It would seem that by
either ignorance to Russia’s own interests within the region, or perhaps
half-blinded by the fact that I did not care much to see another US-EU-Neo-Nazi
coup from occurring, after all the fun of the last one isn’t quite through with
yet, I was thus inclined to view the Russian’s actions in a more favorable
light, perhaps offering their supposed magnanimity more credit than it
deserves. President Putin and the
Russian Federation are in Crimea, at least in part to protect its governmental body from falling
to another American-EU sponsored coup, but also to maintain hegemony in a
region important for a number of reasons, gas supply pipelines not being the
least of which, neither being the strategic naval base located on the Black
Sea. There can be no doubt of this, Putin's
actions represent a response to the aggressive power grab in Kiev. A strategic
area heavily under the influence of Moscow was threatened by an outside nation acting
through its Neo-Nazi paramilitary proxies, and Putin responded in the exact
same way that any other power who’s interests were being threatened would. Because of this Putin’s ‘military aggression’
is the most justifiable position within the conflict; one need not mention how
illegitimate and unjustifiable Europe and America’s actions are in contrast.
The claim of legitimacy
America has been desperately trying to hide behind can thus be explained as
follows: We acquired influence over Kiev through a violent, armed coup, which
there can be no doubt about, the government was overtaken by force and the one
we installed is by no stretch of the imagination legitimate in any meaningful
sense of the word, yet it is our illegitimate
government and because of that reason alone it is legitimate. It is legitimate because we say it is, and we
will use all of our powers of PR, propaganda and demagoguery to influence public
opinion and re-write the history of current events so that it aligns itself
with this axiomatic reality. This stance
is apparent when you read any of the recent corporate news stories covering
Ukraine; our blindness and inability to see our own crimes while vehemently denouncing
the highly predictable response of the nation whose interests we selfishly are
seeking to undermine. Anybody who says
that Putin’s response is shocking, alarming or surprising is either
deliberately trying to mislead their audience or completely inept and ignorant
to world affairs. Only an elementary
understanding is needed to realize that when a power-structure’s interests are
being undermined or threatened that power will behave in a way so as to protect
those interests. Ukraine is the hydrocarbon
energy connection between Europe and Russia, the intermediary by which a highly
significant amount of gas flows through in order to reach Europe. Before the coup in Kiev, Moscow’s Gazprom
held a monopoly over the region, the West’s actions are an attack on Russia’s
monopoly over the energy transit routes, the use of military force in Crimea
was the response by which Putin sought to maintain control of these
interests. Control of Crimea maintains
control of most of the pipeline routes; the real prize is Crimea, that’s where
the pipelines are and that’s also where the army and naval bases are
located. America can shout and moan all
day over Russia’s ‘invasion’ while attempting to brand the democratic decision
of self-determination of the Crimean people as somehow illegitimate and
un-democratic, but once again, it is un-democratic purely because we say it
is. The presidential elections to be
held in Kiev will of course be held to a higher standard and branded as ‘democratic’
while those in Crimea will of course not be, the differentiating variable being
that one will be held under the auspices of our control while the other will
not.
Given all of this, there
is only one correct way to interpret the claim for Ukrainian territorial sovereignty
which is being invoked by the West as a justification to cancel the Crimean
referendum for self-determination, and that would be to realize that all ‘Ukrainian
territorial sovereignty’ really means is instead simply ‘our ability to
maintain hegemonic control of Ukraine.’
Given this definition the American government’s stance against the
democratic vote for determination makes much more sense: they are opposed to
the referendum in Crimea because it would break any kind of dominating control
that they seek to gain within the region.
Imperialism and geo-strategic hegemony are driving the show; euphemisms
regarding humanitarian concern and ‘democracy’ provide the smokescreen in the
foreground.
Also to note, a likely
reason why the right-wing, ultra-nationalist contingencies are gaining influence
as well as positions in seats of power is, at least in part, due to the fact
that they were willing to take on the police, police that have been excessively
brutal at times throughout the protests yet who also have been the subjects to
extreme aggression from the radical opposition elements, and have therefore
been able to successfully overthrow what unanimously is agreed was a corrupt
and insufficient government. Perhaps
many of the protestors who had become radicalized by these elements thought that
actual change would result from Yanukovych’s ouster instead of just a transfer
of power from one oligarchy to another, which now has battle-proven military,
security and defense forces headed by leaders of openly Nazi parties. Yet what it seems everybody did agree upon before the transfer of
power took place was that Yanukovych had lost political relevancy, and was as
much a threat to his citizens well being as they ended up becoming to his. This, of course, by no means gives America or
anyone else the right to manipulate the valid uprisings and protests of a
disenfranchised and exploited people in order to realize their own political
and strategic ambitions, no matter how intensely neo-liberals claim to be
spreading freedom and democracy and no matter how intensely neo-cons spout off
at the mouth with jingoisms and hawkishness.
As Europe and America
threaten sanctions and threats of retaliation to pressure Moscow into
retreating from the region, the true impetus of the conflict becomes apparent:
The Ministers noted that energy is a critical part of Europe's security. Therefore, it is essential to accelerate the implementation of goals and activities to increase European energy independence and diversify energy sources. A concrete action plan to achieve this must be established as soon as possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment