Criticized by NATO, Putin accuses it of committing a violent coup to take over his neighbor, Ukraine, in 2014

[I added photos and comments in italics, especially about the harmful role of US and Ukrainian Jews in the Ukrainian scandal.]

---

By Eric Zuesse – October 30, 2017 – Source Strategic Culture

[source: http://lesakerfrancophone.fr/critique-par-lotpoutine-by-longuement-politique-russe-en-ukraine ]

[This article has some leftist gobbledygook in it, but the accurate part about the Nazi thing is that the Ukrainian Jews who came to power in 2014 by a coup using rightwing forces have indeed exploited indescribably stupid “Nazi” troops such as the Azov Battalion to fight the Russians, and also used the “Right Spectrum” political movement. Why? Because these Ukrainian Nazis are as fanatic about being anti-Russian as they are about being anti-Jewish, and they pitifully delude themselves that after defeating Russia they will then overthrow the Jews! 😉 ]

A NATO supporter criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin for Russia’s Ukraine policy on October 19, 2017, at the annual Valdai Club meeting in Sochi. Putin responded with his most detailed statement to date, denouncing the violent overthrow in February 2014 of the democratically elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych [photo with Putin],

….as a “coup d’état” of the West, especially the EU (which he blamed for this, rather than the US).

Berkut riot police seek to protect city hall in Kiev, capital of Ukraine, on December 2, 2013

Asle Toje, a Norwegian supporter of NATO’s anti-Russian military alliance, raised the issue by asking Putin :

Asle Toje ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asle_Toje )

“And how about Ukraine? From the European point of view, the ball is firmly in Russia’s court. The conflict is semi-frozen and the supposedly dynamic sanctions have become semi-permanent. What does Russia intend to do about it? “

Putin replied:

“Well, we think that the ball is in Europe’s court, because because of the totally non-constructive stance – I choose my words carefully so as not to appear rude – of the then members of the European Commission, where the situation turned into a coup. “

Recall :

On February 4, 2014 ,  US President Barack Obama,  who was responsible for planning the coup, had his agent,  Victoria Nuland, a long-time friend of Hillary Clinton,

… appointed as the US ambassador to Ukraine, and decided even who the person was who should lead the country at the conclusion of the coup, 23 days later, February 27: 

“Yats is the guy who has the economic and government experience. He must be named , “ she told the US ambassador, Geoffrey Pyatt,

Nuland, Pyatt and Poroshenko in Warsaw / Poland

… and so “Yats” (Yatsenyuk) won the post of prime minister, because Obama [JdN: a crypto-Jew because of his mother, a part of the marxist branch of the CIA, one Stanley Ann Dunham] wanted Julia Timoshenko, who was/is fiercely anti-Russian [JdN: and crypto- Jewish also]

… to be installed in the presidency of Ukraine in an election, in order to qualify the regime change as being democratic , i.e. elected ,  – as in the case of Yats.

However, Timoshenko had too much of a public reputation for being an agent [puppet] of the United States (and a crook ) to win, and so Petro Poroshenko won the election in her place.

This election was held in all the Ukrainian-majority regions of the country, without allowing the vote of the population in the predominantly Russian-speaking regions [in the east], where the man overthrown by Obama, Yanukovych, had won by more than 75% of the votes in the last democratic election in Ukraine, which was the 2010 presidential election – the last election in which Ukrainians from all parts of the country voted.

JdN: The eastern third of Ukraine (in yellow) is even Russian-speaking! This country was part of Russia for 200 years, until 1991. Ukrainian and Russian are very close Eastern Slavic languages.

 

Although Poroshenko was anti-Russian, he was not as much so as Timoshenko. Yatsenyuk was Timoshenko’s subordinate, he was chosen by Nuland because the Obama administration thought that after the presidential election, Yats would hand over the government to Timoshenko, who ran Yats’ political party.

