Russia in Crimea: to Rescue, Protect and Defend

Por • 5 mar, 2014 • Sección: Política

Boris Novoseltsev

Crimea is what the whole world is talking about. Western media is bringing news about «aggression» or ‘intervention» in Ukraine accusing Russia of trying to annex part of foreign land. They fully ignore the reality – the fact that Moscow has lent a helping hand to rescue, protect and defend the Russian speaking population in the peninsula. A few days ago the leaders of the European Union signed an agreement on crisis management with the legally elected President of Ukraine. Now the putschists have become the West’s partners. The inadequate reaction is explained by the threat posed to the Western geopolitical game played on the Grand Chessboard… 

The project called «color revolutions» started to hit snags in Central Asia but got a new lease on life by the February coup in Ukraine. Now the color revolution technology has been modified by matching «peaceful» street protests with the actions of armed militants. The combination was to push President Yanukovych, who was not very popular at the time, to abyss. And it has been implemented. But those who operated behind the scenes wanted it all right now and right here. That’s why the West traitorously contravened the February 21 accord it had wanted badly before and gave its approval on February 22, 2014 of a coup to be staged in Kiev. 

The West got embroiled in its own geopolitical game and lost its bearings; it stopped to treat Russia as an equal partner ignoring the fact that it has its lawful interests in the post-Soviet space. Russia displayed restraint as the events in Kiev unfolded since the end of November. This attitude was perceived as a sign of weakness or indifference on its part, anything but respect and unwillingness of the Russian Federation to interfere into internal affairs of another state. 

The West was carried away by prospects looming as a result of the coup staged in Ukraine. The new regime displayed its real nature as soon as it made first steps: it made Russophobia part of official policy and set the goal of turning Ukraine into a colony of the West. 

It could be surmised that those steps were nothing but an intermediate phase of a larger geopolitical scheme drawn by Western powers.  

First of all, it envisioned striking the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Right after the coup the voices were raised calling for tearing up the Kharkov agreement (the gas prices discount in exchange for Ukraine agreeing to extend the lease of Sebastopol, the main home port for the Black Sea Fleet) and rescinding the treaty stipulating the conditions of the Fleet’s deployment. There were hot heads who even called for cancelling the «big treaty» which stated the Russia’s recognition of Ukraine. The treaty torn up, Kiev would be in a dead end situation.  

Making Russia retreat its navy from Sebastopol before the agreement expired was planned as a step aimed at undermining its clout in the region. Even if back up bases were ready, the pull out would be interpreted as a sign of Russia losing the power to influence the events in the vicinity of its borders. 

There is no reason to believe that the creeping occupation of Ukraine could entail «a revolution exported to Russia», but there is no doubt there was an attempt to destabilize the situation in the whole post-Soviet space. 

It was to hurt economically both Russia and Ukraine. Europe let it know clearly that it has no interest in Ukraine as an industrial state boasting a robust capability to produce high-tech products. At best it was perceived as an agricultural province with ecological standards ignored to allow the cultivation of transgenic plants. The Ukrainian economy in doldrums would jeopardize close bilateral ties damaging Russia too. The economy in the south-eastern part of Ukraine is closely tied to the countries of the Customs Union; its cooperation with the Russian military industry is fruitful. It was also planned to make Ukraine more dependent on money lenders. 

 No doubt with the putschists at the helm in Kiev, the issue of Ukraine joining NATO would have come to the fore under the pretext of «defending national interests» and «implementation of the military reform»… 

The south-eastern part of the country became somewhat disorganized as a result of President Victor Yanukovych fleeing the country and the betrayal of many MPs from the Party of Regions. It complicated the efforts to counter the trend. Especially under the conditions when «evolutionary expediency» substitutes the law. It’s hard to imagine the United States installing elements of missile defense somewhere as near as Lugansk and Donetsk, but even if it were Dnepropetrovsk, for instance, the deployment of US interceptors at the distance of 1000 km from the centers of vital importance on Russian soil would have been unacceptable. But missile defense sites would be just an element of larger NATO’s presence in Ukraine. The US is not even trying to hide the fact of deploying chemical virus research facilities there, one can imagine what it would do if there was no resistance anymore? 

Could Russia watch quietly how NATO is getting tighter the moose around its neck while millions of Russian lives are jeopardized in Ukraine as the events unfold unfavorably for them? 

Playing its geopolitical games the West has approached the red line posing a threat to the balance of forces in the Black Sea region and, potentially, in the entire Eurasia. The Russia’s interests in the region are not something abstract; it’s a reality for the West to reckon with. 

No way could the West-Russia dialogue proceed according to the pattern which envisions Russia constantly making concessions and retreating from its stance… There is a silver lining – many Western politicians begin to realize this fact. The emotional reaction with the threats to impose sanctions etc. had nothing to do with anything like providing Ukraine with financial or military aid. 

It’s no use to waste time and effort trying to make a deal with those in the West who regularly ignore international law and the principles of state sovereignty while going to any length pursuing their goals while being obsessed with the idea of NATO’s expansion to the East. They should be resolutely snubbed. This way to deal with them would be much more effective as the ongoing events in Crimea and Ukraine testify.


Post to Twitter

Etiquetado con: , , , , , ,

Escribe un comentario