There’s uproar in the Western media, about Donald Trump wanting to negotiate with Putin, a peace deal in Ukraine. And Trump called Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy a dictator and blamed him for starting the present war Ukraine.war. And he said that Zelenskyy’s approval rating has fallen to 4%. General agreement that Donald Trump was “rewriting history”.
Well, Trump is well known for lying, and it’s just so easy to scrutinise those statements and smugly assert that they are incorrect, and obviously Donald Trump has no idea of what he’s talking about.
And yet, and yet… all those statements deserve further scrutiny. Because underneath their careless inaccuracy lies the real history of the Ukraine mess.
Historically, Ukraine as a sovereign State goes back only until 1991. In its previous history, it was dominated by a motley succession of European powers, but in the 19th and 20th Century, by Russia. Cruel exploitation by Stalin’s rule in the 1930s was followed in 1941 by a brutal Nazi regime, and after 1944 back under oppressive Soviet control.
It is no surprise that there are long-standing resentments among both Ukrainian dwellers and in the diaspora. There is also a variety of ethnic backgrounds, and a clear difference between the ‘West-leaning” culture of Western Ukraine, and the more pro-Russian culture to the East.
At the end of World War 2, the Allies had the opportunity to include Russia in some co-operative Council of the powers, as was done by the Congress of Vienna in 1815, after the Napoleonic Wars. Instead, the USA, Britain and France chose to set up a co-operative group, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), that excluded Russia. American triumphalism gradually encouraged this into a defensive group against Russia, and encouraged former Soviet States to be part of America’s “sphere of influence” and to join NATO.
As Ukraine is the largest Western State on Russia’s border, it is obvious that Russia would not want it to be a NATO state, potentially with U.S military bases aimed at Russia.
Now, to go to the forgotten 8 years Ukrainian war
In 2014, an American-sponsored coup overthrew the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych. He was subsequently followed by oligarch Petro Poroshenko, who removed Russian as an official language, causing opposition in the Eastern provinces. The result was fierce repression against the Russian-speaking regions (Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, Lugansk and Donetsk). The rebels of Donetsk and Lugansk held referendums, seeking not to separate from Ukraine, but to have a status of autonomy, guaranteeing them the use of the Russian language as an official language .
2014-15 Minsk Agreements. Leaders of France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine gathered in Minsk, and supported the agreements between Russia, Ukraine, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the leaders of separatist-held regions Donetsk and Luhansk. This formally gave Donetsk and Luhansk autonomous status within Ukraine.
2015 – 2022: The agreements were never implemented. The Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko launched a massive “anti-terrorist operation” against the Donbass, and the fighting continued. This war was not popular, reservists failed to turn up.
“In October/November 2017, 70% of conscripts did not show up for the “Fall 2017” recall campaign. This is not counting suicides and desertions (often over to the autonomists), which reached up to 30 percent of the workforce in the ATO area”.Young Ukrainians refused to go and fight in the Donbass and preferred emigration, which also explains, at least partially, the demographic deficit of the country.”
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) estimates the total number of war-related casualties in Ukraine from 14 April 2014 to 31 December 2021 to be 51,000–54,000.
This entire 8 years of war is rarely mentioned by the Western media. There’s no recognition of the impact of imposing the Ukrainian language on Russian-speakers. No consideration of some loyalties to Russia and her role in WW2. No consideration of the influence of Ukrainian Nazi collaborators, and the role of the minority neo-Nazis. There was one exceptional coverage by The Guardian in 2014 – It’s not Russia that’s pushed Ukraine to the brink of war.
2019: Volodymr Zelenskyy was elected with a huge majority, on his pledge to uphold the Minsk agreements, and bring peace to Ukraine. But soon after coming to power, Zelenskyy reneged on that pledge. He later made it clear that he intentionally chose to sabotage Minsk, give his country more time to prepare for war. A large-scale militarisation of Ukraine began. The build-up of the Ukrainian army was accompanied by the development of militias, notoriously the Azov brigade, with links to the Nazi past and the philosophy of past far-right leader Stepan Bandera.
