Why the Russian Federation Recognized the Independence Movements in the Donbas

 

 BY AJAMU BARAKA

“Minsk, Minsk, Minsk,” they cried after Russia recognized Donetsk and Luhansk. But those Western diplomats and pundits did not hear those of us in the Anti-war, pro-peace and anti-imperialist movements who insisted that Minsk II was the only conceivable way out of the crisis!

There will be reams of words attempting to provide a coherent analysis of the manufactured crisis dramatically unfolding in Ukraine, which took another unanticipated turn when Russia extended recognition to the Peoples’ Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in the territory referred to as the Donbas in Eastern Ukraine.

I will not add to that mountain of ink because, for me, the story is relatively simple. I have argued since 2015 that it was greed informed by miscalculations that drove the U.S. — with the support of European capital salivating from prospect of profits generated by gaining full control of the Ukrainian economy through the European Association agreement — to decide to overthrow the government of Viktor Yanukovych when he turned to Russia instead of surrendering Ukrainian sovereignty to U.S. and European capital.

This was the genesis of the crisis. For U.S. policymakers it did not matter that the coup government was made up of literal neo-Nazis and extremist white supremacists and antisemitic ultra-nationalists from the neo-Nazi Svoboda party — the National Socialist Party of Ukraine.

Nor was there any concern that one of the former commanders of the Azov Battalion, a violent right-wing gang that was merged into the Ukrainian National Guard and is now being trained by the British, said that Ukraine’s mission is to “lead in a final crusade … against the Semite-led Untermenschen” (sub-humans).

No concern because aligning with rightist elements in order to advance the economic and geostrategic interests of the U.S. state and capitalist class behind the backs of the U.S. public is nothing new. That is why it is so ironic, or perhaps contradictory, that while Democratic Party activists are mobilized to struggle against the far-right in the U.S., Biden’s Ukrainian policies are affirming once again that the neoliberal right does not mind aligning with naked fascism to advance the imperial interests of capital.

From rightist Islamic forces to right-wing apartheid state of Israel, to anti-democratic monarchs of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), there is usually never a state too odious for the U.S. to deal with as long as there was the possibility of a buck to be made.

That is why it is almost surreal to read U.S. propaganda messages that still frame U.S. intentions in themes that suggest a benevolent character to U.S. behavior — and getting away with it! And even among African/Black radicals who should know better, instead of educating Africans on what was in play in Ukraine with the expansion of the white supremacist NATO structure, the gangster move being made on Ukraine in order for U.S. capital to continue to assert control over the European market, and the crude attempt to divert attention away from the failures of Biden’s domestic policies — some Africans, along with elements of the white left, were more interested in having abstract discussions on the class nature of the Russian state and economy — as if there was anything to debate there!

Like other subversive actions by the U.S. state, the destabilization and then capturing of the Ukrainian state, and the installation of a puppet government had nothing to do with any concerns for democracy. It is impossible for the U.S. to be concerned about democracy when it is the principal state undermining democracy around the world. If the U.S. were committed to upholding democratic processes, it would not have overthrown a democratically elected government in Ukraine.

And U.S. policy certainly did not reflect any concern for human rights in Ukraine. The war that was sparked after the coup government decided to attack its own citizens in the Donbas who rejected its legitimacy resulted in thousands of Ukrainians losing their lives.

The U.S. was not concerned with the territorial integrity of Ukraine either, because it was the coup government, backed by their bosses in Washington, that forced the separation of the Donbas from Ukraine by defining them as non-Ukrainians. Ukrainian citizens in Donbas became “pro-Russia separatists and terrorists,” which made them eligible for massive human rights violations, including murder as foreign entities.

Yet, with all of that, up until February 21, 2022 the 57th anniversary of the assassination of the Black internationalist revolutionary Malcolm X, a route to a peaceful resolution to the crisis existed — the Minsk II agreement.  It was the Minsk II agreement, put in place after the independent republics fought the Ukrainian neo-fascists to a military stand-still, along with provisions for a ceasefire, that provided a path to peaceful resolution. The agreement would have provided political autonomy for the Donbas within the Ukrainian state, thus preserving the existing borders of Ukraine before the coup of 2014.

Unfortunately, with the election of Joe Biden, who was the Obama administration’s point person on Ukraine, the Democrats immediately picked-up where U.S. policy left off in 2016 and started to encourage the Ukrainian government to ignore the Minsk II agreement and to consider taking back the Donbas by force.

