Trending Topics:

Dateline, Ukraine: How the State Department ‘midwives’ democracy

on 92 Comments
US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland (L) and US ambassador to Ukraine Jeffrey Payette (C) walk on the Independence Square in Kiev on December 10, 2013. (Photo: AFP/ SERGEY GAPON)

US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland (L) and US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt (C) walk on the Independence Square in Kiev on December 10, 2013. (Photo: AFP/ SERGEY GAPON)

Detail 1: Excerpt from transcript of Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs  “Remarks at the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation Conference,” 16 December 2013:

Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations. We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.

Detail 2: Excerpt from transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt Call:

Voice thought to be Geoffrey Pyatt’s: I think we’re in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you’ve seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we’re trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you’ll need to make, I think that’s the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatseniuk, another opposition leader]. And I’m glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I’m very glad that he said what he said in response.

Nuland: Good. I don’t think Klitsch should go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t think it’s a good idea.

Pyatt: Yeah. I guess… in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I’m just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok [Oleh Tyahnybok, the other opposition leader] and his guys and I’m sure that’s part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the… what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in… he’s going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it’s just not going to work. . . .

Detail 3: Excerpt from Strange Accusations by Vladimir Putin, in Time Magazine 2007 “Person of the Year” Interview:

Putin: I believe that this [suggestion that Russia sell gas to Ukraine at a discount] is a violation of the market principles, damaging the economies in question. Within Russia, we’ve adopted a program of reaching the world price levels for domestic consumption. Any other approach would distort economic indicators and economies, making one sector dependent on other sectors, leading to cross-subsidies and destroying the economy. We do understand the difficulties of our partners. For 15 years, we were selling them energy resources way below the market prices subsidized to the tune of $3 billion to $5 billion a year for Ukraine. This cannot last forever. The Europeans are always criticizing us. They want us to introduce international pricing standards. Otherwise, they say, our enterprises would enjoy an unfair advantage over European enterprises. So within the country we should sell at world prices while to our neighbors we should sell below the world prices? This is discrimination. Let’s be frank and speak directly and call a spade a spade. What I’m about to say is not aggressive in any way, but I urge you to be frank. The United States somehow decided that part of the political elite in Ukraine is pro-American and part is pro-Russian, and they decided to support the ones they consider pro-American, the so-called orange coalition. Well, O.K., you decided to support them. Do as you please, although we don’t believe it’s right. Of course, they have people with different outlooks there and with different political tastes, but as I’ve already mentioned, if a politician wants to be popular, he or she must protect the national interests first of all, be Ukrainian nationalists in the good sense of this word. And they are. They are not pro-Russians. They are not pro-Europeans. They are not pro-Americans. They are all pro-Ukrainians, but somehow Americans divided them all into pro- this or that. We believe that is a mistake. Let them settle their issues themselves. Everything that’s been done there is unconstitutional, which has created distrust among various political groups and citizens, thus undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and economy. That’s what the United States has done and is doing in Ukraine and in Georgia. What we say is, leave them alone, without choosing sides. When everyone saw that destabilization was under way in Ukraine, they tried to force Russia to subsidize the Ukrainian economy at our expense. Why? If you want to support someone, you pay for it. Nobody wants to pay.

David Bromwich

David Bromwich's latest book is "American Breakdown: The Trump Years and How They Befell Us." He teaches literature at Yale and is a frequent contributor to the Huffington Post and has written on politics and culture for The New Republic, The Nation, The New York Review of Books, and other magazines. He is editor of Edmund Burke's selected writings On Empire, Liberty, and Reform and co-editor of the Yale University Press edition of On Liberty.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

92 Responses

  1. Rusty Pipes on March 6, 2014, 6:11 pm

    What was the date of this State Department presser?

  2. Susie Kneedler on March 6, 2014, 6:16 pm

    Thanks, David, for your principles and for your great work here and always.

  3. Bandolero on March 6, 2014, 6:25 pm

    Thank you for bringing up this topic again. I believe the situation in Ukraine has a lot to do with the interests of extreme right wing neocon zionists.

    Putin in his presser two days ago asked:

    First of all, my assessment of what happened in Kiev and in Ukraine in general. There can only be one assessment: this was an anti-constitutional takeover, an armed seizure of power. Does anyone question this? Nobody does. There is a question here that neither I, nor my colleagues, with whom I have been discussing the situation in Ukraine a great deal over these past days, as you know – none of us can answer. The question is why was this done?


    I think this question is self-evident to answer. It is not the EU driving all this, but a zionist neocon faction in the US goverment.

    Let me give some quotes:

    Quote Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the United States Department of State, and wife of Bob Kagan, instructing U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt in a telephone call:

    “F*** the EU.”


    Who derailed the 21 Feb agreement?

    Quote Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin:

    “…Someone must have worked against that agreement which was singed on Ferbuary 21 with the support of three foreign ministers from the European Union. Somebody must have been behind it being derailed, maybe those who, as we all know, expressed their strong dissatitisfaction with the work of the European Union in Ukraine”


    What kind of trained military guys were fighting the Ukrainian government?

    Quote JTA:

    “In Kiev, an Israeli army vet led a street-fighting unit

    … Delta, a Ukraine-born former soldier in the Israel Defense Forces, spoke to JTA Thursday on condition of anonymity. He explained how he came to use combat skills he acquired in the Shu’alei Shimshon reconnaissance battalion of the Givati infantry brigade to rise through the ranks of Kiev’s street fighters.

    He has headed a force of 40 men and women — including several fellow IDF veterans — in violent clashes with government forces. …

    As platoon leader, Delta says he takes orders from activists connected to Svoboda, an ultra-nationalist party that has been frequently accused of anti-Semitism…”


    What could be the overall motive behind all this?

    Quote Clifford A. Kiracofe, former senior professional staff member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations:

    “… Western media reported the vulgar remarks concerning the EU by Victoria Nuland, who is US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.

    The media refrained from reporting that Nuland is the wife of Robert Kagan who is a key leader of the pro-Zionist neoconservative policy network.

    It is well known that the staunchly pro-Israel neoconservatives express deep political and cultural aversion to Russia, and promote Cold War perspectives. Such a mindset undermines US global diplomacy and US national interests. Thus Ms Nuland is the wrong person for a high US diplomatic position, critics say.

    Using the Ukraine crisis to subvert major power relations between the US and Russia and their constructive joint action in the Middle East serves Israeli interests. It helps Israel and its neoconservative allies in the US and in Europe push for unilateral US military action against Syria and Iran. …”


    And, of course, Sevastopol is the backup port for the Russian navy in the eastern mediterranean, and any trouble elsewhere allows Israel to not come as much in the world’s spotlight for settelement building as it would become in other circumstances. And if the current crisis in Ukraine will lead to more “Aliya” from Ukraine, the settlement builders in Israel would likely be quite happy about that, too.

    • lysias on March 6, 2014, 7:21 pm

      In the case of Ukraine today, those neocon Zionists happen to be supporting a bunch of neo-Nazis. Perhaps not so surprising.

      Interesting that “Yats”, who Nuland was saying should be prime minister and who, lo and behold, now has become prime minister, happens to be Jewish (as well as a financial expert apparently liked by the IMF).

      • Bandolero on March 6, 2014, 9:01 pm

        There is an argument in Ukraine going on on whether Yats is jewish or not. He denies it, so I – as someone who thinks religion is a point of confession – see no reason to dispute that claim. And anyway, I think jewish or not is absolutely not the point. Zionism and loyalty to the Israeli government is a point. To use a US term: being an Israel firster or a Ukrainian firster is a point. There are many influental jews in Ukraine, and many have affiliations to Israel, but other don’t have.

        Just named governor of Dneprpetrovsk Israeli-Ukrainian billionaire Ihor Kolomoyskyi, Putin mentioned him in his presser linked by me above, is much more interesting in regard of being an Israel-firster than Yats. But other billionaires connected to the events do not have any known Israeli connections, take Poroshenko as an example, who seems to be connected to the strong anti-Russian circles in Poland.

        But even if, let’s say, Israel played a major role in Ukraine’s people revolution or Neonazi putsch, just like one wants to see it, and I think strong zionist links to the recent regime change in Ukraine are evident, I find Putin’s question very valid. Why?

        Yanukovich’s Ukraine had good relations with Israel. That’s why I find Kiracofe’s opinion so important to think about.

      • Walid on March 6, 2014, 11:11 pm

        Israel’s meddling in the Ukraine will have an effect on events in Syria and on Russia’s backing of it and I wouldn’t be surprised to see things flaring up in Chechnya soon. The stuff’s already hitting the fan in the ME with Saudia, Bahrain and the UAE having pulled their ambassadors from Qatar because as Brotherhood country itself, it’s not playing ball with them on Syria, Egypt and Hamas and other issues of putting the Brothers’ lights out. Ukraine is only a part of the bigger picture involving Israel and on the final settlement that is being drawn and about to be imposed on the Palestinians. Turkey, a Brotherhood country is also astir.

