NATO Weaponizes EU's Anti-Refugee Sentiment Against Russia

Russia Insider ^ | March 8, 2016 | Marko Marjanović

[marvel5]

1. The Russian military forces maintained order and allowed Crimeans to exercise their right to self-determination, after an illegal coup in Kiev had deposed the elected and legitimate President of the country whom Crimeans had voted for by 90% in the 2010 election. Had Russia not acted, the same genocidal aggression against ethnic Russians that emerged later in the Donbass would have been their fate. Under crisis conditions created by the coup and the threat of attack, unorthodox procedures were followed but no less so than what had occurred in Kiev. Meanwhile, thousands of Crimeans demonstrated against the coup government in cities across Crimea. Yes, Aksenov had gotten 4% in the previous Crimea election, but Turchinov had gotten 0% in the previous Ukraine election.

Prof. David Hendrickson of Colorado College, author of six books on international relations, related the facts concerning the unconstitutional deposition of Yanukovych. http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-democratic-values-stake-ukraine-10069 Excerpt:

“Americans have previously acknowledged a right of revolution in a circumstance where there has been no previous instance of an election and no possibility of one. But in a regime that has a constitution and that has prescribed rules for the transfer of power? Revolution in those circumstances has been generally seen as deeply illegitimate, and for the simple reason that once you depart from that rule you are in no man’s land.

And yet the United States government, along with other western powers, did so abet and orchestrate the downfall of the president, Viktor Yanukovych. He won a 2010 election that the OSCE judged more free and fair than the 2012 vote that elected the current Ukrainian parliament. Even the mob-dominated vote by the Rada to impeach Yanukovych fell short of the required 3/4ths supermajority. They needed 338 votes in the 450-seat parliament and only got 328. Oops, ten votes shy. Not a big deal.”

2. So Katchonvski is a “Russian propagandist?” Actually, he is an ethnic Ukrainian and respected scholar who has been affiliated with Harvard, the Univ. of Toronto, and the Library of Congress. What makes him a propagandist - that you don’t like his conclusions? His paper was presented to his peers at the most prestigious gathering of political scientists in North America. He has a reputation and a career to protect and his thorough scientific study is in the academic and public domain for scholars and citizens to evaluate. Read the report yourself.

As to Minister Paet, his backpedaling was a pathetic attempt at damage control. His English is perfectly clear on the point.

3. All the Presidents of Ukraine since independence have arguably been corrupt and Poroschenko is the most corrupt of all. His current approval rating is 17%, 11 points lower than Yanukovych’s lowest rating according to Gallup.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/187931/ukrainians-disillusioned-leadership.aspx (PM Yatsenyuk’s rating barely registers at 1%).

The Western-installed economy minister just resigned, saying that “corrupt officials had blocked systematic reform and were attempting to gain influence over state enterprises such as natural gas company NAK Naftogaz,” and added that, “Neither I nor my team have any desire to serve as a cover-up for the covert corruption, or become puppets for those who, very much like the ‘old’ government, are trying to exercise control over the flow of public funds.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/04/economic-minister-resignation-ukraine-crisis-aivaras-abromavicius

In early 2015, a top Poroschenko aide admitted 20-25% of the defense budget had been stolen and that there was “total corruption” in the Ministry of Defense. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/ukraine/budget.htmJust

As to the EU agreement, Richard Sakwa (of Polish extraction btw) professor of Russian and European Politics at the University of Kent, noted in his book “Frontline Ukraine,” that “Russia in the end offered $15 billion in immediate support, and preferential gas tariffs, much more generous than the EU offered.” (p. 57)

On the other hand, “Der Spiegel,” Germany’s main establishment news magazine reported that Yanukovych learned from his own experts that singing the EU agreement would cost Ukraine $160 billion, more than 50 times the $3 billion the EU calculated and told the EU “Can you imagine what would happen if our people were to learn of these numbers, were they to find out what convergence with the EU would cost our country?”
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/war-in-ukraine-a-result-of-misunderstandings-between-europe-and-russia-a-1004706-2.html

4. The “anti-protest laws” were not introduced until January 16, 2014 and most all were repealed on January 28, 2014,lasting only 12 days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine.

The protests were initially peaceful but later turned violent with protesters occupying buildings, throwing Molotov cocktails and paving stones, etc. as documented by numerous YouTube videos.

Whether Yaunkoych was corrupt or whether he should or should not have signed the EU agreement, the place to address that was in the next Presidential election, not in the streets. However many thousands were in Maidan, the total is far less than the 24 million who voted in the 2010 Presidential election. Notwithstanding, Putin agreed with Yanukovych, Germany, France, Poland, and the opposition leadership to hold early elections before the end of 2014, which he knew Yanukovych would almost certainly lose.

5. I don’t think you can deny that the overwhelming majority of Crimeans wanted to rejoin Russia. If you don’t like the referendum results, look at the outcome of every Western sponsored public opinion poll taken since, as previously cited. Even Russia-hating Forbes magazine has given up on this one:

“The U.S and European Union may want to save Crimeans from themselves. But the Crimeans are happy right where they are.

One year after the annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula in the Black Sea, poll after poll shows that the locals there — be they Ukrainians, ethnic Russians or Tatars are mostly all in agreement: life with Russia is better than life with Ukraine.

Little has changed over the last 12 months. Despite huge efforts on the part of Kiev, Brussels, Washington and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the bulk of humanity living on the Black Sea peninsula believe the referendum to secede from Ukraine was legit. At some point, the West will have to recognize Crimea’s right to self rule. Unless we are all to believe that the locals polled by Gallup and GfK were done so with FSB bogey men standing by with guns in their hands.” http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/03/20/one-year-after-russia-annexed-crimea-locals-prefer-moscow-to-kiev/#20222c465951

The Crimeans escaped the fate of the rest of Ukraine, including a contraction of the economy by about 1/8, 40-50% inflation, record corruption, and a bloody war. What’s not to like?

[Krosan]

You have bragged about being a master of New York slang, but you don’t know the dialect “bad English” of those who learned German in school. “There is a big understanding in this district that Hillary Clinton makes America great again” does not mean the one saying this sentence agrees with the people in this district. He is describing attitudes, that he himself might find very wrong.

Minister Paet graduated from Kadrioru German Gymnasium. The foreign language he learned in school was German and he picked up bad English on the go.