Putin blamed the EU for the coup, although, in fact , Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign minister, learned on 26 February 2014 that the overthrow had been a coup d’état and not a “popular uprising” or “democratic revolution,” expressed shock and disappointment — but continued to carry out

the Obama administration’s plan for the integration of Russia’s former ally into the EU and, as expected, in NATO, so that US nuclear missiles can be installed at the Russian border also near Moscow as possible, for a lightning attack against Russia, in order to conquer the country.

Moreover, in his instructions to the ambassador in Kiev, Nuland said “F–k the EU” , because the aristocracy of the EU was not as eager to conquer Russia as was the American aristocracy.

EU aristocracies would have wanted [the Jewish ex-boxer] Vitaly Klitschko to lead Ukraine, but Ukraine was really not fiercely anti-Russian, not like Timoshenko and Yatsenyuk. Putin knew it, and he knew that the coup was made by the United States and not by the EU.

Putin then described the coup as follows:

“There were [Kiev Euro-Maidan] riots that were supported by the United States – both financially, politically and in the media – and also across Europe.

They supported the unconstitutional takeover, bloody with victims, and pushed a war on the southeastern Ukraine. Crimea then declared its independence and reunification with Russia, and now you think we are to blame for it?

Did we provoke the unconstitutional coup? The current situation is the result of an unconstitutional armed takeover in Ukraine, and Europe is to blame, because it supported it.

What would have been easier to say at the time is this: ‘ You have staged a coup d’état, and now we are the guarantors of a return to peace.’ As guarantors, the Foreign Ministers of Poland, France and Germany signed a document, an agreement between President Yanukovych and the opposition.

Three days later, the agreement was trampled and where were these guarantors? Ask them! Where were these guarantors? Why did not they say, ‘Please, put things back the waythey were. Put Yanukovitch back in power and hold constitutional, democratic elections. ‘ Their side had every chance of winning anyway, a one hundred percent chance, and without a doubt.

But no, they had to do it by an armed coup. Well, we were faced with this fact, we accepted it and we even signed the Minsk agreements.

JdN: Putin, Merkel of Germany and (((Hollande))) (with the big nose) of France in Minsk

But the current Ukrainian leaders sabotaged every single paragraph of these Minsk agreements, and everyone can see it perfectly clearly. Those involved in the negotiation process are fully aware of this, I assure you.

No steps have been taken [by the West or their puppets in Ukraine] to implement the Minsk agreements [which they signed].

Everyone says: ‘The sanctions will only be lifted when Russia complies with the Minsk agreements.’

Everyone has long realized that the current leaders of Ukraine were not able to comply. Now that the situation in this country has reached its nadir in terms of economy and domestic politics, and the [Ukrainian] police are using tear gas against the [anti-Poroshenko and peace-with-Russia] protesters, while waiting for the Ukrainian president to take at least one small step to implement the Minsk agreements. A futile exercise.

I’m not sure he even can accomplish this. But there is no alternative, unfortunately. Therefore, we will keep the Normandy format [the 2015 agreement among Lukashenko of Belarus, Putin of Russia, Merkel of Germany, Hollande of France and Poroshenko of Ukraine; see photo]  for as long as our colleagues want, and we will strive to implement the Minsk agreements you mentioned.“

Putin never blamed the US government for this coup, but he knows at least as much about it as the leader of Stratfor – the private CIA – who described the event as “a coup d’état”.

It was the most flagrant coup in history “ because it had been very well documented by intercepted/recorded phone conversations and other solid evidence. 

There was no doubt that the US State Department had directed it , and eventually the evidence went public that Google and the US State Department were already preparing the operation since 2011.

Putin continued his answer:

“It is not enough to call on Russia to do something. It is also necessary to influence the position of Kiev. Now they have made a decision on language, banning the use of ethnic minority languages ‹ ‹[JdN: like Russian!] in school.

Hungary and Romania have raised objections. Poland has also made some comments on this subject. However, the European Union as a whole is silent. Why do not they condemn this? It’s radio silence.

Now they have erected a monument to Simon Petliura . He was a man with Nazi opinions, an anti-Semite who killed Jews during the war. Apart from the Zionist Jewish Congress, everyone else is silent. Are you afraid of hurting your allies in Kiev, right? These things are not done by the Ukrainian people; they are done at the initiative of the competent authorities. But why do you keep quiet? “

Putin asked the EU to remain neutral on the Ukrainian issue, not the US government, because Putin understood that the US government wanted to conquer Russia and to take Ukraine first to advance this goal,

… whereas many countries in the EU want to have peace and trade with Russia and do not wish to invade it.

Putin has dropped working with America, whose government is – with Ukraine and Canada – the only defender of Nazism – that is racist fascism – at the UN. [JdN: Geez, that’s ridiculous. It is Ukrainian Jews like Yatsenyuk and Poroshenko who are shamelessly exploiting the Ukrainian nationalist and antisemitic right — for their own anti-Russian purposes.]

But he knows that if he blames the US government for the coup, it will make it more difficult for the EU to move away from the US towards neutrality, because such an accusation would only irritate NATO and not end its policies.

Putin wants to see EU politicians elected to push for neutrality in Ukraine and get away from NATO’s objective of invading Russia, but this can only work if it minimizes the real competition for world power,which is between the US government — that wants to conquer Russia — and the Russian government itself, which wants only to remain a free and independent nation and to protect its national sovereignty.

The reason Putin blames the EU for the US is therefore tactical in nature.

What he says is particularly interesting: “These things have not been done by the Ukrainian people. They have been done at the initiative of the competent authorities. But why do you keep quiet?”

Here he challenges anti-Nazi Europeans to break away from the pro-Nazi American regime of today. He says: Oppose that, stand out publicly .

Then, he continues:

“I hope that will happen eventually. I can see the interest of our partners, mainly the interest of our European partners, in resolving this conflict. I can see a real interest. [Putin gets very diplomatic here.] Angela Merkel does a lot of things, invests her time, gets deeply involved in these issues. The former President of France and President Macron are also attentive. They really work on it.

Putin and Macron of France

However, it is necessary to work not only technically and technologically, but politically. It is essential to exert some influence on the Kiev authorities, to get them  at least to do something. In the end, Ukraine itself has an interest in normalizing our relations.

Now however Ukraine went to imposing sanctions on us, just as the EU did. We answered in our own way.

The [Ukrainian] president asks me, ‘ Why did you do that?’  say, ‘Listen, you have introduced sanctions against us.’

It’s just amazing! “

He refers here to the Kiev authorities , not the Washington authorities, because he knows that the Europeans he is talking about know that Ukraine is now a vassal nation of the United States. He knows they know what he knows about it. Then he really addresses , not to the leaders of Ukraine, but rather to the people of Ukraine, when he says:

“I think it’s becoming obvious and, most importantly, it’s becoming obvious to the overwhelming majority of Ukrainian citizens. We love Ukraine and I really consider the Ukrainian people as a fraternal nation, if not as a nation that is a part of the Russian nation.

Even if the Russian nationalists do not like that and the Ukrainian nationalists do not like it either, that’s my position, my point of view. Sooner or later, this will happen – reunification, not at the interstate level, but in terms of restoring our relationships. “

Many polls have shown that many Ukrainians feel fraternal towards the Russians.

He tries to appeal to these people, to seek a restoration of the previous alliance: Russia with the anti-Nazis of Ukraine, instead of America with pro-Nazi Ukrainians.

Putin’s questioner, the pro-NATO Asle Toje, could have replied to what the latter said, but he remained completely silent, perhaps because he knew that if he opposed what Putin was saying, he would have had an excellent opportunity to react by referring to the real role played by NATO – the United States – in Ukraine, the Nazi role, and perhaps also an allusion to the famous statement of the American Nazi [JdN: LOL because this person is a hard-core Jewess] Victoria Nuland “Fk the EU! When she gave her instructions, on February 4, 2014, for the composition of the next government of Ukraine, it was run by the Ukrainian Nazis who are angrily anti-Russian.

Hamid Karzai [photo on the right], the former leader of Afghanistan [2004-14] – or at least of the capital, Kabul – was also one of the participants at this conference, and he spoke about the long history of his country as a pawn in the Grand Game of imperial aristocracies who wage wars of conquest to establish empires and seize the lands of others.

Then, he specifically commented on the role that the seizure of Ukraine in 2014 had played in the last phase of the Great Game :

“On the Ukraine and the conflict there, I was in my last years of government when this crisis emerged in Ukraine. I, and my close colleagues in the government on foreign and security policy issues, met together. I told them that Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union and that after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of independent states, Ukraine was one of the closest countries to Russia in terms of ethnic, economic and cultural relations.as well as in terms of value that Ukraine represents for Russia. So my approach was that of feeling and sensitivity, but keeping in mind the Russian feeling, keeping in mind the Russian sensibility in this region.Let’s take a look at this: If Russia tried to make Canada an ally of the Warsaw Pact against America, what would America do?

They would act more aggressively than Russia did. In Crimea: from what I understand, Crimea was given to Ukraine in 1957, is that right? So, it was before then part of Russian territory.

His argument that “if Russia tried to make Canada into an ally of the Warsaw Pact against America, what would America do?

This is simply a rhetorical, question, because in the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, the United States had already shown what they would do.

If Russia placed missiles on or near America’s borders, the United States would launch a nuclear war against Russia.

For some reasons, the Americans felt that this threat – threatening a Third World War – was justified for America at that time, in 1962, but somehow does not think it would be a justified response toward the United States. With Russia now, in 2017, the symmetry is in the other camp, and even more so than it was in 1962 – because Ukraine is right on the Russian border.

Map of Europe (with Russian shipping and naval lanes) The Ukrainian border is just 230 miles from the Russian capital, Moscow. 

But, of course, this would be even more justified in the present case, since the conquest of Russia became, in 2006, the quasi-official strategic objective of America, replacing the old doctrine accepted by both parties. a strategic peacekeeping policy – under the umbrella of Mutually Assured Destruction (or MAD) – which was to maintain a balance of nuclear weapons in order to avoid a Third World War, instead of wishing to win it – as it’s the US doctrine since 2006.

Russia still believes in Mutually Assured Destruction , but America is now looking for gold, for nuclear victory .This was implicitly the policy of the United States and NATO since February 24, 1990, but has since 2006 become a goal called nuclear primacy, the ability of the United States to win a nuclear war against Russia – conquer Russia.

Putin’s recent statement – of 19 October – is the largest he has ever made on the Ukrainian question, but that is not the only statement he has made on this subject.

A year before this last discussion in Valdai, October 12, 2016 , at the eighth investment forum of VTB Capital Russia calls you! in search of foreign investment in Russia:

“You just talked about the crisis in Ukraine, but we did not make a coup in Ukraine, did you? They concealed that, to a large extent, they supported a radical opposition, an unconstitutional way of changing power, although it could have been done differently: the former President Yanukovych had accepted all the requirements and was ready to organize early elections. They contributed to a coup d’état, and for what?

Faced with the fait accompli, we were forced to protect the Russian-speaking population of Donbass,

we were forced to respond to the aspirations of the people of Crimea wanting to return to the Russian Federation, so immediately began a new outburst of anti-Russian policy and the imposition of sanctions.

You just talked about the Minsk agreements. But we are not the saboteurs of the implementation of these agreements. “

On that occasion, because he was responding to a question that had been raised by former US congressman Rick Boucher, and now a partner in a law firm, Putin had been more direct, saying: ” We did not bring a coup in Ukraine. Have we done that? No. Especially since our American partners do not hide that, to a large extent, they were behind the scenes, supporting and funding a radical opposition, to provoke an unconstitutional change of power. “

But it was ambiguous as to whether America   was simply behind, “they were behind the scenes” or instead acted “to bring about an unconstitutional change of power” [that is, a coup d’etat]. In any case, there is no record of Boucher’s response to Putin’s statement.

Ambiguity is the norm in political speeches, we see it everywhere, and when it appears, tactical reasons are usually mentioned.

Even earlier, May 23, 2014, a few months after the US coup, Putin attended the plenary session of the 18 ^th International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg, and answered a question from Geoff Cutmore of CNBC :

“President Yanukovych has decided to postpone signing and to start further discussions. What comes next? A coup. It does not matter how you choose to call it, a revolution or something else. It is a coup d’etat with the use of violence and militant forces. Who is on which side now? Who uses what tools of the past or the future?

It is imperative to be very cautious about the public institutions of emerging nations, because otherwise things can slip into chaos, which is exactly what happened in Ukraine. Civil war and chaos are already there. Who benefits? Why did they do it, if Yanukovych accepted everything? They had to vote, and the same people would be in power now, but legally. We, like idiots, would pay them the $ 15 billion we promised, keeping gas prices low for them and continuing to subsidize their economy …

Let’s face it. We are all adults here, are not we? Intelligent and educated people. The West supported the unconstitutional coup. In fact, is not it? Not only through the infamous cookies [allusion to Nuland distributing cookies to insurgents on the Maidan Square] , but through media support, politics and what do I know yet. Why did he do it?

Very good. And now you think that everything is our fault? We proposed a dialogue and we were refused. And after ? The last time I was in Brussels, we agreed to keep this dialogue open. That was before the coup. Mr. Ulyukayev – he is sitting there in front of me – a respectable man, speaking English correctly, an absolutely market-oriented mind, one of our best economists, was called for consultation. Ask him what he thinks after the end of the session. I will not dwell on it now. But there were no consultations. Nothing but slogans.

What’s next ? They made a coup and they do not want to talk to us. What are we supposed to think? The next step will bring Ukraine into NATO.

They never question our opinion, and we have discovered over the past two decades that there is never any dialogue on this issue.

All they say to us is: ‘ It’s not your business, it’s not about you.’ We tell them: ‘ Military infrastructure is approaching our borders.’ they say, ‘ Do not worry, it’s not against you.’

So tomorrow, Ukraine could end up being a member of NATO, and the next thing you know is that a US missile defense complex will be stationed on its territory.

Nobody ever talks to us about it either. They simply tell us: ‘ It’s not against you, and it does not concern you’ … 

If we had not done what we did in Crimea, Crimea would have been much worse than Odessa where people were burned alive. And there are no explanations, no real convictions by anyone. It is not yet clear who did it, I mean the tragedy in Odessa. “

May 2, 2014 – 42 dead! https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incendie_criminel_%C3%A0_Odessa

He said this, against the West , after the evidence came to the attention of the public, except in the West,that it was in fact the American regime that had done so, and that had hired Ukrainian Nazis to achieve it.

On the front page of the New York Times, October 23, 2017, a report was published on Republicans’ efforts in the US Congress to focus on something other than the alleged manipulation of Russiagate in the 2016 US election campaign. and on the efforts of the Congressional Democrats to focus solely on these allegations. This New York Times story on the front page carelessly used the phrase “the extraordinary efforts of a hostile power to disrupt American democracy , “ as if it had already been proven, instead of being merely a line of incessant propaganda of the United States. Democratic Party to explainthe electoral defeat of Hillary Clinton.

The propaganda of the American media does such things to stir up the hatred of its public against the Russians, and especially against the Russian government,

and thus promote the scenario of the war against Russia. Putin knows what is the origin of this march towards the Third World War, and that it is not in Europe.

He knows that he has had more than his share of wars, but that Americans are more malleable on this subject, better controlled by the aristocracy who owns the military-industrial complex of the nation.

Eric Zuesse