      • seafoid on March 8, 2014, 6:13 am


        Israel is not going to final anything with the Palestinians.
        Ukraine looks more like the general capitalist spasm of zero growth in the core that is reverberating in the periphery.

        Israel has a very dangerous housing bubble that is going to pop at some stage. Those Zionists are not half as smart as they tell us they are.

      • kalithea on March 7, 2014, 10:35 am

        “Yanukovich’s Ukraine had good relations with Israel. That’s why I find Kiracofe’s opinion so important to think about.”

        Doesn’t matter, Zionists will betray anyone in a heartbeat if it suits their agenda.

        Zionists benefit from Nato getting closer to Iran in a non-Muslim country. Zionists have a vindictive interest in seeing Russia’s power diminished because Russia has helped to build up Iran’s Nuclear Program and has veto power in regards to a military invasion against Iran. There are several reasons Zionists hate Russia and want to see it punished and backed into a corner.

      • lysias on March 7, 2014, 10:37 am

        I just read an allegation that Yatsenyuk (and his sister) are scientologists. Oh boy!

      • eljay on March 7, 2014, 11:02 am

        >> I just read an allegation that Yatsenyuk (and his sister) are scientologists. Oh boy!

        I wonder if they, too, are able to eat planets… :-)

        I don’t see a problem with Yatsenyuk and his sister being Scientologists as long as they keep their One True Religion to themselves and don’t try to turn the Ukraine into a supremacist “Scientologish State”.

      • lysias on March 7, 2014, 4:56 pm

        Anybody who wants to know what Scientology is really about should read Kate Bornstein’s A Queer and Pleasant Danger: The true story of a nice Jewish boy who joins the Church of Scientology, and leaves twelve years later to become the lovely lady she is today. Bornstein does not paint a pretty picture of that “church”.

        According to Bornstein, the “Church” of Scientology plans to take over the world. And for no good purpose. It all seems to be for selfish ends.

      • American on March 6, 2014, 9:15 pm

        lysias says:
        March 6, 2014 at 7:21 pm
        In the case of Ukraine today, those neocon Zionists happen to be supporting a bunch of neo-Nazis.

        The Jewish Israeli, former IDF, that was featured and interviewed because he lead a group in the revolt says the accusations of anti Semitism are exaggerated. He was born in the Ukraine, went to Israel and then left and moved back to the Ukraine. He say the group he led was mostly Ukraine boys, no Israeli gov, IDF operatives on the ground there.
        Could be true, could be a cover story.

    • American on March 6, 2014, 9:37 pm

      ” Thus Ms Nuland is the wrong person for a high US diplomatic position, critics say.”’…Bandalero

      Nuland, like Ann Marie Slaughter and the whole bevey of post WWII immigrants that flocked to US agencies and positions have ideologies that were formed by their resentment/ feelings that Europe was ‘weak’ in the 30 and 40’s and also that the US didn’t use its ‘full power’ prior to WWII to stop Hitler. They are obsessed with power and its use and the US as the sole super power is their power instrument. We don’t have an American policy for America, what we have is the ‘European’ policy theses people wanted for Europe but Europe lacked the power. The US doesn’t lack the power so they are now trying to employ it around the world.
      I listened to Slaughter once talking about how her ideas and policies for America’s role were formed in the European ‘salons’ and over ‘dinner tables’ with Europeans who had experienced WWII—-I literally gagged. The US isn’t Europe and this isn’t 1930.

    • annie on March 6, 2014, 11:37 pm

      Nuland is the wife of Robert Kagan who is a key leader of the pro-Zionist neoconservative policy network.

      and robert’s bro is Frederick Kagan married to kimberly kagan president of the Institute for the Study of War, the same institute elizabeth o’bagy worked for. remember her? the ‘expert’ who kerry sited alleging the a jihadist-dominated opposition in syria was ‘moderate’. the same institute pushing us to invade syria?

      i linked to the the Institute for the Study of War report here:

      these kagan’s. we just can’t seem to get rid of them.

    • Eva Smagacz on March 7, 2014, 3:26 am


      I absolutely agree with your perspective. The crisis and regime changes create fantastic investment opportunities for those who are ready to pounce. Notice how interconnected russian oligarchs are, who, but one, are eligible for Israeli citizenship, and how countries with cashflow problems are forced by international financial institutions to sell their national assets at fire sale prices. This creates a class of people who cannot spent what they earn, so they keep buying and increasing their capital – creating permanent underclass and superclass of citizen. This is not an antisemitic remark about global Jewish conspiracy, by the way. It is a statement of fact as it applies to countries that fall under the neoconservative bus.

      • Citizen on March 8, 2014, 5:27 am

        @ Eva S
        Yeah, I’ve noticed that pattern too.

      • wondering jew on March 10, 2014, 10:28 am

        Eva- “Notice how interconnected russian oligarchs are, who, but one, are eligible for Israeli citizenship,” I don’t know the name of a single Russian oligarch, so I would not be able to attest to the truth or the falsehood of this statement. How many Russian oligarchs are there? What are their names? Who is the one who isn’t Jewish?

        And is the phrase “eligible for Israeli citizenship” as a euphemism for Jewish supposed to be a way of saying they are but Zionists in disguise or was it somehow an innocuous statement or just a way of catering to the antiZionist crowd here and saying, no I am not antisemitic, I am just stating facts and antiZionist?

    • LeaNder on March 7, 2014, 8:04 am

      zionist neocon faction in the US goverment.

      They may well be in the larger boat of neo-cold-war thinking, but they hardly are the only force in play.

      Ukraine is the most important piece of the puzzle in a foreign policy started by Reagan it feels. I just watched to this Senate Foreign Relations Committee session in January on C-SPAn. In the end “grand visier”, Zbigniew Brzezinski testified, on one of the most important issues of “national security” as McCain puts it earlier. There is absolutely no doubt that there is a huge consent on the US scene. Zbig ironically uses the term nationalism (really neo- or newly discovered nationalism, as some good force) in the context Ukrainians being the good nationalists, as long as they are on our multi-national side. Then tells his audience that part of the Ukraine, which indeed it is, historically was the core of Russia (Kiew). That is why it is important to get it into the EU, to force Russia to become a new democracy, finally. If I remember correctly he thinks that the Ukrainian oligarchs–(maybe with the exception of the son of the former president?*– do not want to return to Russia’s sphere of influence.

      * that one only signifies corruption, of course, while the others stand for good solid business.

      • marc b. on March 7, 2014, 2:50 pm

        They may well be in the larger boat of neo-cold-war thinking, but they hardly are the only force in play.

        I think that hits the nail on the head, Lea. The Zionists as prime mover for this manufactured crisis is an overstatement. As you reference, Reagan, influenced by the Coors-funded Heritage Foundation, did increase support for low intensity conflict in the 80s, to include operations in Eastern Europe. (The Heritage Foundation hosted groups such as the World Anti-Communist League (WACL) and the Anti-Bolshevik Block of Nations (ABN) both of which had strong ties to Eastern European ‘nationalists’ interested in undermining and chipping bits off the Soviet European empire) On the other hand, it’s more accurate to say that Reagan just took a more muscular approach to the exploitation of ethnic and nationalist divisions in the USSR, an approach that has its roots in German policy towards the USSR during WWII, and was extended by the US-West German alliance after the war. (see Gehlen Organization for example) Here, though, I see a fundamental divergence of interests. It appears to me that, amongst other things, US planners are looking to push its military closer to Russian borders and gain a measure of control over Russian energy supplies to Europe, an approach that many Europeans are only luke warm about. (This isn’t to say that there is no connection between Russian policy in Syria and the Ukraine ‘crisis’, and not to say that the maximalist state isn’t inserting itself into the crisis.)

      • Bandolero on March 7, 2014, 7:42 pm

        “They may well be in the larger boat of neo-cold-war thinking, but they hardly are the only force in play.”

        You are perfectly right with this. Regarding Ukraine, there are other external forces at play than Zionists, too. Take the Polish and Lituanian anti-Russian networks as an example for this, and anti-Russian policy networks in EU/US are not all connected to Zionism, neither. Zbig for example is not at all what one would say is “a good friend of Israel” or an ardent zionist, quite the opposite. And then, of course, there are a host of internal factors at play in Ukraine’s troubles, too, most of them having nothing to do with zionism. But that’s not my point.

        There is evidence, that there is a quite strong zionist hand in Ukraine’s current troubles, and it is largely ignored by western politicians and the western mass media. One may argue about the extent of zionist networks in Ukraine’s troubles, but there is hard evidence of a more or less covert zionist angle in the story. That’s my point.