2022: February 24. Russia launched its Special Military Operation into Ukraine, claiming that it was a limited operation, not a war. Russia argued that this was lawful under Article 51 of the UN Charter, that it may use force against Ukraine in order to defend the Donetsk and Luhansk Peoples Republics. Anyway it soon turned into a full-scale war against Ukraine, which certainly was not legal, and Ukraine got the enthusiastic backing of the USA and NATO, though no foreign troops.
The Political Situation in Ukraine: The Zelenskyy regime has banned opposition parties, cracked down on the use of the Russian language, restricted media and freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly, violating international law. Zelenskyy signed a law that threatens to effectively shut down the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) – the largest faith-based organization in the country. He signed a law that restricted import of books from Russia. Monuments to Russian cultural history were destroyed.
So – to go back to Donald Trump’s inaccurate claims and “rewriting history”. How far off the mark was Trump? In fact, Zelenskyy was elected democratically, but has now turned Ukraine into a dictatorship. Zelenskyy did not start the war, but he provoked it, by overturning his election policy to implement the Minsk agreements. Zelenskyy’s approval rating is still above 50%, but has slipped over the past year.
It is Western dogma that you can’t approve of anything that Donald Trump does. And for anyone to even mention the 8 years’ war in Ukraine is to invite being branded as an idiotic puppet of Russian propaganda and disinformation.
The “progressive” West notices with disapproval, that Donald Trump’s aim is to get American business’s control of Ukraine’s mineral resources, in exchange for Russia getting territorial concessions. Well, what else would you expect from Trump – whose whole schtick is to get American (and his own) control of business, preferably everywhere? It still might be a better deal for Ukrainians than obliteration. Way back, the West, and Zelenskyy could have honoured the Minsk agreement, and given the Donbass provinces self-government within the state of Ukraine and avoided the whole war.
Also by Neil Wauchope: Conveniently forgotten and ignored: the 8 years war in Ukraine up to 2022
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Thank you Noel Wauchope for the true background to this tragic conflict
Few remember the role of Victoria Nuland in thenMaidan protests and her part in the regime change. Among all the western commentators there is a wilful forgetfulness about this period and the unnecessary deaths of thousands over the years prior to Putins invasian. Moreover Ukraine’s legacy of Nazi sympathisers is never mentioned. Had the Minsk agreements been honoured and if the west had refrained from using this conflict for its own advantage this conflict would have been long over.
1/.“As Ukraine is the largest Western State on Russia’s border, it is obvious that Russia would not want it to be a NATO state”
May I suggest you do a little more research. Putin has completely changed his position on Ukraine’s joining NATO.
Putin has previously made the following statement –
“I am absolutely convinced that Ukraine will not shy away from the processes of expanding interaction with NATO and the Western allies as a whole. Ukraine has its own relations with NATO; there is the Ukraine-NATO Council. At the end of the day the decision is to be taken by NATO and Ukraine. It is a matter for those two partners.”
Only more recently has Putin objected to Ukraine joining NATO.
You can find the statement I’ve quoted on the official site of the Russian President
2/. “In 2014, an American-sponsored coup overthrew the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych”
I’ve pointed out before that to gain office, Yanukovych committed to seeking membership of the EU.
Once elected he reneged and sought to join the Russian trade zone.
There were mass public protests against his decision. The public protests were the biggest in contemporary Europe. Ukrainians didn’t wish to return to being a Russian colony.
Yanukovych lost control of the apparatus of government when the police and military declined to comply with his directions to shoot civilians.
Ultimately Yanukovych was removed from office by a vote of the Ukraine Rada. It was 328 to zero.
Even the Regional Party of Yanukovych voted against him.
That isn’t to say the USA was a disinterested bystander, but calling this a “coup” ignores the facts.
3/. With regard to the Minsk Agreement(s), there were requirements on both sides.
There are numerous clauses of the Minsk Agreement the Russian backed separatists did not comply with . Among them they were required to-
° Decommission their heavy artillery. They didn’t
°Disband all illegal militias. They didn’t
° Return border control to Ukraine. They didn’t
° Allow humanitarian aid to the region. They didn’t.
4/. It is also important to recall that all regions of Ukraine voted solidly for independence from the Soviet Union. Even Crimea.
5/. With regard to the status of the Ukrainian nation, we should note that Russia guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty, in accordance with existing borders by signing the Budapest Memorandum.
In return Ukraine relinquished their nuclear weapons.
Ukraine was disarmed then invaded.
Let’s not fool ourselves by blaming Ukraine for the war.
Later, I might post some further information, to balance this article.
But don’t ignore these facts I have posted
Need to learn how to find, test and present sources for credibility.
Case in point, the imagery of Roger Waters, according to Tampere University’s Russian disinfo research unit Vatnik Soup
‘Former Pink Floyd Lyricist Polly Samson tweeted that Waters is “antisemitic” to his “rotten core”, also calling him Putin apologist and misogynist. David Gilmour, Roger’s former band mate and Samson’s husband, fully agreed with this assessment…..
‘Waters has also denied Bashar al-Assad’s involvement in the chemical attacks around Syria. He’s called the Syrian humanitarian aid NGO, White Helmets, who save civilians from disaster areas a “fake organisation” that produces propaganda for “jihadists and terrorists”.
https://vatniksoup.com/en/soups/189/
The comment by AC is a litany of deliberate misinformation.
Deliberate, because this has all been refuted before, yet he repeats it without shame.
You will note that AC in his usual manner provides no dates or references to his claims. This is important, because circumstances change over time. The provision of dates provides context.
To have any credibility at all on this AC should provide a link for Putin’s statement about Ukraine joining NATO. It’s not good enough to quote “the official site of the Russian president”. AC knows that the average reader will not go to that trouble. It’s a ploy to keep people in the dark.
The 328 to zero vote was not constitutional, as AC already knows.
Those seeking autonomy were not Russian backed as AC already knows. And why would they disarm while still being under attack from their own government?
The Budapest Memorandum was first breached by the US, UK, and Ukraine. When Russia intervened the Memo no longer existed, Ukraine had walked away from it as AC already knows.
The regions of Ukraine voted for independence from Russia prior to the coup and the emergence of ultra-nationalists into positions of power in Ukrainian affairs. As AC already knows.
AC said “Let’s not fool ourselves by blaming Ukraine for the war” yet he knows that a plan to provoke Russian intervention existed for at least 3 years prior, and was verified by a video that I have linked to at least twice previously.
This irrational behaviour by AC must have a reason.
Given the events of the last few days it’s not hard to work out.
Steve Davis do you ever stop gaslighting people who disagree with your opinions and repetitive Kremlin talking points?
Shooting messengers to avoid and deflect from inconvenient facts, alliances etc. a la RW MSM…
Like the article, why do you ignore the distasteful RWNJs and tankies, who run protection for corrupt power represented by Putin, Trump etc. while precluding agency for sovereign states, Ukraine, their citizens, Europe etc.?
Gee, it would be nice if Andrew Smith one day posted a comment that actually had substance to it.
He and AC must have gone to the same debating seminar —
“Don’t provide context.”
“give ’em nothing they can use”
“brush up on a lot of critical labels you can pin on your opponents, like gaslighting etc”
“Be as vague as you can without appearing stupid”
Readers will note that Andrew chose to not contest any of my points. Made accusations without evidence.
And for those who might think Andrew has a point with my reference to AC being irrational, his repetition of refuted points is not rational, nor was his repeated references to little green men at A Dramatic Development In The Ukraine Situation.
Consider AC’s account of the protests that led to the coup, then consider this.
An established and public verdict on the false-flag operation commonly called ‘Euromaidan’ was rendered by a Kyiv court (Sviatoshyn District Court) on 18 Oct 2023, following an extensive investigation. The verdict acknowledged that non-government and non-law-enforcement activists firing from the Hotel Ukraina were responsible for the deliberate and targeted killings of both protesters and police, and had also shot at a BBC News crew with the apparent intent of killing them. This verdict is based in part on the testimony of eyewitnesses. Today you would never find acknowledgement of that verdict unless you knew how to keyword-search for specific terms, because virtually no news media reported it. Meanwhile, public social-media archives such as Wikipedia go on blithely spreading the disinformation that it was a spontaneous grass-roots rebellion
From canadiandimension.com 20 Feb 2024– A nearly one-million-word verdict from Ukraine’s Maidan massacre trial has recently confirmed that many Maidan activists were shot not by members of Ukraine’s Berkut special police force or other law enforcement personnel but by snipers in the far-right-controlled Hotel Ukraina and other Maidan-controlled locations a decade ago today. The verdict, handed down on October 18, 2023, states specifically that this hotel was controlled by Maidan activists and that an armed, far-right-linked Maidan group was in the hotel and fired from it. It also confirms that there was no Russian involvement in the massacre and that no massacre orders were issued by then President Viktor Yanukovych or his ministers. The verdict concludes that the Euromaidan was at the time of this massacre not a peaceful protest but a “rebellion” that involved the killing of Berkut and other police personnel.
There has been, however, a blackout of the verdict’s confirmation of the Maidan snipers in the Ukrainian media and, with a few notable exceptions, the Western mainstream media. Moreover, in an op-ed piece in The Bulwark, an online neoconservative magazine, author Cathy Young misrepresented the verdict, falsely claiming that it had found the Berkut police responsible for the deaths of 40 of the 48 protesters killed. Young also denied and openly whitewashed the existence of Maidan snipers and the far-right’s involvement in the Maidan massacre, labelling it a “conspiracy theory” despite clear and overwhelming evidence to the contrary in the verdict, the trial, and the investigation, as well as in academic studies of the event. Such deliberate omission and misrepresentation has been perpetrated in spite of the fact that the verdict’s Ukrainian text, as well as automatic English translation of the relevant excerpts, are publicly available, and in spite viral tweets describing and quoting from it.
https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/114304164
AC stated that “Yanukovych lost control of the apparatus of government when the police and military declined to comply with his directions to shoot civilians”, yet the verdict stated that no massacre orders were issued by then President Viktor Yanukovych or his ministers.
AC is a fabricator.
Why are you so aggressive in shooting messengers and disrupt others’ narratives by micro focus ignoring all else; neither makes your Putin-MAGA infused opinions correct, nor the article.
The points you make are wilfully misleading, as you seem to have been misled; what and how you present is not credible (year 10?).
Using the Socratic method on credibility, there is a lack of Ethos or authority and Logos or expertise, but dollops of Pathos or negative opinions and pathos a la Fox News editorial; equates with throwing Ukraine and Europe under a bus…
What is it, and the article’s author too, that you are proposing or what do you want for the future vs banging on about your misconceptions of history and more recent events?
Suggests everyone should be ‘quiet Australians’, take empathy bypasses and follow orders, that mirror Trump, Putin, faux anti-imperialist ‘tankies’ of the left (&/or right?), Musk, Orbán, Koch & Tanton Networks et al, MAGA and RW white Christian nationalists’ ‘collective narcissism’ to support <1%?
The latter suggests what you and the author are reflecting ie. the latters’ intolerance, but deflecting to blame Ukraine victims of an invasion and Russians too, due to Putin’s regime, to deal with your own 20thC cognitive dissonance and (collective) narcissism?
Andrew Smith says “The points you make are wilfully misleading,…” yet he gives no evidence for that.
Where did he learn to discuss like this?
Did the seminar I jokingly referred to earlier also include in its advice “deflect, accuse and ramble until your opponent walks away” ?
I would not wish to confuse AC, or his buddy, about Putin and NATO, but history does record that Vlad, in his early days leading Russia, actually applying to NATO for membership.
It was denied and thats probably because NATO woold then have to have another reason to carry on.
I also watched Jeffery Sachs addressing an audience in Europe very recently revealing his personal involvement in the USA`s regime change operation in Ukraine in 2014. This is not AI but an US senior official telling Europe what happened, and how they should now react.
Its sitting there on U-tube.