|
|
By Siv O'Neall, Axis of Logic
Axis of Logic
Friday, Aug 12, 2016
No Russian Aggression Against Georgia, Ukraine or Crimea
|
Obama vows to stand with Ukraine as he meets President-elect, Petro Poroshenko in Poland |
Comment from a Swedish Conservative:
"What
you call" Russophobia "could of course also be due to the fact that
Russia occupied Crimea, is aggressive against the Baltic states and
waged war in Georgia.
It would be a simpler explanation than your extravagant conspiracy theories.
You
also say, quite wrongly, that Russia would be "the other superpower". It
is China that is the other major power today, economically, militarily
and geopolitically. That is a bit disgraceful for Russia, who of course
is desperately trying to be a great power ... .. "
***
A chronologically logical beginning in this answer seems to be Georgia, which is an incredibly complicated story.
"Caucasus, where Georgia is, is like a patchwork of different
nationalities with different languages and cultures. During the Soviet
era borders were drawn between republics, irrespective of the local
conditions and the desires of the populations. After the Soviet Union
collapsed in 1991, a series of local conflicts broke out and different
ethnic groups in the Caucasus demanded independence. "(Landguiden.se)
This is the background to the conflicts in Georgia and the whole Caucasus region.
Georgia has had a pro-Western regime since the US-backed Rose
Revolution of 2003. The corrupt and Russian-friendly Eduard Shevardnadze
resigned and America's favorite, Saakashvili, won a major victory in
the presidential elections on January 4, 2004.
There were two more or less autonomous regions in the north -
South Ossetia and Abkhazia. These regions had already in the early 90's
declared themselves independent of Georgia and had become autonomous
republics. Georgia was now a vassal of Washington and, quite obviously
inspired by the US, Georgia attacked both regions during the Saakashvili
presidency.
"During a short war Georgian forces were driven out of Abkhazia,
but the area's independence was not recognized by the outside world.
Georgia lost partial control even over South Ossetia. When the Georgian
government in the summer of 2008 tried to take back South Ossetia,
blaming this on certain 'military provocations' (which may or may not
have existed), there was a brief but intense war against Russian forces
which had come to the support of South Ossetia. Russia was also on the
side of Abkhazia and recognized the two ethnically Russian regions as
independent states." (Wikipedia)
|
Georgia and the two autonomous regions South Ossetia and Abkhazia, bordering on Russia |
Georgia bombed viciously the South Ossetian capital,
Tskhinvali, and it seems most likely that Georgia was the aggressor in
this war. Russia defended the regions which had declared themselves
independent after the dissolution of the USSR. Russia has obviously made
every effort to keep the ethnically Russian regions who wanted to
retain the links to the country that they considered themselves as
belonging to. It is of course a question of cultural identity, an
important fact that the United States seems to lack any kind of
understanding for.
As for the Baltic states, there is no aggression from the Russian
side there either. This is pure propaganda. Nor has there been any
aggression against Sweden. (See my essay: Scary Swedish policy on Russia - a letter from France)
– not since Sweden lost Finland, a third of its territory to Russia in
the most megalomaniac war Sweden ever fought. Well, one of them at
least, Charles XII's absurd war against Russia that ended with the
embarrassing Swedish loss in the battle of Poltava was certainly equally
megalomaniac.
However, Washington is working frantically on getting the Baltic
states under its influence and it seems that they have succeeded very
well. NATO has several military bases in the Baltic countries, and it is
obviously from that direction the aggression is coming – against
Russia. Washington propaganda creates an upsidedown world. They want us
to believe, through its persistent propaganda, that their presence in
the Baltic States is motivated by a need for those countries to be
protected against Russian aggression. We know better, but it would be
preferable by far if the West in general could also see through this
pretense, which also goes for Poland where Russophobia is rampant – but
less so than in Sweden and Finland.
As for Ukraine, it is all very
clear. Of course, Washington has never admitted that they were behind
the coup in Kiev, despite the fact that the whole world knows it.
Victoria Nuland, 'Assistant Secretary of State for Europe', was in close
cooperation with the neo-Nazi mercenaries in the violent coup in which
they attacked the ethnic Russian population. It was a long-lasting
uprising by the US-friendly fascists that culminated in the much written
about Maidan violent battles in February 2014, which caused mass
killings and massive destruction in central Kiev. Several neo-Nazis wore
swastikas on their sleeves and they behaved like bloodthirsty
hooligans. They killed and completely destroyed everything around them. [i]
|
Victoria Nuland who handed out cookies on the Maidan to the Neo-Nazi hoodlums in February 2014 and Yatsenyuk who went on to become the Prime Minister of Ukraine |
There has always been a significant number of fascist,
neo-Nazi elements (Nazis during World War II) in Ukraine's population,
and Washington was using those thugs to create a new pro-Western and
Russian-hostile government as a major step towards their ultimate goal,
which is to crush Russia. The protests that began in November culminated
at the end of February. To the western press these hoodlums were
'protesters', but they were rather mercenaries hired by Washington and
they counted many non-Ukrainians in their wildly stabbing, burning,
murdering armies of thugs. The number of deaths in these riots is
impossible to find a reliable figure for, but they amounted in many
cases to over 50 in a single day.
The result of these vicious riots was, as we all know, that the
Russian-friendly Viktor Yanukovych fled to Russia, and was replaced as
president by Petro Poroshenko, who later declared openly that he had
come to power in a coup. Elections were held in October, however, but it
was not clear that Poroshenko won this election. Separatists in the
Donbass region could not vote, and the outcome is very much in dispute.
Ukraine is definitely now a divided country.
The Crimean crisis came shortly after the coup in Kiev.
After such a savage and illegal coup that completely changed their view
of Ukraine, now quite openly supported by the United States, the
Crimean residents did not want to be ruled by Ukraine's corrupt
government. [ii] There
is a minority of Ukrainians in Crimea (15%) and there is also Crimean
Tatars a large amount (12%), but the great majority are Russians. An
uprising followed by the Russian Crimean population of the Autonomous
Republic of Crimea in late February, which led to the referendum, whose
results are consistently challenged by the US-obedient Western world and
the media.
”The majority population in Crimea speaks Russian, identifies with
Russia and was formally a part of Russia until the region was
transferred to Ukraine as a largely administrative measure in 1954 when
Ukraine and Russia were full republics united in one country: the Union
of Socialist Soviet Republics.The vote by Crimea to leave Ukraine has
led to a chorus of condemnation and economic sanctions against Russia by
the United States and all the NATO governments of Europe.” (Global
Research)
|
Crimea and a tiny bit of Russia in the east. |
In a referendum on March 16, 2014 the yes-votes got a substantial
majority (the exact figure varies so enormously depending on the source
you use that it is impossible to give an exact figure) and then the
Crimean autonomous government declared their independence and their
inclusion in the Russian Federation.
The number of Yes-votes in this referendum has been said to be
above 90%, but this figure is obviously too high, if we look at the
entire population. The percentage of voters in Wikipedia is stated as
81.37%, but even that must be considered as doubtful since the majority
of Crimean Tatars boycotted the referendum as did many Ukrainians. The
number of voters, according to another source was said to to 50-60%.
This is quite understandable against the background of the ethnic
pluralism. Quite naturally the Tatars, who are Turkmens, are
Turkish-friendly, not Russian-friendly.[iii]
Turkmens are spread across Europe and Asia, but the vast majority live
in Turkmenistan. Moreover, a large number of Ukrainians must also have
voted for the option to remain part of Ukraine, which was the second
option in the referendum.
An essential factor concerning the result of this referendum is of
course the question of how the voting was carried out . It has been
claimed that the Russian army invaded Ukraine and that Ukrainians voted
at gunpoint by Russian military forces.
