How does the US made report below differ from RT's which had to be blocked?
Ted Galen Carpenter:The extent of the Obama administration’s meddling in Ukraine’s politics was breathtaking.
Neither
the domestic opposition nor Washington and its European Union allies
behaved in that fashion. Instead, Western leaders made it clear that
they supported the efforts of demonstrators to force Yanukovych to
reverse course and approve the EU agreement or, if he would not do so,
to remove the president before his term expired. Sen. John McCain
(R‑AZ), the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee,
went to Kiev to show solidarity with the Euromaidan activists. McCain
dined with opposition leaders, including members of the ultra
right‐wing Svoboda Party, and later appeared on stage in Maidan Square
during a mass rally. He stood shoulder to shoulder with Svoboda leader
Oleg Tyagnibok.
But McCain’s actions were a model of diplomatic
restraint compared to the conduct of Victoria Nuland, the assistant
secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs. As Ukraine’s
political crisis deepened, Nuland and her subordinates became more
brazen in favoring the anti‐Yanukovych demonstrators. Nuland noted in a
speech to the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation on December 13, 2013, that she
had traveled to Ukraine three times in the weeks following the start of
the demonstrations. Visiting the Maidan on December 5, she handed out
cookies to demonstrators and expressed support for their cause.
The
extent of the Obama administration’s meddling in Ukraine’s politics was
breathtaking. Russian intelligence intercepted and leaked to the
international media a Nuland telephone call in which she and U.S.
ambassador to Ukraine Geoffey Pyatt discussed in detail their
preferences for specific personnel in a post‐Yanukovych government. The
U.S‑favored candidates included Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the man who became
prime minister once Yanukovych was ousted from power. During the
telephone call, Nuland stated enthusiastically that “Yats is the guy”
who would do the best job.
Nuland and Pyatt were engaged in such
planning at a time when Yanukovych was still Ukraine’s lawful president.
It was startling to have diplomatic representatives of a foreign
country—and a country that routinely touts the need to respect
democratic processes and the sovereignty of other nations—to be scheming
about removing an elected government and replacing it with officials
meriting U.S. approval.
Washington’s conduct not only constituted
meddling, it bordered on micromanagement. At one point, Pyatt mentioned
the complex dynamic among the three principal opposition leaders,
Yatsenyuk, Oleh Tyahnybok, and Vitali Klitschko. Both Pyatt and Nuland
wanted to keep Tyahnybok and Klitschko out of an interim government. In
the former case, they worried about his extremist ties; in the latter,
they seemed to want him to wait and make a bid for office on a
longer‐term basis. Nuland stated that “I don’t think Klitsch should go
into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary.” She added that what
Yatseniuk needed “is Klitsch and Tyanhybok on the outside.”
The
two diplomats also were prepared to escalate the already extensive U.S.
involvement in Ukraine’s political turbulence. Pyatt stated bluntly that
“we want to try to get somebody with an international personality to
come out here and help to midwife this thing [the political
transition].” Nuland clearly had Vice President Joe Biden in mind for
that role. Noting that the vice president’s national security adviser
was in direct contact with her, Nuland related that she told him
“probably tomorrow for an atta‐boy and to get the details to stick. So
Biden’s willing.”
Both the Obama administration and most of the
American news media portrayed the Euromaidan Revolution as a
spontaneous, popular uprising against a corrupt and brutal government.
A
February 24, 2014, Washington Post editorial celebrated the Maidan
demonstrators and their successful campaign to overthrow Yanukovych. The
“moves were democratic,” the Washington Post concluded, and “Kiev is
now controlled by pro‐Western parties.”
It was a grotesque
distortion to portray the events in Ukraine as a purely indigenous,
popular uprising. The Nuland‐Pyatt telephone conversation and other
actions confirm that the United States was considerably more than a
passive observer to the turbulence. Instead, U.S. officials were
blatantly meddling in Ukraine. Such conduct was utterly improper. The
United States had no right to try to orchestrate political outcomes in
another country—especially one on the border of another great power. It
is no wonder that Russia reacted badly to the unconstitutional ouster of
an elected, pro‐Russian government—an ouster that occurred not only
with Washington’s blessing, but apparently with its assistance.
That
episode, as well as earlier ones involving Italy, France and other
democratic countries, should be kept in mind the next time U.S.
political leaders or the media publicly fume about Russia’s apparent
interference in America’s 2016 elections. One can legitimately condemn
some aspects of Moscow’s behavior, but the force of America’s moral
outrage is vitiated by the stench of U.S. hypocrisy.
Brexit UK could have chosen trade with China but instead went for militarism and war together with its desperate $-freeloading master US, which feels its financial robbery of the world since 1971 is coming home to roost because of China's success in economy and technology that makes US inevitably a loser in the end. However, instead of mature cooperation, now rogue state US pulls its guns and loads them with extremely dangerous mini nukes to be placed on the borders of China and Russia, far away from US. Moreover, NATO and other states have to pay for enhancing the risk of confrontations and even nuclear war. Shame on a US that I used to like as a child. US has become the worst enemy of the world - but few have fully realized the consequences. US gain-of-function strategy is to continue sucking the world while trying to isolate China. And its useful idiot EU under the leadership of a US puppet it chose as its compromise fuhrer because they couldn't unite on a better one. Sadly it will take some time to realize that the West can never beat China in tech anymore - only cooperate. And the alternative is a fast declining standard of living that will sharply contrast with the Chinese one. Unless of course rogue state US has destroyed the world before that.
No comments:
Post a Comment