        And that leads to an important question: why? Why do they do that? What’s the motivation of zionist policy networks for working towards violently overthrowing the government of Ukraine?

      • LeaNder on March 8, 2014, 11:28 am

        Bandolero, as long as I can’t be sure that my own country or the EU for that matter is not equally active in the Ukraine, which no doubt it is, why should I concentrate on possible Zionist covert activities? After Syria, no doubt Israel may have a motive for causing Putin troubles. But is suspicion or an Israeli that returned to the Ukraine for business enough? See my comment to whoever it was below.

        Generally as far as I am concerned in times like this, I doubt I can sort out propaganda from facts. … I am generally skeptic in times like these. But yes, it would make life much more easy if always the same bad guys were responsible. Would make the whole rest of us good ones after all. ;)

      • Bandolero on March 8, 2014, 12:50 pm


        “as long as I can’t be sure that my own country or the EU for that matter is not equally active in the Ukraine, which no doubt it is”

        Germany is not as active in fomenting unrest in Ukraine as Nuland wanted to have it. Remember her instrcution to the US amb in Ukraine: F… the EU.

        And then think about that Germany was among the 3 foreign EU ministers that brokered the 21 February agreement as a peaceful way to diffuse the tensions in Ukraine. Neither the EU, the 3 oppo party leaders nor Russia and Yanukovich were really unhappy with the agreement.

        So, Russia’s UN amb Churkin I quoted above asked an important question: why was the 21 Feb agreement made only to be broken hours later for a renewede push of violence? Churkin said “somebody must have been behind it being derailed, maybe those who, as we all know, expressed their strong dissatitisfaction with the work of the European Union in Ukraine.” It’s a clear reference to Nuland and the political faction she represents, be it called US, Neocon, Zionist or whatever.

        I think that makes it very clear that the EU and Germany were not the main driving forces in overthrowing the Ukrainian government. And it’s quite logical: Germany has quite good relations to Russia, which it wants to maintain, and Germany has no interest in bailing out another southern Europe country. Germany was also not the main driving force behind the EU association agreement with Ukraine, back then, Germany had to be persuaded by US-backed Poland and Lithuania to start that new EU association program at all. However, the German government is, like the EU as a whole, under pressure from US political forces – as it was revealed in the leaked phone call of Schmid and Tombinski.

        I hope that clarifies a bit, where the most pressure to associate Ukraine to the EU comes from: it comes from the US. But there is more.

        The Nuland leak is even more revealing when one thinks about that her job description says it’s her job to improve relations with Europe. So, when she orders the US amb to Ukraine to “F… the EU” – is she executing US policy – or is she betraying the US, too? I find the order to “F… the EU” not only in language inappropriate, but also in content totally incompatible with the stated US policies regarding improving relations to Europe. So, when Nuland works against what is described as her job – improving relations with Europe – whose policies is she executing, whose interests is she serving then?

        Given that her hubby Bob Kagan is an influental leader of a US pro-Israel policy network, the answer to the question, whose interests Nuland is serving, seems quite obvious to me. There is even a special term in the US to describe such behaviour: Israel firster.

      • LeaNder on March 8, 2014, 1:21 pm

        So, when she orders the US amb to Ukraine to “F… the EU” – is she executing US policy – or is she betraying the US, too? I find the order to “F… the EU” not only in language inappropriate, but also in content totally incompatible with the stated US policies regarding improving relations to Europe. So, when Nuland works against what is described as her job – improving relations with Europe – whose policies is she executing, whose interests is she serving then?

        Look, Bandolero, I am no political scientist. But concerning “betraying the US”, apart from the fact that no doubt it is always easy to construct coherent narative in a complicated mess, maybe the US “national interest” is not always aligned with Europe’s? In any case I don’t think Merkel has good relations with Russia: Not true, rather frozen. Merkel is an “Atlantiker” someone who looks West not East.

        But maybe you look to Egypt. A revolution, never mind if no longer orange may bring interior forces up that simply wait for the right moment. Internal troubles are always a good chance to take over.

        I am not interested in neatly constructed stories, I reserve that to fiction, what I find much more interesting in this context are to what extend general strategies are continued beyond the change in governments in a two-party system like the US. And quite possibly the really few experts that can drive it really with their expertise.

        German’s interests in both the Ukraine and Russia is business. What I find much more interesting is that “the Germans and the Jews” surface together, but that is not really new historically either, from the nationalist perspective its pretty natural really. I am referring to the article by who I called sicko below, at least to the point I read it.

      • Keith on March 8, 2014, 4:46 pm

        BANDOLERO, LEANDER- “So, when she orders the US amb to Ukraine to “F… the EU” – is she executing US policy – or is she betraying the US, too?”

        Don’t you two find it odd that so much “confidential” communication has become public? What better way to “leak” a message than to have it intercepted and made public? Normally, I tend to ignore public statements, however, I can’t help but feel that Nuland was very effective in telling the EU that the US calls the shots and they should back off from negotiating. The US absolutely does not want the EU sans the US negotiating with Russia. Or getting too friendly with Russia. Or, God Forbid!, forming some sort of alliance with Russia which would challenge US hegemony. If you recall, back in the nineties, Germany took the lead on Yugoslavia until Uncle Sam pushed them out of the way by scuttling an agreement which would have ended the conflict much earlier. The US wanted NATO to bomb Serbia to destroy the infrastructure and to justify NATO as an out of area strike force. And that is what happened. I have great difficulty believing that Nuland couldn’t have talked to the ambassador over more secure communications, or that she is deviating from well established imperial policy.

      • Bandolero on March 8, 2014, 5:07 pm


        But concerning “betraying the US”, apart from the fact that no doubt it is always easy to construct coherent narative in a complicated mess, maybe the US “national interest” is not always aligned with Europe’s?

        Of course the US “national interest” is different from Europe’s. My point is a different one. The US publicly stated it’s national interest and policy is to improve relations with Europe and that’s how Nuland’s job was described. So, when Nuland instructed the US ambassador to Kiev to “F… the EU” – she either was betraying the US by not doing what her job was – improving the relations with Europe – or the US as a whole has secretly turned around it’s own publicly stated policy by deciding to “F… the EU” instead of improving relations with Europe.

        Theories regarding “the Germans and the Jews” I find disgusting, because it uses old stereotypes instead of looking into details of who does what. Bollyns theories regarding Oleksandr Turchynov, Word of Life Center and Israel I find unnecessary far fetched. Turchynov belongs politically to the Dneprpetrovsk clan closely aligned to Timoshenko, Lazarenko and the likes. Turchynov in Kiev just appointed the Ukrainian-Israeli billionaire Ihor Kolomoyskyi as governeur of Dneprpetrovsk, and his vice governor Boris Filatov just flew in from Israel:

        So, it’s quite obvious that Turchynov & some powerful ppl from Dneprpetrovsk are somehow connected to Israeli ppl.

      • lysias on March 10, 2014, 11:52 am

        The reason Reagan started that policy was his anti-Communism. That he was willing to change that policy if circumstances changed is shown by his behavior towards Gorbachev in the last years of his presidency. Now, Communism is dead (certainly in Russia), so I think it is very unlikely that Reagan would have continued that policy.

    • UpSIDEdown on March 7, 2014, 2:37 pm

      Very well said. The Israeli Time’s Today also printed the article of the Israeli Vet
      They were bragging loudly I wouldn’t be surprised if he receives some reward for a job well done!

  4. W.Jones on March 6, 2014, 7:08 pm

    This was on Veterans Today. See minute 8:00.

    • Walid on March 6, 2014, 9:25 pm

      Ashton took the news about the sniper from the opposition having shot people from both sides as just another minor detail in the conflict; it’s now yesterday’s news with no further consequence to it. It’s a sad situation with all these irresponsible political world leaders discussing the ongoing overthrowing of a government as just another routine day at the office. Asst SoS Nuland declaring the US having invested 5 billions in the enterprise to influence results is not very different from Asst SoS Feltman declaring at a Senate hearing having invested 400 millions on anti-Hizbullah activity to influence results in the last Lebanese elections. A lot of under the rug sweeping is always going on with stuff gone wrong at the State Dept such as its twisting of the Egyptian Military’s arm to allow the Islamists to run in the last elections while knowing well that they’d win and subsequently having it jail them. Syria is another similar story. People at the State Dept control situations all over the world like puppeteers.

      • W.Jones on March 7, 2014, 3:06 am

        the State Dept such twist[ed] the Egyptian Military’s arm to allow the Islamists to run in the last elections while knowing well that they’d win and subsequently having it jail them.

        Why would they do that if they knew that?