Aftonbladet which is not a mass
medium known as an excessive Russian sympathizer writes:
"Russian
troops, which surrounded the Ukrainian military bases in the Crimea,
were withdrawn, according to a Norwegian media report. Only three bases
are still surrounded. At the same time, the Parliament of Crimea has
unanimously voted to become a part of Russia."
|
McCain and the leader of the political party Svoboda |
Finally, a word about the concept of 'great power'. Our
commentator believes that the concept does not apply to Russia. It's of
course completely subjective what we want to see as a great power. The
United States obviously wants to be the only great power in a unilateral
world. However, in view of Washington's insane and arrogant deeds in
the now completely ruined countries where they ravaged and
mass-murdered, there will no doubt be room for other nations to play a
part in the game of world domination that Washington shamefully brought
about. The U.S. has by its frequent blunders played out its role as
world leader, something that the Swedish government does not seem to
realize.
Whether Russia or China should be considered to be the future rival
to a superpower status is unclear today. I can see no need for neither a
unilateral nor a bilateral worldview. I would very subjectively prefer
to have several countries that do not compete for power or the title of a
great power, but which would instead cooperate for peaceful purposes.
This presupposes that we will now finally see an end to this incredible
arrogance and megalomania represented by the United States and which the
world can no longer live with.
As regards the economic, military and geopolitical situation (to
quote the commentator's words) - if we compare Russia and China, they
are, despite all the differences between them, possibly about equally
strong militarily, even though Russia's weapons are more advanced. [iv]
From an economic point of view it is certainly impossible to compare
two such completely different nations. China has made enormous progress
in recent decades as regards living standards and human rights, and may
have almost caught up with the Russians. But there are still today
starving people in China. But then there are desperately poor families
in the U.S. as well, even if nobody mentions that fact in the mass
media. The financial situation of China today is said to be weaker than
it was once considered to be.
Russia has huge sophisticated defense capabilities, most likely
technologically surpassing even the U.S. in speed and precision. As far
as Russia is concerned, only a defensive capacity is aimed at. They
will, understandably, keep and defend their national and cultural
territory against threats from the west.
This is a short comment on the accusation of my having presented 'conspiracy theories' in my previous essay “Can Swedish Russophobia have an explanation?” (in Swedish at jinge.se)
Whenever a theory does not fit into a person's or a government's
self-serving pattern of behavior, it becomes branded as a conspiracy
theory. It's an all too easy way of getting away from defending your
actions. Another package in the mail from the United States. Let the
propaganda loose instead of answering uncomfortable questions and
accusations. They oil their machines well in the US, and the oil is
spreading rapidly.
Notes:
[i] Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The
Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions" (Information
Clearing House)
[ii] There had been grave corruption during the Russian-friendly
Viktor Yanukovych's presidency too, but a new form of corruption was
orchestrated by the U.S. and it was not accepted by the Russian Crimean
population.
[iii] The forcible deportation of the Crimean Tatars from Crimea
was ordered by Joseph Stalin as a form of collective punishment under
accusations of collaborating with the Nazi occupation regime in Taurida
Subdistrict during 1942–1943. The state-organized removal is known as
the Sürgünlik in Crimean Tatar. A total of more than 230,000 people were
deported, mostly to the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic. This included
the entire ethnic Crimean Tatar population, at the time about a fifth of
the total population of the Crimean Peninsula. (Wikipedia)
[iv] ”A Russian Warning” By Dmitry Orlov, The Saker, Victor Katsap and Evgenia Gurevich
Wonderful photos of Crimea – Wikipedia
Siv O'Neall is an
Axis of Logic columnist, based in France. Her insightful essays are
republished and read worldwide. She can be reached at
siv@axisoflogic.com.
© Copyright 2016 by AxisofLogic.com
This material is available for republication as long as reprints
include verbatim copy of the article in its entirety, respecting its
integrity. Reprints must cite the author and Axis of Logic as the
original source including a "live link" to the article. Thank you!
|
Print This
|
If you appreciated this article, please consider making a donation to Axis of Logic.
We do not use commercial advertising or corporate funding. We depend solely upon you,
the reader, to continue providing quality news and opinion on world affairs. Donate here
|
|
World News
|