Today, after the U.S. flooded Ukraine with weapons, including long-range artillery that was introduced into the conflict area in violation of the Minsk ceasefire deal, the deployment of 150,000 Ukrainian troops positioned along the contact line between Ukraine and Donbas, and the shelling from the Ukrainian forces right during the period that the U.S. predicted that Russia would invade, the Minsk agreement has become another casualty of war.

On February 18, 2022, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov stated that he was “alarmed” by a reported spike in Ukrainian artillery attacks against rebels in the eastern region of Donbas with weapons prohibited by the Minsk agreement. Reports from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which was tasked with the responsibility, since 2015, to monitor and report on violations of the agreement, indicated that in Donetsk, between February 18 and February 20, 2022, there were 591 ceasefire violations, and in Luhansk it recorded 975 ceasefire violations, including 860 explosions.

What was the response from the Ukraine government? The government claims that OSCE is biased because the data it is gathering seems to indicate that it is the Ukrainian forces that are responsible for the increase in military actions.

But that controversy and debate over that data failed to find itself in the daily coverage of the situation by the Western press, even though the empirical data clearly showed that Ukrainian forces were responsible for escalating the military engagement.

Ukraine is just the symptom; the Disease is U.S. Doctrine of “Full Spectrum Dominance”

The U.S. has its pretext to move the Europeans to impose economic sanctions against Russia, even though it is clear to many in Europe that the Biden administration’s policies are no more than the “liberal” version of “America First” as it relates to Europe.

European capital, especially the Germans, are expected to take another hit for the team like it did during the first round of sanctions against Russia and the money they all lost with the Trump administration’s abrogation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran Nuclear Deal).

The capitalist oligarchy that is the base of Putin’s governing coalition may understand something that U.S. policymakers in their arrogance are underestimating, namely, that European capital is getting closer to a breaking point with the U.S., especially when money can be made in a context of relative stability in Europe as opposed to the destabilizing effects of conflict.

They also know that the world is changing and that multipolarity is rapidly becoming the new reality and that European capital will have to make careful choices.

China is the number one trade and investment partner with the European Union states, the Chinese-inspired “Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) ” is the largest “free trade” agreement on the planet constituting one-third of humanity and one-third of global GDP. Russia is sitting on top of the Eurasia Economic Union that, in terms of land, is the largest trade union on the planet, and of course the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). 

The Russian recognition of the republics of Donbas was no more than the open acknowledgment of the dismembering of Ukraine. A process that started with the U.S. coup and the imposition of a government that completely turned over Ukrainian sovereignty to U.S. and European capital.

The lesson for the colonized, working classes and nationally oppressed? Authentic national liberation, people(s)-centered human rights, and self-determination for peoples and nations are impossible in a world in which capitalist competition and war are the defining characteristics of global relations.

We must, as we say in the Black is Back Coalition and the Black Alliance for Peace, turn imperialist wars into wars against imperialism! That is our task and responsibility. To do otherwise is to fail the historical mission of our generation.

Ajamu Baraka is the national organizer of the Black Alliance for Peace and was the 2016 candidate for vice president on the Green Party ticket. He is an editor and contributing columnist for the Black Agenda Report and contributing columnist for Counterpunch magazine. 

Canada and Ukraine

 

BY YVES ENGLER

Moscow’s bombing and invasion of Ukraine must be condemned by all those who believe in a rules-based international order and peaceful solutions to world problems. Hopefully Russian internationalists can come together to create a peace movement powerful enough to pressure their government.

While criticizing Russian imperialism, however, we shouldn’t lose sight of Canada’s significant role in stoking the divisions within Ukraine that have contributed to today’s crisis. Non-interference in other countries’ affairs is also an important principle of international law.

Yet Ottawa has long sought to destabilize the relationship between Russia and Ukraine. In 2014 Ottawa actively assisted the ouster of President Viktor Yanukovych who was oscillating between the European Union and Russia.

The coup divided the Ukraine politically, geographically and linguistically (Russian is the mother tongue of 30% of Ukrainians and as much as 75% of those in eastern cities). The largely Russian-speaking east protested the ouster of Yanukovych, who was from the region. Many opposed the post-coup right-wing nationalist government, which immediately eliminated Russian as an official language. After a referendum and fighting, the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics were proclaimed in the eastern Donbas region, which Moscow recognized as independent on Monday.

Canada assisted pro-European Union, often far right, protesters that rallied in central Kyiv’s Maidan square from November 21, 2013, to February 22, 2014. Ottawa also quickly recognized the post-coup government despite having sent election observers to monitor the 2010 presidential and 2012 parliamentary elections, which were won by Yanukovych and his Party of Regions. As revealed in a leaked tape between Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, US officials midwifed Yanukovych’s unconstitutional replacement.

