The MIC will not tolerate peace

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy wasn't supposed to win.
The establishment wanted the corrupt, anti-Russian President Petro Poroshenko to be re-elected.
Zelenskiy is liable to do something unpredictable.

"I called him urgently. I told him that this brings us no closer to peace," Zelenskiy said during a news briefing in Kyiv, adding that he had urged Putin to ask the Moscow-backed separatists who are holding parts of eastern Ukraine to "stop killing our people."

He also said Putin had promised him something, details of which would be disclosed later.

The Kremlin said the two presidents discussed the prospects of cooperation under the so-called Normandy format for negotiations aimed at putting an end to the conflict, and agreed to intensify their work on prisoner exchange.

It was their second publicly announced phone call since Zelenskiy was elected president in April.

Talking peace with Putin was not something Poroshenko was willing to do.
Washington liked it that way.
Now Zelenski is in danger of messing all of that up.
So how do you think the MIC feels about that?

It turns out that what is, by my guess, probably a CIA asset at Slate decided to announce it out loud.

Selection_006_4.png

The potential for another Ukrainian revolution festers beneath this year’s deceptively calm presidential and parliamentary elections. It would be the third one in 15 years, following the 2004 Orange Revolution and the 2014 Euro-Maidan uprising.

In April, 75 percent of voters elected celebrity comedian Volodymyr Zelenskiy to replace the president who had led Ukraine since the 2014 revolution, Petro Poroshenko. Then in July, Zelenskiy’s party won a supermajority in Parliament, introducing single-party rule to Ukraine for the first time since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991—and empowering Zelenskiy to govern without a coalition.

Western experts have praised these elections as free and fair. But some Ukrainians see them as a subversion of democracy, believing the results were orchestrated by opportunist oligarchs behind a pro-Russian political technology project to elect an empty vessel—Zelenskiy—that can be filled and manipulated. Many activists, volunteers from the last revolution, and veterans of the ongoing war against Russian-backed separatists in the country’s east lament Zelenskiy’s rise as a symptom of their sick state unappreciative of the sacrifices and progress made since the 2014 Maidan.

In reality very little progress has been made since 2014.
So what we are talking about is a coup against an overwhelmingly popular government.

Zelenskiy is on-message about the EU, NATO, anti-corruption, investment, increasing standards of living, meeting unmet promises for impeachment, and ending MP immunity. But he has also hired loyalists from the pro-Russian regime of ex-President Viktor Yanukovych that was overthrown in 2014, criticized a sensitive language law, and indicated that he will implement the 2014–15 Minsk peace agreements.

Nationalists equate Minsk—a hasty deal to end the war in eastern Ukraine signed by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Ukraine, Russia, and its separatist proxies—with surrender.
...
Even more provocatively, Ukraine’s pro-Russia party placed second in the July elections, a reversal that could cast a long shadow over the country’s westward trajectory should this party begin to reassert its influence. Critics claim Zelenskiy is latently pro-Russian anyway: pointing to Ukrainophobic humor from his comedy career, his hit TV show’s dramatization of a neo-Nazi coup—Russian propaganda depicts Ukraine’s post-revolutionary leaders as fascists—and his appointments of incendiary staff who served the Yanukovych regime ousted by 2014’s “revolution of dignity.” Now five years later, activists await the next indignity: Will it be surrender to Russia in eastern Ukraine, political persecution of Maidan leaders, or the humiliating return of Yanukovych himself?

Western-backed civil society groups warned Zelenskiy mere days after his inauguration that crossing their red lines might “lead to political instability” and that “consequences can be fatal.” 72 groups have now signed a 27-item list of security, foreign policy, economic, national identity, governance, and information policy reforms that—if jeopardized—they threaten will incite a third Maidan.

Share
up
21 users have voted.

Comments

Raggedy Ann's picture

Just ask them.

up
8 users have voted.

“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”

-- Voltaire

Wally's picture

I trust I don't have to elaborate too much on my subject title here.

". . . Zelenskiy (is) already . . . a successful TV star embedded with powerful interests. He has the full support and access to one of the major TV networks owned by the oligarch Kolomoisky, widely considered to be his backer," Chalupa continued. "It's clear that Zelenskiy is the best candidate for the Kremlin given his utter lack of political experience and his resistance to transparency and accountability as a candidate."

source: https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-russia-president-election-volodymyr-zel...

Some foreign policy analysts have derisively compared Zelensky to Trump; liberal pundit Andrea Chalupa recently warned Ukrainians about “what a politically untested TV star can do to a country.”

source: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mikheil-saakashvili-ukraines-presidentia...

up
7 users have voted.

It has no unified political or cultural past. It was the most successful Soviet Republic under the USSR, highly developed with the highest GDP per capita in the Soviet Union. But it relied on the strong central government in Moscow to hold it together. It is basically two countries. The more nationalist West, including Galcia with a strong Nazi past. The East and the South have a very socialist preference and lean toward Russia, Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian language. These two halves are fatally incompatible. After independence control of the government of Ukraine bounced between the two halves. The Western part is very nationalist and believes that all of the territory of the previous Ukrainian Socialist Republic, including Crimea, belongs to their "Ukraine".. that is the land, not the people. Their goal is to kill off or drive away the people of Donesk and Lughansk and then take their land. Russia will never allow this to happen. Russia is fiercely defensive of Russians everywhere, and it's not just President Putin. The term "Russian" in fact refers to people who are part of the Russian culture, not citizens of the Russian Federation.

The right solution is to divide the Ukraine into two countries, Western Ukraine from Kiev into Galicia, and Eastern and Southern Ukraine known historically as Novorossiya. Given that this is unlikely primarily because the West will be unwilling to give back the gains in breaking up the Russian sphere, the next best solution is a coalition government. But it has to be strong enough to contain the nationalists and disband the Nazis in the West. Perhaps Zelinsky can do this. He has already gotten warnings to not even try this. The third outcome is that Ukraine remains a broken "country". Despite its wealth in resources it is now one of the poorest countries in all of Europe and is buried in debt. The US did this to Ukraine. It saw an opening with funding the nationalists/nazis to split Ukraine off of the Russian sphere. A huge geopolitical victory. It should have also included a strategic NATO naval base in Sevastopol. Now Crimea has returned to Russia and will never be a part of "Ukraine". I hope that Zelenski can pull off a miracle and unite Ukraine's halves by containing the nationalists/nazis in the West and respecting the rights/culture/language of the people of Eastern Ukraine.

up
9 users have voted.

Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.

Wally's picture

@The Wizard

Maybe they are not as fatally incompatible as you think.

The Westerners' decided preference for Zielinskij (an Easterner) also disputes the idea that "their goal is to kill off or drive away the people of Donesk and Lughansk and then take their land."

Let's hope together for a peaceful miracle from Zielinskij -- and Putin. And that the Chaplupa types don't get to meddle too much. Note, too, that Zielinskij cut out GB and the US from the peace negotiations group.

up
7 users have voted.

@Wally
I see three different spellings here and more online. So here goes:

In Ukrainian: Володи́мир Олекса́ндрович Зеле́нський, notice the two 'o's in his first name and the 'O' beginning his patronym

In Russian: Владимир Александрович Зеленский, Notice the standard Russian Vladimir and Alexandrovich for his patronym

In English: Vladimir Alexandrovich Zelensky, direct translation from Ukrainian (yandex)

New York Times, BBC, Fox etc. : Volodymyr Zelensky

The ending for his last name uses the Cyrillic letter pair "ий" which is
an "e" followed by a "short e". Sometimes the english equivalent is "iy" as
in Zelenskiy.

We should probably follow the standard used in the media, Zelensky, but
Zelenskiy should also be perfectly reasonable.

Anyway, let's pass some good vibes his way. I understand that he has been
talking to President Putin.

up
4 users have voted.

Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.

Azazello's picture

@The Wizard
It's too important, too strategic. The prospect of a NATO base there is what prompted the reunification in the first place.

up
6 users have voted.

@Azazello
Giving up Crimea would mean regime change in Moscow.
Putin had no choice in the matter. If he didn't do something, then someone else in Moscow would have.
Besides, the people in Crimea are overwhelmingly pro-Russia.

up
6 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture

radio free europe, but that's just me. read the sidebar story titles, for instance.

slate? such insiders! lol.

up
4 users have voted.

We should send the Ukraine cookies instead of weapons.

up
5 users have voted.
Wally's picture

@MrWebster

Robert and his wife Victoria Nuland.

And let's not forget Kimberley Kagan over at the Institute for the Study of War.

"Liberal Interventionists".

Big Hillary supporters.

Neoliberalcons (I forget who coined that but I still love it).

up
9 users have voted.
Bob In Portland's picture

When the Ukraine seceded from Donbass, they didn't acknowledge the illegal coup as legal, and when Russia took back Crimea, it removed two large blocs of pro-Russian voters. Even with that territory not voting in Ukrainian elections the opposition removed all doubt of how unpopular the Grand Chocolateer has become. This means that any reunification with Donbass would push the pro-Russian political parties into power. Even the importance of the Russian gas pipelines that cross Ukrainian territory to Europe will soon be worthless to the Ukrainians because Russia plans on shutting down those gaslines in favor of Nord Stream II and other proposed pipelines. Ukraine will no longer collect fees for Russia transporting gas over their territory. If Russia goes through with shutting down those lines entirely Ukraine can no longer siphon off any and will not be able to even buy Russian gas without payment. That's pretty tough for a bankrupt fascist country.

In other words, the American-backed fascists may find the Greater Ukraine becoming Galacia.

up
1 user has voted.