A Simple Solution for the U.S. Dispute with Russia regarding Ukraine
(Ukraine should be within Russia’s sphere of influence. If the West cannot accept this, it should, at the very least, agree that Ukraine will be a neutral and non-aligned state)
(Note the strange flags, somewhat reminiscent of the swastika, in this recent march of contemporary Ukrainian fascists.)
Currently, Russia and the United States are crossing swords over Ukraine. Russia wants the state in its orbit; the United States wants it glued to Washington. For the reasons outlined below, Russia is entitled to dominion over Ukraine. If Washington will not agree to Russian domination, the United States, at the very least, should be amenable to either a) neutralizing Ukraine or b) partitioning Ukraine into an eastern state affiliated with Russia and a western state in the American sphere of influence.
ARGUABLY, RUSSIA HAS THE BETTER ARGUMENT:
1) Ukraine had been part of Russia from as far back as the reign of Catherine the Great.
2) Western protests about Russia’s seizure of Crimea are wholly bogus as
a) Crimea’s population is mostly composed of ethnic Russians, and the citizenry of Crimea favors Russian rule.
b) Crimea had been part of Russia until the 1950’s when it was gifted to Ukraine, but in those days, Ukraine was part of the Russian-led USSR so Russia’s transfer of Crimea to Ukraine did NOT in any way sever Russian ties to Crimea
3) The Eastern Ukraine follows the Eastern Orthodox Church, as does Russia, and is alienated form the Western Ukraine which is Roman Catholic.
4) Most of all, Ukrainian nationalism is in large measure a manifestation of mid Twentieth Century Hitlerism. Leaders of today’s anti-Russian Ukrainians are the descendants of fascist clans from the 30’s and 40’s whose adherents eagerly volunteered to work in Nazi concentration camps and death camps, saw communism as just another feature of decadent modernism and whose Weltanschauung, or world view, was shaped by a Roman Catholic Church which hardly ever recalled Jesus’ plea for peace, which seemed to renounce the Sermon on the Mount and whose religious instruction in large measure consisted of telling the peasants that since the Jews killed Jesus, the Jews must suffer for eternity.
5) Ukraine should not be within Washington’s orbit because NATO has, since the fall of the Berlin wall, moved more than a thousand miles to the East. Formerly, the border between Washington and the Communist world was situated at the border between East and West Germany. When the wall fell, East Germany became part of West Germany and NATO lunged hundreds of miles to the East. Then, Poland joined NATO, and Western armies encroached on Slavic territory. Of course, NATO was still not appeased (just as Hitler was not easily appeased), and NATO soon admitted Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia as well as states south of Poland.
6) Actually, NATO is shaping up to be a successor to Hitler’s empire as so many Eastern European states, which recently joined NATOs, had been aligned with Hitler: 1) Hungary was ruled by Admiral Horthy who committed Hungarian troops to fight alongside the Nazis in their invasion of the Soviet Union, 2) Romania, which was led by Ion Antonescu, was an ally of Nazi Germany and invaded the Soviet Union, 3) Poland was ruled by Pilsudski, who legitimized Hitler’s demolition of Czechoslovakia by seizing a portion of that state when Hitler took Bohemia-Moravia in March, 1939, 4) Croatia was such an enthusiastic follower of Nazi policy that it built the Jasenovac Concentration camp which specialized in the mass murder of Serbs, Jews and the Roma people and 5) Slovakia, which seceded from Czechoslovakia in March 1939, was ruled by a Catholic Priest who, in rebuffing an American Jewish Agency’s offer of Matzoh, sarcastically said, “BRATISLAVA NEEDS NO MATZOH; ALL OUR JEWS ARE DEAD.”
7) Of course, the West has a long history of cultivating fascists. In recent times, we saw this in the case of Al Qaida and Osama bin Ladin; those barbaric Nazified Islamics were supported by the United States to attack Russian interests in Afghanistan. (Think of all the misery and blood shed we would have been spared if the United States had not aided Al Qaida. Among other things, the old World Trade Center, where I used to work, would still be standing.)
Since 20 million Russians were murdered by the Nazis, since the West tenaciously aided Hitler throughout the 1930’s [1], and since the newly admitted Eastern European members of NATO are stained with the sin of fascism, any Russian leader who does not staunchly oppose Western advances toward Russia would be guilty of malpractice and, perhaps, patent and deadly treason.
AT THE VERY LEAST, THE WEST SHOULD BE ABLE TO ACCEPT THAT UKRAINE SHOULD BE NEUTRALIZED AND THAT IT WILL NOT BE ALIGNED WITH EITHER THE UNITED STATES OR RUSSIA.
Neutralization has solved many problems in the past. For example, in the early 1950’s, when cold war furies burned like an icy fire from hell, the West and the East agreed to neutralize Austria. Although Berlin was the focal point of febrile and furious conflicts between Washington and Moscow, Austria was relatively quiescent. During the cold war, Rumania was communist, and bordered the Soviet Union, but it pursued a foreign policy wholly independent of Russia and the United States. Also, although Yugoslavia was firmly socialistic, its foreign policy was free of either Soviet or American domination and interference.
However, America has always wanted the whole enchilada and historically eschewed neutralization. America’s insistence that Vietnam be within the anti communist orbit perpetuated that dirty, deceitful war.
In the 1960’s, there was, for a time, a movement towards neutralization, or of states agreeing not to take sides in the Washington-Moscow drive toward mutual annihilation. In those days, India and Yugoslavia were the leaders of a large bloc of states known as the non-aligned bloc which rejected a bipolar world in which everything was dominated by the Washington-Moscow death drive. Indeed, France, which was a NATO ally, began to chafe at the strictures of a world which held that every state must sell its soul to either the US or the USSR and called for a “Third Way.” (Most Americans claim that this was the result of a French proclivity to be persnickety or peevish, but most Americans don’t know any hard, cold facts: At the end of 1965, NATO had argued that territories, ceded by Germany to Poland, Russia and the Baltic states at the end of World War Two, be returned to Germany. France, which suffered the yoke of Nazi rule for four years, was justly irked by this apparent revival of German irredentism. NATO seemed to be singing “Deutschland oober alles,” Germany Over All, but that should not be too surprising as the United States, at the time, was busy murdering hundreds of thousands of Indochinese peasants in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Russia is concerned about states on its border, such as Ukraine. The United States, in its unlimited grandiosity, considered Vietnam, many thousands of miles away from California, nothing but prey for the United States military.
Footnote 1: Americans commonly state that the West appeased Hitler. However, the West did not give Hitler what he wanted because it feared him. In large measure, the West aided Hitler because it saw Hitler as a useful ally as he was such a violent and dogged foe of Russia and Communism. See my article which delineates some aspects of Western support for Adolf Hitler. “Lies America Told You – How the NYTimes’, on October 11, 1938, impeached the U.S. View of Geo-Politics,” David Gottfried, May 4, 2121