      • Walid on March 7, 2014, 4:02 am

        The argument at the time was to let the Brothers (and the more radical Salafists) that had been kept underground since Nasser’s days 50 years ago and had been helpful in the overthrow of Mubarak, have their day in the sun and if proven unworthy, they’d be trounced out in the subsequent elections in a few years. It was evident they’d win as they were the only organized political group at the time. After they were voted-in as expected, they started wrecking what wasn’t already wrecked in the economy by the previous regime. The Saudi-Qatar conflict played a role and the trial period for the Brothers was moved up and as quickly as they came to power, they were removed.

      • W.Jones on March 7, 2014, 10:22 am

        Are you saying that the MB were allowed in so that they would wreck the economy? Why would they think that MB would wreck the economy? I heard that the foreign banks did not like what they were seeing in Morsi and so they pulled finances from Morsi and this was a main reason why the economy collapsed under him.

      • Walid on March 7, 2014, 4:27 pm

        Today’s news from a few hours back:

        “Saudi Arabia designates Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization

        Updated 6:00 pm: Saudi Arabia has formally designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, official Saudi television reported citing a statement by the Interior Ministry.”

      • Walid on March 7, 2014, 4:32 pm

        W. Jones, about the Saudi-Qatar conflict I mentioned earlier, now Egypt has joined the anti-Qatar parade; things are now moving very fast in the region and you can expect something on Turkey soon:

        “Egypt recalls envoy from Qatar following Gulf decision

        Published Friday, March 7, 2014
        Egypt has welcomed the decision of three Gulf states to withdraw their envoys to Qatar and said its own ambassador “will not return” to the Gulf emirate.

        The unprecedented decision this week by Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates was seen as closely linked to Qatar’s support for the Muslim Brotherhood of deposed Egyptian president Mohammed Mursi, who was overthrown by the military in July.

        In a statement posted online late Thursday, the Egyptian government said it hoped the withdrawal of the envoys would mark “the beginning of a correction of the course taken by the Qatari government, which is contrary to our brothers in the Gulf Cooperation Council.”

      • W.Jones on March 8, 2014, 12:11 am

        I am still not getting why they would want the MB in power or why they would believe that he would wreck the economy, and whether it was he or foreign financial sources who did this.

    • bilal a on March 6, 2014, 10:44 pm

      This used to be classic FM Field Manul doctrine on Insurgency; sniper attacks on protestors and soldiers alike initiated both the Syrian conflict and the first Coup in Egypt.

    • annie on March 6, 2014, 11:08 pm

      w.jones, b @moa covered this yesterday

      bilalThis used to be classic FM Field Manul doctrine on Insurgency; sniper attacks on protestors and soldiers alike initiated both the Syrian conflict and the first Coup in Egypt.

      here’s along list of places it happened: Unknown Snipers and Western backed “Regime Change”

      it begins with the cia’s coup of romania and describes the movie ‘Checkmate: Strategy of a Revolution’ which i have linked to several times on these threads.

      The western intelligence officials interviewed in the documentary also revealed how the Western press played a central role in disinformation. For example, the victims of Western-backed snipers were photographed by presented to the world as evidence of a crazed dictator who was “killing his own people”.

      more at the link.

      • marc b. on March 7, 2014, 4:14 pm

        there have also been a series of unsolved ‘photogenic’ killings of opposition members attributed to various evil dictator types.

        see, e.g. Neda Agha-Soltan, an Iranian beauty who just happened to have been followed through the crowds on a phone-cam at a demonstration in Tehran in 2009 only to be shot in the head while being filmed, and a Venezuelan beauty (a professional model), Genesis Carmona, who was similarly shot in the head during a recent demonstration in Caracas, I believe.

      • W.Jones on March 9, 2014, 9:06 pm

        A senator from Crimea mentioned that this happened in Euromaidan too, where an Armenian activist was played up alot up facebook and then shot at such close range there were powder burns on him. Weird.

    • Bandolero on March 7, 2014, 10:31 pm

      AP has now some follow up reporting on that video.

      So the new western spin is that it is likely true that one and the same snipers shot protesters and policemen in a provocation. But, so the new western spin as their guys were caught red handed in this false flag terror act to get regime change, it was of course not ordered by the opposition, but either Putin or the Interior Ministry & the SBU must have ordered the sniper provocation as pretext to clear the Maidan.


      • annie on March 8, 2014, 9:53 am

        bandelero, not sure what to make of this: USA military mercenary BlackWater in Ukraine (Donetsk)

        russia is asking for an investigation in light of the ashton leak.

        Russia calls for OSCE probe into Kiev sniper deaths

        Moscow (AFP) – Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Saturday called for an OSCE investigation into who was behind the deaths of dozens of people in Kiev last month in attacks by snipers, saying the truth could no longer be “covered up”.

        “The latest information about the so-called snipers case can no longer be covered up,” Lavrov told a news conference in Moscow with his Tajik counterpart.

        “We have proposed that the OSCE (Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe) takes up an objective investigation of this and we will ensure there is justice.

        “There have been too many lies, and this lie has been used too long to push European public opinion in the wrong direction, contrary to the objective facts.”

        However Russia has strongly emphasised the leaked phone call between Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and Ashton as evidence for its argument that the new post-Yanukovych government in Kiev is made up of dangerous extremists.

        Lavrov’s call for a full probe indicates that this is an issue Russia will not allow to drop, risking new tensions with the West.

      • Bandolero on March 8, 2014, 1:06 pm


        The blackwater story I would treat so far as a rumor. Russian media reported, about 300 blackwater – now called “academy” – mercenaries are in Ukraine to protect the Kiev regime. Here is a detailed discussion of the mercenary angle in the Ukrainian story in Russian:

        However, I’m not convinced. I haven’t seen much hard evidence about newly arrvied blackwater mercenaries yet. A single short Youtube clip I find not enough as evidence for such a claim.

        But the snipers story, that they were shooting on police and protestors alike in Kiev to foment regime change, that I find a very significant story backed up with lot’s of video evidence. Here is a good analysis showing four sniper points, some of them clearly in opposition controlled Maidan territories:

        And last not least the leaked Ashton phone call. The leaked phone call begs also a different question: why didn’t Ashton make these suspicions public? She sat on them in silence for more than a week while her collegues accused Yanukovich to be without any serious doubt behind the bloodshed. The EU even sanctioned Yanukovich and his fellows based on that assumption. Russia made it clear, that it suspects the EU of knowing very well that Maidan leaders are behind the snipers shooting on protestors and police alike, and that’s the reason they are so silent about it, and they do not pressure for an independent investigation. Seeing that Ashton apparently did nothing after she was informed on these suspicions by the Estonian foreign minister I find that assumption quite plausible.

  5. David Doppler on March 6, 2014, 7:16 pm

    I had to read to the end of Bandolero’s comment, with Kiracofe’s dot-connecting, to see how this report was on topic for Mondoweiss. Are Russia and the US really such pawns in neocon games?

    • Bandolero on March 6, 2014, 8:40 pm

      A flea in my ear whispers: it would be not the first time the Israeli neocon rightwing lobby runs such a strategy. Under Ford & Carter the Israeli lobby was also one of the driving forces to derail USA-SU relaxation policies.

      However, today this rightist Israeli lobby is much stronger than it was back then. So, for me the more interesting question is: will Obama and Putin anyway find ways to prevent spoiling their relations due to Ukraine?

      Russia seems to understand that angle of the events in Ukraine. See RT:

      “Those who seized power in Kiev want to sour relations between West & Russia – Lavrov”

      But does Obama understand that, too, and if so, will he want and be able to prevent it happen?

      • David Doppler on March 6, 2014, 10:34 pm

        Well, give that flea a megaphone. Obama needs breathing room to not follow the dictates of the neocons. There needs to be a counter-narrative in the press that doesn’t buy the Ukraine = white hats, Russia = black hats BS. There needs to be a counter-narrative asking who in our government is striving for confrontation between the US and Russia and why? People in the press, people in Congress need to ask these questions.

        Incidentally, I just finished Season 2 of House of Cards, and we’re working our way through Scandal. It’s hard to keep the first ladies and presidents and other support characters straight between these two, both of which seem to be the same story of diabolic corruption, complete with CIA and NSA and hacker snooping via phones and all else electronic, with brilliant protagonists overturning every basic American value, in pursuit of power. Popular TV turning it into entertainment, historic low approval ratings for all the institutions of power, the table seems set for someone to expose the real base of corruption.

        Let those who manipulate power and press to start wars for ulterior motives be exposed and held accountable.

    • Bumblebye on March 6, 2014, 9:20 pm

      @David Doppler
      With the high levels of power they’ve achieved, and with the interwoven networks they switch between (think tanks/institutes/”public” service), all being well known to each other, I sadly think it is entirely possible. I’d come to the same conclusions (tho’ i can’t articulate it at all well). These guys wish lists were badly thwarted last year, so they’re trying a new tactic to get them back on track. It’s Iran and Syria neocon style.

  6. just on March 6, 2014, 8:07 pm

    Nuland’s father has passed. I hope that he will RIP.


    “Sherwin Bernard Nuland[1] (born Shepsel Ber Nudelman; December 8, 1930 – March 3, 2014) was an American surgeon and writer who taught bioethics, history of medicine, and medicine at the Yale University School of Medicine, and occasionally bioethics and history of medicine at Yale College. His 1994 book How We Die: Reflections on Life’s Final Chapter was a New York Times Best Seller and won the National Book Award for Nonfiction,[2] as well as being a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.”

    “Nuland was born Shepsel Ber Nudelman in The Bronx, New York City, in December 1930 to immigrant Russian Jewish parents Meyer and Vitsche Nudelman. Although raised in a traditional Orthodox Jewish home, he came to consider himself agnostic, but continued to attend synagogue.”

    “In a 2001 TED talk, which was released in October 2007, Nuland spoke of his severe depression and obsessive thoughts in the early 1970s, probably caused by his difficult childhood and the dissolution of his first marriage. As drug therapy remained ineffective, a lobotomy was planned, but his treating resident suggested electroshock therapy instead, leading to ultimate recovery.”

    He was human and a scientist. His daughter– not so much.

    • Eva Smagacz on March 7, 2014, 5:40 am

      Victoria Nuland is Sherwin Nuland’s daughter from his first, very troubled marriage. He was quite ill during her formative years, and I can only assume that her mother’s influence on her dominated her early adolescence. So although he was, by all accounts, a deeply ethical and moral person, this probably did not rub off on his daughter.

      • just on March 7, 2014, 5:58 am

        Apparently not………

  7. chuckcarlos on March 6, 2014, 8:20 pm

    distance from Kiev to Moscow is 527 miles, basically the same distance from San Francisco to San Diego but bet the train service over there is better

  8. Keith on March 6, 2014, 9:07 pm

    I am going to try to concisely make a few points about the complicated situation in the Ukraine. At one level, it is not very complicated. It was an imperial destabilization followed by a putsch. Was there legitimate grievances? With Wall Street and the IMF destroying the economies of Eastern Europe, how could there not be? Talk of “reforms” is a joke. There is no Eastern European country strong enough by itself to break free from the global financial system and the implementation of neoliberal globalization. The deposed President was an oligarch? Jeez, what a shocker. After the USSR broke up and Washington implemented economic “reforms,” all of Eastern Europe is essentially run by oligarchs. Money rules, and the fat cats call the shots. But Yanukovich got out of line and got too cozy with that upstart Putin, so he had to go. That is the simple part.

    The complicated part revolves around Putin’s ascendance in both the Middle East and in Western Europe. The Middle East is somewhat obvious. Syria is under attack and Putin is in the way. I am emphasizing Putin specifically because without him in power, Russia was much more compliant with imperial wishes. So Putin and Russia are under attack. Western Europe is less obvious. Suffice to say that if Russia was able to somehow form an alliance with Germany and France, it would be catastrophic for empire. US controlled NATO exerts organizational constraints on Germany and France while threatening Russia. Also, all of the countries separating Russia and Germany are NATO members, with the Ukraine eagerly pursued.

    A significant impetus for US emphasis on fracking natural gas is to export it to Europe thereby supplanting Russia’s influence with regard to energy. While Russia remains the number one exporter of natural gas, the US is now the number one producer. None of the power elites seems overly concerned with the environmental consequences of fracking, or of increased fossil fuel use. Without going into detail, I think that the Russian economy will be made to suffer and Putin blamed.

    I suppose we could summarize the ongoing destabilization of target regimes, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, etc., as a hyper-aggressive and risky attempt to alter the global geostrategic situation in such a way as to lock-in imperial hegemony for the foreseeable future. And while the US nation-state may be in relative decline, the global corporate/financial empire isn’t. Also, the power of the global financial system penetrates national boundaries imposing severe limits on governmental discretion.

    • Keith on March 6, 2014, 9:17 pm

      Let me add an additional comment. The Ukrainian economy is a disaster, the consequences of which will profoundly influence the course of events. I am providing a quote and a link to an excellent article by Jack Rasmus discussing the Ukrainian economy for those interested.

      “Looking longer term, should the USA and the west prevail politically somehow in the coming contest for the Ukraine, the Ukrainian economy will be in shambles far worse than it is even today. Ukraine’s currency will be near-worthless. Inflation rampant. Government subsidies stripped from households. And economic hardship severe, as a ‘Greek-Style’ austerity is imposed. But western banks and multinational corporations will have a field day, as they say, buying up industries and companies on the cheap in the east and restructuring them to fit their global economic plans.” (Jack Rasmus)

  9. RudyM on March 6, 2014, 10:14 pm

    More Zionist connections to the coup in Ukraine are emerging:

    The coup in Kiev also made Oleksandr Turchynov the acting President of Ukraine. On February 25, Turchynov assumed the duties of the supreme commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. While some American Baptists are reporting that Turchynov is a pastor or an elder at his church, the Word of Life Center in Kiev, they are missing the point. The Word of Life is a Zionist organization posing as a church. It was established by a Swedish Jew named Ulf Ekman, who created a church called “Livets Ord”, which established evangelical churches throughout the former Soviet Union in the early 1990s with the express purpose of finding and funding Jewish emigration to Israel.

    I can’t say I’ve confirmed all of that elsewhere, yet, but Word of Life is clearly Christian Zionist:

    • RudyM on March 6, 2014, 10:39 pm

      Hopefully Bollyn is correct that that is the Word of Life church under discussion (since it’s not an uncommon name).

      • RudyM on March 7, 2014, 2:01 am

        There definitely is a Word of Life church in Kiev connected to Ulf Ekman, so apparently yes:

        Things just get weirder and weirder. Oh, and here is the movie based on a book authored by Oleksandr Turchynov. I haven’t watched it all yet (no subtitles either).

        Some edification from Pastor Ekman:

        However, hostility remains. Anti-Semitism has taken on a new form and become anti-Zionism. Sometimes one can hear anti-Semites say, I have nothing against Jews, but I don’t like Israel or Zionism; as if one can treat the people and their land separately. This is impossible because they are inextricably joined together through the promises of God. Anti-Zionism is merely Anti-Semitism in another guise.

    • LeaNder on March 8, 2014, 10:19 am

      Jesus, conspiracy monger Bollyn of all people. Is that sicko spread here a lot?

      If you cannot see in what way he twists the Jewish thread into his larger story from this, I have admit that I feel very, very sorry for you, RudyM.

  10. DICKERSON3870 on March 7, 2014, 12:27 am

    RE: “Dateline, Ukraine: How the State Department ‘midwives’ democracy”

    MY COMMENT: Oh, the psychopathy of hegemonic exceptionalism! ! !*

    * SEE: “Hegemonic Exceptionalism: Ukraine as Cold War Epicenter”, by Norman Pollack,, 3/06/14

    [EXCERPTS] . . . Ukraine came along just as Americans’ fears instilled through the climate of counterterrorism, critically important to inducing complaisance and complicity with respect to US interventions, massive defense spending, and the demiurge for remaining on top (what The Times euphemistically called today [3-5], speaking positively, “credibility and global leadership”), were beginning to flag, a waning interest in global conquest periodically requiring shock treatment to keep intense and self-justificatory. “Came along,” however, is obviously incorrect: America had been fishing in Ukrainian troubled waters for some time, aware of the potential for heightening Cold War tensions at the center of the US’s international posture. . .
    . . . But that has changed, for with markets, etc., has come since World War II a growing ideological factor, the ideology, or better, psychopathology, of power-dominance-recognition, for its own sake, granted as making easier and seemingly legitimizing the traditional form, yet also a reification of toughness fitting an authoritarian collective-personality structure. Domination of others has become habituated in, and the constant expectation of, the American mind-set, whose origins may have rested in capitalism’s shaping of the social structure on hierarchical class lines, salted with the historical presence of slavery then segregation as well as the xenophobic attitude toward immigrants. . .
    . . . In a formalistic democracy, violated with impunity at every turn by the leadership structure (invariable bipartisan continuity) itself and speaking for the business and military communities-of-interest as well, shibboleths of freedom remain conspicuous, and simultaneously are negated by the regimentation of mind, with the result—pardon the neologism—of the ideologization of US policy top-to-bottom. . .
    . . . In fact, everyone seems to be using Ukraine as the validation of America’s greatness. Peter Baker in The Times had some choice quotes coming out of Congress: Dick Durbin, Democratic stalwart, on Putin, “[Kick] him out of the G-8”; Lindsey Graham, “Create a democratic noose around Putin’s Russia”; Marco Rubio, “Revisit the missile defense shield”; Mike Rogers, “Cancel Sochi [G-8]”. Rubio last night (3-4) spoke darkly of making Russia pay “the consequences” for its actions—he and Obama on the same page. Why the need for such validation? Why the recurring use of “TOUGHNESS”? I think psychopathology is an appropriate diagnosis here (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate at my elbow), in which “psychopathy” refers to “mental disorder; esp: extreme mental disorder marked usu. by egocentric and antisocial behavior.” Nicely fits the bill, show toughness in all things, even when, and especially when, your actions are morally and/or existentially wrong, as in: intervention (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and a host of lesser examples, particularly in the Hemisphere), regime change (as now, in Ukraine), targeted assassination (the Obama-Brennan weapon of choice in the War on Terrorism), domestic surveillance and worldwide eavesdropping—you get the idea (!) given the extensibility of the enumeration, much of which remains unknown given USG’s extreme lack of transparency and accountability. . .


  11. DICKERSON3870 on March 7, 2014, 12:51 am

    RE: “We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.” ~ Nuland

    MY QUESTION: How much of that went towards the snipers/sharpshooters?*

    *SEE: “Propaganda Rules the News”, by Paul Craig Roberts,, 3/05/14

    [EXCERPTS] . . . The entire story that the presstitutes have told about the Ukraine is a propaganda production. The presstitutes told us that the deposed president, Viktor Yanukovych, ordered snipers to shoot protesters. On the basis of these false reports, Washington’s stooges, who comprise the existing non-government in Kiev, have issued arrest orders for Yanukovych and intend for him to be tried in an international court. In an intercepted telephone call between EU foreign affairs minister Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister Urmas Paet who had just returned from Kiev, Paet reports: “There is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new coalition.” Paet goes on to report that “all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and then people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides . . . and it’s really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don’t want to investigate what exactly happened.” Ashton, absorbed with EU plans to guide reforms in Ukraine and to prepare the way for the IMF to gain control over economic policy, was not particularly pleased to hear Paet’s report that the killings were an orchestrated provocation. You can listen to the conversation between Paet and Ashton here:

    What has happened in Ukraine is that Washington plotted against and overthrew an elected legitimate government and then lost control to neo-nazis who are threatening the large Russian population in southern and eastern Ukraine, provinces that formerly were part of Russia. These threatened Russians have appealed for Russia’s help, and just like the Russians in South Ossetia, they will receive Russia’s help. . .


    • DICKERSON3870 on March 7, 2014, 1:15 am

      P.S. ALSO SEE – “Ukraine: Secretive Neo-Nazi Military Organization Involved in Euromaidan Snyper Shootings”, By F. William Engdahl,, 3/03/14

      [EXCERPTS] . . . A secretive neo-nazi military organization reported linked to NATO played a decisive role in targeted sniper attacks and violence that led to the collapse of the elected government. . .
      . . . The EU intervention without Washington was extraordinary and reveals the deeping division between the two in recent months. In effect it was the EU saying to the US State Department, “F*** the US,” we will end this ourselves.
      After hard talks, all major parties including the majority of protesters, agreed to new presidential elections in December, return to the 2004 Constitution and release of Julia Tymoshenko from prison. The compromise appeared to end the months long chaos and give a way out for all major players.
      The diplomatic compromise lasted less than twelve hours. Then all hell broke loose.
      Snipers began shooting into the crowd on February 22 in Maidan or Independence Square. Panic ensued and riot police retreated in panic according to eyewitnesses.
      The opposition leader Vitali Klitschko withdrew from the deal, no reason given. Yanukovich fled Kiev.[3]
      The question unanswered until now is who deployed the snipers? According to veteran US intelligence sources, the snipers came from an ultra-right-wing military organization known as Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian People’s Self-Defense (UNA-UNSO).
      The leader of UNA-UNSO, Andriy Shkil, ten years ago became an adviser to Julia Tymoshenko. UNA-UNSO, during the US-instigated 2003-2004 “Orange Revolution”, backed pro-NATO candidate Viktor Yushchenko against his pro-Russian opponent, Yanukovich. UNA-UNSO members provided security for the supporters of Yushchenko and Julia Tymoshenko on Independence Square in Kiev in 2003-4.[4]
      UNA-UNSO is also reported to have close ties to the German National Democratic Party (NDP). [5]
      Ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 the crack-para-military UNA-UNSO members have been behind every revolt against Russian influence. The one connecting thread in their violent campaigns is always anti-Russia. The organization, according to veteran US intelligence sources, is part of a secret NATO “GLADIO” organization, and not a Ukraine nationalist group as portrayed in western media. [6]
      According to these sources, UNA-UNSO have been involved (confirmed officially) in the Lithuanian events in the Winter of 1991, the Soviet Coup d’etat in Summer 1991, the war for the Pridnister Republic 1992, the anti-Moscow Abkhazia War 1993, the Chechen War, the US-organized Kosovo Campaign Against the Serbs, and the August 8 2008 war in Georgia. According to these reports, UNA-UNSO para-military have been involved in every NATO dirty war in the post-cold war period, always fighting on behalf of NATO. “These people are the dangerous mercenaries used all over the world to fight NATO’s dirty war, and to frame Russia because this group pretends to be Russian special forces. THESE ARE THE BAD GUYS, forget about the window dressing nationalists, these are the men behind the sniper rifles,” these sources insist. [7]
      If true that UNA-UNSO is not “Ukrainian” opposition, but rather a highly secret NATO force using Ukraine as base, it would suggest that the EU peace compromise with the moderates was likely sabotaged by the one major player excluded from the Kiev 21 February diplomatic talks—Victoria Nuland’s State Department.[8] Both Nuland and right-wing Republican US Senator John McCain have had contact with the leader of the Ukrainian opposition Svoboda Party, whose leader is openly anti-semitic and defends the deeds of a World War II Ukrainian SS-Galicia Division head.[9] The party was registered in 1995, initially calling itself the “Social National Party of Ukraine” and using a swastika style logo. Svoboda is the electoral front for neo-nazi organizations in Ukraine such as UNA-UNSO.[10]
      One further indication that Nuland’s hand is shaping latest Ukraine events is the fact that the new Ukrainian Parliament is expected to nominate Nuland’s choice, Arseny Yatsenyuk, from Tymoshenko’s party, to be interim head of the new Cabinet.
      Whatever the final truth, clear is that Washington has prepared a new economic rape of Ukraine using its control over the International Monetary Fund (IMF). . .


    • Sibiriak on March 11, 2014, 11:06 am

      [Paul Craig Roberts:]What has happened in Ukraine is that Washington plotted against and overthrew an elected legitimate government and then lost control to neo-nazis

      I’m not entirely in agreement with the use of the term “neo-Nazi” (too reductionist) to describe ultra-nationalist parties like Svoboda, but in any case, their power in the new regime in Kiev should not downplayed.

      Oleg Makhnitski from Svoboda has been appointed to the office of prosecutor general, along with a number of other far-right appointments to key positions, including Secretary and Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council-. The first order of business apparently is to arrest and jail Ukrainians who wish to democratically challenge the current regime.

      Case in point: The ex-governor of the Kharkiv region, Mikhail Dobkin, has been arrested and jailed. A former Yanukovich supporter and fierce opponent of the new Kiev regime, he resigned the governorship in order to run as a candidate in the upcoming May 25 elections. He’s “pro-Russian”, no doubt about it–he supports rights for Russian speakers and greater regional autonomy, maintaining ties with Russia etc.,–and he questioned the legitimacy of the coup-installed regime, but he never supported secession for any region. Nevertheless, he was called to the prosecutor general’s office, accused of separatism, and hauled off to a detention center.

      See (in Russian):

      This kind of anti-democratic repression bodes very ill. With far-right leaders in key prosecutorial and national security positions, its difficult to see how any kind of national reconciliation will be possible. This coming election on May 25th obviously can’t have any legitimacy at all if opposition parties are outlawed and opposition candidates are thrown in jail.

  12. Boomer on March 7, 2014, 1:08 pm

    This thread provides important information that seems to be largely ignored by the U.S. news coverage that I’ve seen and heard, on NPR as well as the networks. It is amazing to me how one-sided, superficial, even propagandistic that coverage seems, based on my unscientific sample. (I don’t have cable, so perhaps I’ve missed something better.)

    Of course, we have seen that kind of coverage before, e.g., before the U.S. invaded Iraq, but somehow this seems worse. As I recall, before we invaded, many newspapers in middle America editorialized against it, even though WaPo, WSJ, and NTY were mostly beating the war drums.

    What’s more, Mr. Obama’s rhetoric seems oddly strident and unrooted in reality. It is amazing to me that Obama would even have Ms. Nuland in his administration. She was, after all, principal deputy foreign policy advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney. Not for the first time, I wonder just who Obama really is. I’m left perplexed and confused.

    • chuckcarlos on March 7, 2014, 10:08 pm

      you ain’t the only one…

      I remember voting for Clinton the first time…

      they the lies…one after another…until it was almost impossible to tell when he was telling the truth…

      so I voted for Dole

      who care who Clinton screwed or did not have sex with…but some point in life one has to be honest, at least with ones own self to have any dignity

      same with Obama…

      the great hope…

      well then, not so much hope…

      but are you going to vote for Mr Footinhismouth?

      so we have another loser…

      Mearsheimer spotted this guy a mile away…

      • Boomer on March 9, 2014, 8:07 am

        I found a long discussion of neocon influence in the State Department–and how it continued during Obama’s administration–over Juan Cole’s blog. If one believes that version of history, it all comes down to Mr. Obama’s courage and character.

      • Bandolero on March 9, 2014, 4:26 pm


        I’m no fan of Juan Cole, however I ‘ld thank him for running that important piece of Robert Parry.

        Robert Parry runs the outstanding website Consortium News, where he carries on the discussion over the “neocons” drive for regime change in Ukraine:

        For everyone interested in US foreign policy and a critical view of relations with Israel, I can highly recommend Robert Parry’s Consortium News website. I find it very informative and very well informed. Robert Parry is a former AP journalist, and many people writing articales for the Consortium News website are highranking former CIA and other US government officials, most of them critical of the Israel lobby.

      • Boomer on March 9, 2014, 4:56 pm


        Thanks for the link; I wasn’t familiar with the site.

    • Citizen on March 8, 2014, 6:53 am

      I’ve seen nothing on cable news that differs from what you say, Boomer–the over all impact of coverage feels like the cold war era–Putin is cast as the black hat, trying to resurrect USSR power. The cable pundits are not parsing the factions involved, nor saying anything about US or Israeli involvement in Urkraine, nor are they discussing the IMF, etc. I’ve never heard the word “zionist” even mumbled on the three major cable news channels…

      • Boomer on March 9, 2014, 8:09 am

        I guess that I don’t need to start paying for cable. Thanks.

  13. UpSIDEdown on March 7, 2014, 2:58 pm

    I wonder how many Russian Christians remember the 66 million who were murdered starved and tortured to death, Is the world we are to live in now? a world where every Country has the fear of being attacked on a whim for political and economic gain. Are we marching towards this one world govt with our eyes open? I’m frightened for my three sons having to live in the future of a Country I’ve no idea where its headed other then what my nightmares are full of.I see no way out other then we people I have acknowledged that no politician will come riding in to save the day so it really will be our doing or undoing to change. I want this next generation to live with the same freedoms that most everyone here has been lucky enough to be raised on.

  14. Dan Crowther on March 7, 2014, 3:22 pm

    These idiots from the Obama administration are totally greasing the skids for a military dictatorship in the US – the Generals have to be going bezerk right now; we’re a wrong move away from DefCon 1, all because of complete ineptitude – remember when Barry was sold as the more “competent manager of Empire”? Haha.

    Just when you thought the republican party was dead too. The “nationalist” blowback from this is going to be severe, “Mericuh looks weak!”; far right wing president here we come. With an american Gen. Sissi to follow.

    • traintosiberia on March 8, 2014, 1:45 pm

      The generals are rebuking the politicians,rear ending them in cabinet,doing end run around on every opportunity they could get, and the CIA is upbraiding the Senators ,threatening the media,and suggesting route map for policies within and outside the borders. They are also being hailed as hero and patriot .

      They are doing a good job . They may decide not to take decorative control.they have effective control.

  15. ivri on March 7, 2014, 3:46 pm

    So, Zionists are running Ukraine, the US, Russia, Palestinians, Egyptian coup (according to Erdogan at least) and everything else. Now some would connect it to claims about who runs wall St. and responsible for the financial crisis in the EU (as many there actually believe) and the alleged masters of the media and Hollywood and you have “The Protocols” resuscitated. Turns out tiny Israel is some bigger than life force on earth…
    Some key flaws: if something serves Israel interest (or anybody else for taht matter)it does not follow automatically that it engendered it; If two things are Jewish there may still not be any real connection between them – in reality the people behind them might even be rivals; To show conspiracy you need to demonstrate pre-planning, masterminding or control over affairs; Proportions matter: a small country taht is hugely occupied with own problems, as Israel certainly is, cannot meddle, even just find the attention space for it, in global geo-strategic issues.

    • Walid on March 7, 2014, 3:53 pm

      You underestimate Israel, Ivri.

    • Bandolero on March 7, 2014, 7:24 pm


      It’s a fact that there is an influental Pro-Israel-Lobby at work in the US – and in other countries, too. The main Pro-Israel-Lobby group in the US is called AIPAC and it has a huge influence on US foreign policy, focusing usually on foreign policy items of Israel’s concerns, and the US is the most powerful country on earth. And we have strong evidence, see the leaked call of very much pro-Israel assistant secretary Nuland, that the US was/is in the lead regarding government change in Ukraine.

      And Ukraine was also a topic on AIPACs recent policy conference. See here reporting on the JINSA-awarded US-politician John McCain blaining “Obama’s ‘feckless’ foreign policy for Ukraine crisis” for example:

      It’s quite obvious to see the difference the Israel lobby’s handling of encouraging protests and regime change in Iran, Libya, Syria & Ukraine, while being uninterested in other protests, like those in Thailand for example.

      • ivri on March 8, 2014, 4:56 am

        AIPAC is indeed a fact but then what is so surprising about Jews in the US setting up a lobby to support a Jewish state. The fact that it managed to do that effectively is no more than the American Story in general, namely if you do something you try to do it well. That its mission is to persuade American policy makers to see matters in ways that favor Israel with arguments that strive to show that Israel`s position is the correct one in the conflict is just doing what it was established for in the first place. And likewise, naturally, it would be mainly interested in matters that concern Israel rather than ones that happens elsewhere in the world (even if they happen to have some commonality in structure). And then if the Ukraine case helps to advance their own case – would not they mention that?
        What I am trying to say is that there is nothing out of the ordinary here – it is all on the table and makes perfect sense.

      • Citizen on March 8, 2014, 7:09 am


        “… it is all on the table and makes perfect sense.”
        And so does what George Washington had to say about foreign entanglements in his farewell address. Similarly, what Ike said in his about military-industrial complex.

      • Bandolero on March 8, 2014, 12:24 pm


        This your comment sounds completely different as your comment above where you compared discussing Israeli influence on US and world policies to the protocol propaganda.

        I agree with you that “there is nothing out of the ordinary here – it is all on the table and makes perfect sense” – so we should not be afraid to frankly discuss these matters of Israeli & Zionist influence on US and world policies, trying neither to exaggerate nor to underestimate it.

    • American on March 8, 2014, 12:19 pm

      Proportions matter: a small country taht is hugely occupied with own problems, as Israel certainly is, cannot meddle, even just find the attention space for it, in global geo-strategic issues”..ivir

      Israel meddles all the time…in the ME they meddle ‘directly” … other areas of the world they ‘piggyback’ with some other power’s agenda for whatever they can get out of it for themselves.

      • Bandolero on March 8, 2014, 9:00 pm


        Israel meddles all the time…in the ME they meddle ‘directly” … other areas of the world they ‘piggyback’ with some other power’s agenda

        I think Ukraine is a very special place for Israel. Lot’s of people in Israel were actually born in Ukraine and emigrated after the collapse of the Soviet Union to Israel. But a lot of these people have still an attachment to Ukraine – see Boris Filatov, the new deputy governor of Dnepepetrovsk, who just came in from Israel, as an example. He doesn’t speak Ukrainian, but he’s now a leader of Ukraine’s “nationalist revolution.” See the RT article about him, which I quoted above.

        It’s quite interesting:

        Apparently, Kiev’s new language policy affects the deputy governor personally, as all his posts on the social network are in Russian. Earlier, he was looking on Facebook for a teacher of Ukrainian. “Primarily, I’m interested in the spoken language,” Filatov wrote.

        In his earlier controversial post, the businessman stated that Stepan Bandera, a Nazi collaborator and leader of Ukraine’s Nationalist Organization, was his hero.

        “I am proud of Bandera. He is my Hero. Particularly, as I see that people are ready to die under red-and-black flags,” Filatov stated.

        One of the richest businessmen in the Dnepropetrovsk region, Filatov got his administration seat on March 4, just several days after returning to Ukraine from Israel.

