Nine years ago, the Orange Revolution (named after the color of Viktor Yushchenko’s banner) was launched in Ukraine with financial and political support of the government and political strategists of the United States, and with an active involvement of the U.S. intelligence and numerous non-governmental and research organizations such as the Open Society Institute of billionaire George Soros, Harvard University, the Albert Einstein Institute, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, etc.
This revolution was a logical continuation of the operation implemented by Washington and its European allies at the end of the previous century aimed at the “political renewal” of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, bringing to power their own puppet regimes. These regimes would erase from the memory of the peoples of this region, the gratitude to Russia they felt thanks to long-term friendship and cooperation during the Second World War and the subsequent recovery of their economies. Such were the “Rose Revolution” in Georgia in 2003, the “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine in 2004, the “Tulip Revolution” in Kyrgyzstan in 2005, as well as the attempts to start the “Cornflower (Jeans) Revolution” in Belarus in 2006, color revolutions in Armenia in 2008 and in Moldova in 2009. Significant funds for the organization of these “color revolutions” were provided through the American Support for East European Democracy Foundation (SEED), funded from the budget of the U.S. State Department.
Following the example of these “revolutions” and already proven schemes, the White House launched the “Arab Spring” a few years later, but the similarities of the schemes and “conducting” of these processes from Washington are clear. The same “leading” role of the White House in the destabilization of the situation in these countries at first, and then the provision of funding to opposition authorities through international “public and research organizations” to pay for sentiments and speeches aimed at bringing to power puppet henchmen and thus obtaining uncontrolled access to natural resources through them.
At first, the White House succeeded relatively smoothly in Ukraine. Thanks to the “Orange Revolution”, the rise to power of V. Yanukovych who oriented himself towards Russia was blocked, and then the henchman, Viktor Yushchenko, was placed in the Presidential Chair on the oppositional wave promoted by Washington in 2004. However, during the eight years of the “Orange Presidency” overseas political strategists did not manage to change completely the mentality of the Ukrainian population into becoming anti-Russian.
As a result, in 2012, like in 2004, the population of Ukraine re-elected the same V. Yanukovych as the President by a majority vote. However, such an outcome of the struggle for the former Soviet republic and the breadbasket of the Russian Empire of the 19th century obviously did not satisfy the White House. Under these conditions, overseas political strategists selected a slogan about the alleged “heavenly benefits” for the country from the alliance with the EU and the weakening of trade and economic relations with Russia – as an additional tool to destabilize Ukrainian society and to separate it from Russia. Although, in fact, the “alliance conditions” proposed by the EU lead to a clear worsening of the social and economic situation in Ukraine: the limitation of public sector wage bill and the number of employees in the public sector, an increase in gas tariffs for households and utilities, the prohibition of participation in the Customs Union. The last of these requirements is the most perceptible for the Ukrainian economy, which has been focused on the cooperation with Russia for decades, and the break of these relations will inevitably lead to the collapse of an absolute majority of enterprises and increase unemployment in the country. In order to come to the technical standards of the EU, to be competitive and to sell its products on the European market, Ukraine, according to the estimates of Prime Minister Azarov, will need about $160 billion in the next ten years. The EU is ready to allocate only a very small part of this – 1 billion, which is clearly insufficient and explains the resistance of Kiev to this European pseudo-integration.
Europe’s interest in Ukraine is quite understandable. Establishing of closer, alliance relations with it and separating it from the Customs Union will noticeably facilitate for Europe its trade and economic confrontation with Russia. Ukraine itself, with its natural resources, rich agricultural land and 46 million people was always interesting for Europe, and primarily for Germany, as a tempting target for colonization by German companies that could produce products there at prices much lower than in China. Such interest was repeatedly evidenced by the attempt to occupy this territory during the First and Second World Wars.
However, Germany, the European Union and the United States pursue not only economic but also geopolitical objectives in the struggle for Ukraine. Given Russia’s loss of influence in Eastern Europe, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the integration of Ukraine into the EU would contribute to more rapid push of Russia to the periphery of European politics and economy.
To implement the conceived plans, Washington and the EU have focused on the work on the population by three “tamed” Ukrainian parties. These are the:
- All-Ukrainian Union “Batkivshchyna”, headed by the imprisoned ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. For these purposes, this Union was even given the status of a member of the Supervisory Board of the European People’s Party – the Association of Christian and democratic, nationalist parties of European countries;
- Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform (UDAR), headed by heavyweight boxer Vitali Klitschko who lived in Germany for a long time. Not being the mouthpiece of the broad masses of the Ukrainian population, the party whose membership in 2010 was about 10,000 people was created with the participation of the Christian Democratic Party of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and its analytical center – the Konrad Adenauer Foundation. This latter was engaged in undisguised interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine by organizing seminars on “training activists” of the alliance through social networks and the Internet;
- All-Ukrainian Union “Svoboda”. Even according to the conclusions of German Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, “Svoboda” is a Ukrainian far-right radical nationalist party, which previously used a symbol resembling a swastika in its logo. The anti-Semitic and xenophobic statements made by the leaders of “Svoboda” were sharply criticized both in Ukraine and abroad, and show the ideology of this party – their public declarations and rhetoric are neo-fascist and neo-Nazi. However, as we can see, the White House does not refuse from the “services” of even such an ally for the sake of the set goal, thus becoming an accomplice of the Nazis and xenophobes.
After the government and the President of Ukraine refused to agree on the obviously unfavorable terms of integration with the EU, Washington and Brussels throw increasingly greater forces into the fight for this republic, ignoring the principles of international law on non-interference in the internal affairs of a foreign state. Leading U.S. and European politicians are sent in to support the demonstrators opposing the legally elected president and the government of Ukraine. The Former Polish Prime Minister and leader of the conservative Law and Justice Party Jaroslaw Kaczynski personally participated in opposition demonstrations in Kiev. Protesters on Maydan Nezalezhnosti were visited by the U.S. Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, who apparently had forgotten that it was her agency that had to protect international law and not to interfere in the internal affairs of a foreign country! Ukrainian opposition and, in particular, neo-Nazis of form “Svoboda” were supported by the German government that had recently declared its disapproval of activities of essentially similar neo-Nazi National Democratic Party of Germany.
If we compare the reaction of European and American politicians to the measures to restore public order in the country made by Ukrainian authorities, with the absence of any reaction of western political establishment to the recent crackdown on demonstrators in Greece, Spain and Portugal, their political bias and prejudice are obvious. The things that are happening around Ukraine now are not a struggle for democracy and rule of law, as European and American media, paid by Washington, are trying to present. This is an undisguised struggle for Ukraine, and primarily aimed against Russia. It is easy to guess further steps of the strategists in this struggle – these are an increased destabilization of Ukrainian society, bribery and increased financial support to the opposition. And, as the last option, Washington has experience in power solutions for internal conflicts in Iraq, Libya, Syria…
Valery Kulikov, political analysts, exclusively for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook.