All-Out War in Ukraine: NATO’s ‘Final Offensive’

By James Petras

November 23, 2014 "ICH" -  There are clear signs that a major war is about to break out in Ukraine:  A war actively promoted by the NATO regimes and supported by their allies and clients in Asia (Japan) and the Middle East (Saudi Arabia).  The war over Ukraine will essentially run along the lines of a full-scale military offensive against the southeast Donbas region, targeting the breakaway ethnic Ukraine- Russian Peoples Republic of Donetsk and Lugansk, with the intention of deposing the democratically elected government, disarming the popular militias, killing the guerrilla resistance partisans and their mass base, dismantling the popular representative organizations and engaging in ethnic cleansing of millions of bilingual Ukraino-Russian citizens.  NATO’s forthcoming military seizure of the Donbas region is a continuation and extension of its original violent putsch in Kiev, which overthrew an elected Ukrainian government in February 2014.

The Kiev junta and its newly ‘elected’ client rulers, and its NATO sponsors are intent on a major purge to consolidate the puppet Poroshenko’s dictatorial rule.  The recent NATO-sponsored elections excluded several major political parties that had traditionally supported the country’s large ethnic minority populations, and was boycotted in the Donbas region.  This sham election in Kiev set the tone for NATO’s next move toward converting Ukraine into one gigantic US multi-purpose military base aimed at the Russian heartland and into a neo-colony for German capital, supplying Berlin with grain and raw materials while serving as a captive market for German manufactured goods.

An intensifying war fever is sweeping the West; the consequences of this madness appear graver by the hour.

War Signs:  The Propaganda and Sanctions Campaign, the G20 Summit and the Military Build Up

The official drum- beat for a widening conflict in Ukraine, spearheaded by the Kiev junta and its fascist militias, echoes in every Western mass media outlet, every day.  Major mass media propaganda mills and government ‘spokesmen and women’ publish or announce new trumped-up accounts of growing Russian military threats to its neighbors and cross-border invasions into Ukraine.  New Russian incursions are ‘reported’ from the Nordic borders and Baltic states to the Caucuses.  The Swedish regime creates a new level of hysteria over a mysterious “Russian” submarine off the coast of Stockholm, which it never identifies or locates – let alone confirms the ‘sighting’.  Estonia and Latvia claim Russian warplanes violated their air space without confirmation.  Poland expels Russian “spies” without proof or witnesses.  Provocative full-scale joint NATO-client state military exercises are taking place along Russia’s frontiers in the Baltic States, Poland, Romania and Ukraine.

NATO is sending vast arms shipments to the Kiev junta, along with “Special Forces” advisers and counter-insurgency experts in anticipation of a full-scale attack against the rebels in the Donbas.

The Kiev regime has never abided by the Minsk cease fire. According to the UN Human Rights office 13 people on average –mostly civilians –have been killed each day since the September cease fire. In eight weeks, the UN reports that 957 people have killed –overwhelmingly by Kiev’s armed forces.

The Kiev regime, in turn, has cut all basic social and public services to the Peoples’ Republics’, including electricity, fuel, civil service salaries, pensions, medical supplies, salaries for teachers and medical workers, municipal workers wages; banking and transport have been blockaded.

The strategy is to further strangle the economy, destroy the infrastructure, force an even greater mass exodus of destitute refugees from the densely populated cities across the border into Russia and then to launch massive air, missile, artillery and ground assaults on urban centers as well as rebel bases.

The Kiev junta has launched an all-out military mobilization in the Western regions, accompanied by rabid anti-Russian, anti-Eastern Orthodox indoctrination campaigns designed to attract the most violent far right chauvinist thugs and to incorporate the Nazi-style military brigades into the frontline shock troops.  The cynical use of irregular fascist militias will ‘free’ NATO and Germany from any responsibility for the inevitable terror and atrocities in their campaign.  This system of ‘plausible deniability’ mirrors the tactics of the German Nazis whose hordes of fascist Ukrainians and Ustashi Croats were notorious in their epoch of ethnic cleansing.

G20-plus-NATO: Support of the Kiev Blitz

To isolate and weaken resistance in the Donbas and guarantee the victory of the impending Kiev blitz, the EU and the US are intensifying their economic, military and diplomatic pressure on Russia to abandon the nascent peoples’ democracy in the south-east region of Ukraine, their principle ally.

Each and every escalation of economic sanctions against Russia is designed to weaken the capacity of the Donbas resistance fighters to defend their homes, towns and cities.  Each and every Russian shipment of essential medical supplies and food to the besieged population evokes a new and more hysterical outburst – because it counters Kiev-NATO strategy of starving the partisans and their mass base into submission or provoking their flight to safety across the Russian border.

After suffering a series of defeats, the Kiev regime and its NATO strategists decided to sign a ‘peace protocol’, the so-called Minsk agreement, to halt the advance of the Donbas resistance into the southern regions and to protect its Kiev’s soldiers and militias holed-up in isolated pockets in the East.  The Minsk agreement was designed to allow the Kiev junta to build up its military, re-organize its command and incorporate the disparate Nazi militias into its overall military forces in preparation for a ‘final offensive’.  Kiev’s military build-up on the inside and NATO’s escalation of sanctions against Russia on the outside would be two sides of the same strategy:  the success of a frontal attack on the democratic resistance of the Donbas basin depends on minimizing Russian military support through international sanctions.

NATO’s virulent hostility to Russian President Putin was on full display at the G20 meeting in Australia: NATO-linked presidents and prime ministers, especially Merkel, Obama, Cameron, Abbott, and Harper’s political threats and overt personal insults paralleled Kiev’s growing starvation blockade of the besieged rebels and population centers in the south-east.  Both the G20’s economic threats against Russia and the diplomatic isolation of Putin and Kiev’s economic blockade are preludes to NATO’s Final Solution – the physical annihilation of all vestiges of Donbas resistance, popular democracy and cultural-economic ties with Russia.

Kiev depends on its NATO mentors to impose a new round of severe sanctions against Russia, especially if its planned invasion encounters a well armed and robust mass resistance bolstered by Russian support.  NATO is counting on Kiev’s restored and newly supplied military capacity to effectively destroy the southeast centers of resistance.

NATO has decided on an ‘all-or-nothing campaign’:  to seize all of Ukraine or, failing that, destroy the restive southeast, obliterate its population and productive capacity and engage in an all-out economic (and possibly shooting) war with Russia.  Chancellor Angela Merkel is on board with this plan despite the complaints of German industrialists over their huge loss of export sales to Russia.  President Hollande of France has signed on dismissing the complaints of trade unionists over the loss of thousands French jobs in the shipyards.  Prime Minister David Cameron is eager for an economic war against Moscow, suggesting the bankers of the City of London find new channels to launder the illicit earnings of Russian oligarchs.

The Russian Response

Russian diplomats are desperate to find a compromise, which allows Ukraine’s ethnic Ukraine- Russian population in the southeast to retain some autonomy under a federation plan and regain influence within the ‘new’ post-putsch Ukraine.  Russian military strategists have provided logistical and military aid to the resistance in order to avoid a repeat of the Odessa massacre of ethnic Russians by Ukrainian fascists on a massive scale. Above all, Russia cannot afford to have NATO-Nazi-Kiev military bases along its southern ‘underbelly’, imposing a blockade of the Crimea and forcing a mass exodus of ethnic Russians from the Donbas.  Under Putin, the Russian government has tried to propose compromises allowing Western economic supremacy over Ukraine but without NATO military expansion and absorption by Kiev.

That policy of conciliation has repeatedly failed.

The democratically elected ‘compromise regime’ in Kiev was overthrown in February 2014 in a violent putsch, which installed a pro-NATO junta.

Kiev violated the Minsk agreement with impunity and encouragement from the NATO powers and Germany.

The recent G20 meeting in Australia featured a rabble-rousing chorus against President Putin.  The crucial four-hour private meeting between Putin and Merkel turned into a fiasco when Germany parroted the NATO chorus.

Putin finally responded by expanding Russia’s air and ground troop preparedness along its borders while accelerating Moscow’s economic pivot to Asia.

Most important, President Putin has announced that Russia cannot stand by and allow the massacre of a whole people in the Donbas region.

Is Poroshenko’s forthcoming blitz against the people of southeast Ukraine designed to provoke a Russian response – to the humanitarian crisis?  Will Russia confront the NATO-directed Kiev offensive and risk a total break with the West?

James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York. Latest book: “The New Extractivism. A Post-Neoliberal Development Model or Imperialism of the Twenty-First Century?” Henry Veltmeyer and James Petras. Zed Books. http://petras.lahaine.org/

Il potenziamento militare di Kiev e l'escalation delle sanzioni contro la Russia sono le due facce della strategia della Nato

Изазивање Русије (Вили Вимер)

Ових дана је веома упадљиво у којој мери немачки медији трчкарају иза догађаја. Вечерња батина која формира јавно мњење, као и увек je до те мере пасторално прожета да од толике политичке коректности човек просто не зна који положај уопште да заузме у студију.

Осврнемо ли се на догађаје изван граница сопствене земље, видећемо да о њима цвркућу и врапци на грани. Преговори са Ираном о атомском програму од 18. до 24. новембра ће се завршити или на начин да нарастајући регионални конфликти деескалирају, или ћемо се помирити са тим да гледамо како ће, без нашег утицаја, бити повучен oроз за следећи глобални конфликт. При томе се догађају ствари које су нам важније и које нам привидно ”скидају с врата” конфликт, удаљен од нас само неколико часова лета.

И сусрет земаља региона Пацифика у главном граду Кине јасно је показао да нам могућности избора нису велике: или ће бити дата шанса разуму и страху од несреће која нас очекује, или ће ствари сазрeвати у правцу избијању великог рата. Свет се десетинама година није суочио са оваквом ситуацијом пред којом се налазимо на крају 2014. године.

Ми у Европи и други који се сврставају у ”Запад” не би при томе требало да сметнемо с ума свој морални, привредни, фанансијски и политички положај по завршетку Хладног рата и након поновног уједињења Немачке. А где смо данас? Ретка је оваква прилика која нам допушта да се активно супротставимо великим проблемима света, а ми смо је, како данас јасно видимо, проиграли.

Запад је искључиво својом кривицом упропастио сјајну почетну позицију у суочавању са сваком врстом изазова. Зашто? Зато што смо из много разлога у нужном савезу са једном силом која више од десет година у дословном смислу те речи свесно ”разбија све око себе”, обеснажујући сва правила која дају шансу свету да живи у миру. Ми смо увезани са њом конопцима за вучу. Данас можемо једино да се молимо да нам конфликт у Источној Украјини не донесе неке друге падавине осим Божићног снега.

Није било ни од какве користи од тога што је Руска Федерација по завршетку Хладног рата и нестанком Совјетског Савеза постала ”пaучина на ветру” и на дуже време престала да буде један од стубова поретка европске стабилности. И они у Москви и ми у Бону и Берлину били смо присиљени да посматрамо како Вашингтон гази све што се нашло испред његових цеви. Запад, а са њиме и ми, није могао да уради ништа конструктивно да би успешно превазишао конфронтацију у једном региону од глобалног значаја. И, шта сад? Сад нам дословно застаје дах што је Руска Федерација поново стала на политичку бину света након што је била принуђена да у случају међународноправно недопустивих ратова против Београда, Багдада, Дамаска и Триполија болно искуси нови амерички приступ усмерен и против ње саме.

Данас све говори у корист тезе да се Запад, којим доминира Америка, није снашао ни са некадашњом руском занемелошћу, нити са садашњим повратком Руске Федерације као силе која делује на глобалном плану. Наравно, Европска Унија се одлучно укључила у ову екипу на шта нова ”висока представница ЕУ за сопљну политику” већ сада јасно указује Комисији Европске Уније коју је Вашингтон циљано уздрмао кризом преко њеног председника Јункера. Када неко као Могерини већ у првој изјави даје јасно до знања да ће политику према Москви усклађивати договарањем са НАТО, онда нам она открива колико мало жели да буде питана. А и што би када ми носимо главни терет наметнух санкција!?

Могерини уопште не крије да санкције које нам је наметнуо Вашингтон уопште не утичу на руско руководство. Па зашто се уопште још увек придржавамо ових санкција и зашто смо их уопште увели? Западу неће још дуго полазити за руком да заварава изненађену и санкцијама све више погођену јавност. Да ли је Запад санкцијама позитивно утицао на Москву и Кијев, на мере које воде стабилизацији? Нипошто! Зато што свако у Европи и на кугли замаљској зна до које мере су санкције једнострани кораци против Москве у поређењу са пристрасношћу Запада у корист Кијева. Речено војним језиком санкције се могу упоредити са додатном тенковском дивизијом која треба да осигура офанзиву своје восјке против једне мирољубиве земље, у овом случају Руске Федерације.

Чак није потребно ни објављивање телефонских позива америчке секретарке Нуланд да би се схватила општа западна стратегија у Украјини. Запад није имао никакву замерку против председника Јануковича и бала олигарха у Украјини све док се чинило да је он спреман да потпише одговарајуће уговоре са Европском Унијом. Нови и бивши комесари Европске Уније су последњих недеља појаснили до које мере је европска политика у овим питањима била погрешна. Право смеће, куда год да погледамо!

Још у ноћи када је окончано убијање по Кијеву, у договору са западним људима из сенке, циљано су подметнути пожари у одређена подручја Украјине како би могле да се предузму акције против Русије. Није ту било много скрупула у ангажовању бивших и садашњих нациста, оних снага које у овом региону делују онако како је деловала куга у Средњем веку. Колико је било изненађујуће, толико је било и срамно ко у Кијеву и код нас о томе ћути, или умањује значај слања војних формација овакве провинијенције на руску државну границу. Просто је невероватно ко је све пристао на ово ћутање.

Међутим, једну ствар би требало да знају наше владе. Нема помоћи ономе ко верује њима и медијима на које оне утичу када су у питању вести које нам стижу из конфликтних подручја Украјине.

Са немачког превела Бранка Јовановић

ИНСТРУМЕНТАЛИЗАЦИЈА ОЕБС-а И ИНСЦЕНАЦИЈА РАТА

One year since the beginning of the crisis in Ukraine

28 November 2014

Tomorrow, Saturday, marks the first anniversary of the Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius, where then Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych refused to sign an Association Agreement with the European Union. One year later Ukraine is embroiled in a civil war that has claimed more than 4,000 lives. NATO is on the verge of an armed conflict with Russia that threatens humanity with nuclear annihilation.

How did this come about? Western propaganda answers this question with five letters: PUTIN.

The Russian president thinks in “spheres of influence,” breaks international law, endangers “the framework of peace in Europe” and seeks to annex not only Ukraine, but also Georgia, Moldova and the Baltic states, according to the accusations of German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

A flood of propaganda spread by the media 24 hours a day tries to convince the public that only the villain in the Kremlin is preventing Ukraine from developing into a prosperous oasis of democracy, and Europe into a paradise of peace.

The WSWS has absolutely no sympathy for the Russian president. He is a right-wing nationalist who represents the interests of Russian oligarchs and is diametrically opposed to the socialist and internationalist goals for which we stand. But to make Russia responsible for the escalation of the crisis in the last twelve months stands reality on its head.

Among the few western voices to contradict the official propaganda is the professor of political science at the University of Chicago, John J. Mearsheimer. In the September/October issue of the journal Foreign Affairs, he states that Putin is not the aggressor. “The United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West.”

Mearsheimer continues: “Putin’s pushback should have come as no surprise…. His response to events (in Ukraine) has been defensive, not offensive.” He points out that the United States would “not tolerate distant great powers deploying military forces anywhere in the Western Hemisphere, much less on its borders. Imagine the outrage in Washington if China built an impressive military alliance and tried to include Canada and Mexico in it.”

Mearsheimer, a proponent of the school of international relations theory known as neorealism, examines the conflicts among states, but does not deal with the economic and social issues that also play a role in the Ukraine crisis. However, his assertion that the US has encircled Russia to maintain its position as a world power, while Germany is striving to become one, is correct.

The penetration of Eastern Europe by NATO and the EU has a further dimension. It aims to transform Ukraine and eventually Russia itself into a kind of semi-colony—a reservoir of cheap labor and raw materials for Western companies, a market for their products and a source of profits for hedge funds and Western banks. To this end they require a regime that is subordinate to NATO and the EU and brutally suppresses the working class.

This was the aim of the Association Agreement that Yanukovych refused to sign a year ago and which, after his overthrow, was accepted by the new regime.

The Agreement protects the assets of Ukrainian oligarchs and opens up Ukraine to western corporations and banks while luring the political elite and a small layer of the middle class with bribes from the EU. To the broad mass of the population it has nothing to offer but unlimited quantities of “Greek medicine”—austerity programs prescribed by the IMF and the EU, massive cuts in spending on social welfare, education, health and administration, and the closure and privatization of factories.

Initially Yanukovych supported the Association Agreement, but eventually decided against it because he feared for his political future. He feared a social explosion if he implemented the cuts demanded by the EU in what was already a desperately poor country. For its part, Russia offered Ukraine cheap loans, while the EU insisted on immediate drastic savings.

In order to bind Ukraine to the EU and NATO despite this, it was necessary to organize a coup and to mobilize fascist forces. From the start, the protests on the Maidan were under the influence of western backed forces. US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland later admitted that the US had invested over $5 billion in such forces since 1991.

At first, just a few thousand took to the streets, and there was no evidence of a widespread sentiment in favor of the EU. Public opinion polls show that during the last ten years only 30 to 40 percent of the Ukrainian population favored EU integration, with about the same number favoring integration with Russia.

The spokesmen of the protests were familiar figures: Arseny Yatsenyuk, a representative of the US sponsored Orange Revolution of 2004; Vitaly Klitschko, who lived in Germany, a professional boxer with close ties to the CDU-affiliated Konrad Adenauer Foundation; and Oleh Tjahnibok, leader of the fascist Svoboda party. In what was a complete break with diplomatic norms, government members and parliamentary deputies from NATO countries mixed publicly with demonstrators who blocked government buildings and demanded the overthrow of the elected president.

When Yanukovych refused to yield to the demonstrators’ demands, armed right-wing groups began to dominate events on the Maidan. Svoboda transported its followers into Kiev from its strongholds in the west of the country. Virtually out of nowhere, the Right Sector, an alliance of neo-Nazis and paramilitary militias emerged. The conflicts became more brutal, snipers killed dozens of people. It has not been settled until this day if they were part of the security forces of the regime or political provocateurs from the ranks of the opposition.

On February 21 Yanukovych agreed to an interim government and early elections. Threatened by right-wing militias, he took flight the very same night. On February 22 his opponen

(Message over 64 KB, truncated)

Ukraine communists comment on elections in Donetsk and Lugansk

On elections in Donetsk and Lugansk