        As far as I know, many of the Ukrainian people who emigranted to Israel in the last three decades are now settlers in the Westbank, and from what I understand of Israel’s internals policies, the settler faction is quite influential in Israel’s internal policies nowadays. So it’s quite clear to me, that for these reasons Israel has a much closer relation to what’s going on in Ukraine, as opposed to some more distant events, let’s say, Thailand for example.

        But the bigger question is how that translates into Israel’s overt and covert foreign policy.

  16. Walid on March 7, 2014, 4:11 pm

    Doom and gloom and possible nuclear war being predicted by Paul Craig Roberts today:

    “The Looting of Ukraine Has Begun
    by Paul Craig Roberts

    According to a report in Kommersant-Ukraine, the finance ministry of Washington’s stooges in Kiev who are pretending to be a government has prepared an economic austerity plan that will cut Ukrainian pensions from $160 to $80 so that Western bankers who lent money to Ukraine can be repaid at the expense of Ukraine’s poor. It is Greece all over again.

    … In the former Russian provinces of eastern Ukraine, Putin’s low-key approach to the strategic threat that Washington has brought to Russia has given Washington a chance to hold on to a major industrial complex that serves the Russian economy and military. The people themselves in eastern Ukraine are in the streets demanding separation from the unelected government that Washington’s coup has imposed in Kiev. Washington, realizing that its incompetence has lost Crimea, had its Kiev stooges appoint Ukrainian oligarchs, against whom the Maiden protests were partly directed, to governing positions in eastern Ukraine cities. These oligarchs have their own private militias in addition to the police and any Ukrainian military units that are still functioning. The leaders of the protesting Russians are being arrested and disappeared. Washington and its EU puppets, who proclaim their support for self-determination, are only for self-determination when it can be orchestrated in their favor. Therefore, Washington is busy at work suppressing self-determination in eastern Ukraine.

    This is a dilemma for Putin. His low-key approach has allowed Washington to seize the initiative in eastern Ukraine. The oligarchs Taruta and Kolomoyskiy have been put in power in Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk, and are carrying out arrests of Russians and committing unspeakable crimes, but you will never hear of it from the US presstitutes. Washington’s strategy is to arrest and deep-six the leaders of the secessionists so that there no authorities to request Putin’s intervention.

    If Putin has drones, he has the option of taking out Taruta and Kolomoyskiy. If Putin lets Washington retain the Russian provinces of eastern Ukraine, he will have demonstrated a weakness that Washington will exploit. Washington will exploit the weakness to the point that Washington forces Putin to war.

    The war will be nuclear.

    Paul Craig Roberts

    for full article:

  17. ToivoS on March 7, 2014, 7:25 pm

    This talk of Zionist running our policy in the Ukraine or having a significant influence on events there is completely unneeded. Israel will deal with whatever government emerges there and it not in their interests to be involved. The influence of the neocons is without doubt a major factor in US policy as witnessed by the antics of Victoria Nuland. The neocons have a history. When they first gained a foothold in the Washington power structure their primary issue was the Soviet Union and they were central to the most aggressive anti-Soviet policies during the Reagan admin. They are simply carrying on that tradition today. It was a group of aids to Senator Henry Jackson that was the core neocon group who was the biggest hawk in the Senate for decades. The Henry Jackson Society today is a hotbed of neocon activity.

    Because there is so much overlap between Zionists and neocons it is easy to be confused.

    • Citizen on March 8, 2014, 11:04 am

      @ ToivoS
      I replied to your comment’s last sentence, but my comment was censored. It contained a link from Rense in 2005 naming key Zionists involved in the Ukranian government and main media, and another link pointing out how Ukranian crisis has been exploited by US and Israeli Zionists-neocons, especially Nuland.

    • lysias on March 8, 2014, 5:19 pm

      The Soviet Union is dead. Putin and his government are closely associated with the Russian Orthodox Church, which was severely persecuted under Communist rule. Just what policies are the neocons continuing?

      • ToivoS on March 8, 2014, 8:52 pm

        lysias you raise a good point. I have been trying to answer the question why is there such an anti-Russian sentiment in so much of the US press over the last decade. Given Putin’s involvement in restoring the Russian Orthodox Church one would think he would be given some credit for that. He has largely, if not entirely, cleaned up the corruption that reigned during the Yeltsin years so what is not to like about that?

        The Putin hatred goes deeper and I think it has to do with historical bias. Many of our attitudes are absorbed directly from England — the have two nearly continuous centuries of anti Russian (and Soviet) hatred built into their psyche. Many of today’s leaders were raised in the anti-Soviet propaganda that dominated news up to 1992. The neocons were involved in that project very early starting with the expulsion of Trotsky from the Soviet Union. I think it is just in their blood. Victoria Nuland’s policies are there for everyone to clearly see so there is no need form me to explain to you what they are.

      • RoHa on March 9, 2014, 4:00 am

        “Many of our attitudes are absorbed directly from England — the have two nearly continuous centuries of anti Russian (and Soviet) hatred built into their psyche.”

        Where do you get this idea from? I don’t recall encountering any anti Russian (and Soviet) hatred in Britain. Bloviations from politicians trying to suck up to the Americans, yes, but not among the general public. The anti-Soviet propaganda was mostly American in origin, and taken rather lightly by the British.

      • W.Jones on March 10, 2014, 3:53 pm


        Does the Crimean War make sense? The Turks invaded Europe, conquered Constantinople, and the West fought four Crusades against them. The Turks are Muslim and attacked Austria. They occupied Slavic Europe and Greece for many centuries.

        So what did Britain and France (I think) do? When Russia got in a war with the Ottoman empire to free lands that the Turks had conquered, Britain and France attacked Russia to protect Turkey. Isn’t that rich?

        We grow up learning about how bad the Turks are with forced conversion and the Jizzya tax on Christians and other “dhimmis”, and then when Russia goes to free those lands, Britain steps in and *invades* Russia to stop it. Please explain how that makes sense?

        The best sense I can make is that the war had zero to do with ideology and was a power play- Britain did not want Russia to get real strong, including in the Mediterranean. But from a Christian standpoint, this is incredibly stupid and self-mutilating. Why should Christians invade and try to destroy another Christian country for the sake of Islamic power? Is geopolitics worth it?

        Actually, I doubt there is anything like some kind of ingrained “anti-Russian” thinking that is any worse than thinking about other possible competing powers. I assume Americans actually like Russia more than the Caliphate. But the stupidity of putting geopolitical “order” over actually caring about people or Christianity is revealed once again in the incredibly stupid and bad funding of the Jihadis in Syria which slaughter Christians and indeed other Muslims.

      • RoHa on March 10, 2014, 9:59 pm

        “Does the Crimean War make sense?”

        Almost no-one remembers the Crimean War. (And those few who do don’t care.) Almost no-one remembers the Great Game to stop Russia from pushing to the borders of British India, and even when it was being played there was no anti-Russian hatred. Almost no-one remembers that British forces supported the Whites in the revolutionary wars, and, again, those few who do don’t care.

        Slightly more people remember that the Soviet Union defeated the Wehrmacht in WW2, and are glad of it. It makes them pro-Russian.

        So no, there is and never was any great store of anti-Russian hatred in Britain. Any such hatred in America has been cooked up by crazy Americans for their own purposes.

  18. chuckcarlos on March 7, 2014, 8:50 pm

    hey to say this

    but russkies are a damn dangerous bunch

    cultured, intelligent, with one hellofalot of courage

    took them 60 years…but in 45 they transferred a million plus army to Manchuria and made the Japanese look silly…evened the score for the previous War…

    some say it wasn’t Hiroshima or Nakasaki that brought Japan to her knees, but the spectre of Russians dining in Tokyo…

    Russians and various forms of Cossacks have been in and around the Black Sea for many, many years…

    Russia is a heterogeneous society but they love their country…

    the girls are real good lookin but I sure wouldn’t screw with the guys…

    • RoHa on March 8, 2014, 1:30 am

      “but in 45 they transferred a million plus army to Manchuria and made the Japanese look silly”

      Not that difficult in 45. But in 38/39, when the Japanese were strong and growing stronger, they fought border wars with the Soviets and were thrashed so thoroughly that they changed their grand strategy and decided that South East Asia had better weather, better food, and prettier girls*.

      (And the Soviet commander, Zhukov, had an experienced army that turned out to be pretty useful later on.)

      (*Still does, too.)

  19. Citizen on March 9, 2014, 1:09 am

    Putin asks, why?
    Uri Avnery’s answer: Bibi got his diversion, the Zionist strategy of “time is everything,” more time to build “facts on the ground.” God bless Putin:
    (tidy little summary of Ukrainian history & source of Ukrainian anti-semitism)

  20. W.Jones on March 10, 2014, 3:38 am

    Song about foreign assistance teams sent to Ukraine:

  21. Citizen on March 10, 2014, 5:07 am

Leave a Reply