Canada funded groups behind the EuroMaidan protests. Ottawa and the Ukrainian Canadian Congress have ploughed significant resources into anti-Russian, nationalist, elements of Ukrainian civil society since before the 2004 Orange Revolution. Throughout the protests against Yanukovych, the Canadian embassy’s local spokesperson, Inna Tsarkova, was a prominent member of AutoMaidan, an anti-government group.

A little over a week into the EuroMaidan protests Canada released a statement critical of government repression, which University of Ottawa professor Ivan Katchanovski says was precipitated by far-right infiltrators. In a November 30, 2013, release titled “Canada Condemns Use of Force Against Protesters in Ukraine” Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird declared, “Canada strongly condemns the deplorable use of force today by Ukrainian authorities against peaceful protesters.” Six days later Baird visited Maidan square with Paul Grod, president of the ultranationalist Ukrainian Canadian Congress. From the stage Grod announced Baird’s presence and support for the protesters, which led many to chant “Thank you Canada”. Baird called on Ukrainian authorities to respect the protests and bemoaned “the shadow that Russia is casting over this country.”

On December 27 Canada’s chargé d’affaires visited protest leader and journalist Tetyana Chornovol in the hospital after she was violently attacked. Three weeks earlier Chornovol was widely reported to have participated in seizing Kyiv City Hall. A former member of a far-right party, Chornovol had previously been arrested on numerous occasions and was subsequently charged with murder for throwing a Molotov cocktail at the Party of Regions headquarters during the EuroMaidan protests.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper repeatedly expressed support for the protesters and criticized Yanukovych. On January 27 he slammed the Ukrainian president for “not moving towards a free and democratic Euro-Atlantic future but very much towards an anti-democratic Soviet past.”

The next day Ottawa announced travel restrictions and economic sanctions on individuals close to the elected president. At the press conference to announce the measures Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander said, “you [Yanukovych] are not welcome in Canada and we will continue to take strong action until the violence against the people of Ukraine has stopped and democracy has been restored.” Ottawa subsequently slapped travel bans and economic sanctions on dozens of individuals aligned with Yanukovych.

At the height of the protest, activists used the Canadian embassy, which was immediately adjacent to Maidan square, as a safe haven for “at least a week”. The protesters gained access to a mini-van and other Canadian material. In a story a year after the coup the Canadian Press quoted officials from allied European nations accusing Canada of being “an active participant in regime change.”

At least some of those allowed to use the Canadian embassy were from the far right. In “The far right, the Euromaidan, and the Maidan massacre in Ukraine” professor Katchanovski reported, “the leader of the [far right] Svoboda-affiliated C14 admitted that his C14-based Maidan Self-Defense company took refuge in the Canadian embassy in Kyiv on February 18 and stayed there during the Maidan massacre.”

On February 19 and 20, more than 50 were killed in violence that was widely blamed on government security forces. But Katchanovski shows that far-right activists were in fact responsible for many of these deaths.

The killings precipitated the collapse of the government. After Yanukovych was ousted, Ottawa sought to shore up the unconstitutional government. Soon after, Baird “welcomed the appointment of a new government”, saying, “the appointment of a legitimate government is a vital step forward in restoring democracy and normalcy to Ukraine.” But the country’s constitutional provisions dealing with impeachment or replacing a president were flagrantly violated.

Days after the coup Baird led a delegation of Conservative Party MPs and Ukrainian-Canadian representatives to meet acting president, Oleksandr Turchynov and new prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Canada’s foreign minister announced an immediate $200,000 in medical assistance for those injured in the political violence. Subsequently, Ottawa announced $220 million in aid to the interim government. Harper said, “I think we really have to credit the Ukrainian people themselves with resisting the attempt to overturn their democracy and to lead their country back into the past.”

After the coup Canada’s PM was the first G7 leader to visit the interim government. Alongside Baird and Justice Minister Peter MacKay, Harper told the acting president, “you have provided inspiration and a new chapter in humanity’s ongoing story of the struggle for freedom, democracy and justice.” During his visit to shore up the US and Canadian installed government Harper accused Putin of seeking to destabilize international security and return the world to the “law of the jungle.”

Canadian officials stayed mum about the significant influence far-right nationalists had within the interim leadership. In subsequent weeks a wave of violence swept Ukraine with right wing nationalists perpetrating many killings, including a massacre that left 50 dead at Odesa’s trade union hall.

Over the years since 2014 fighting intensified, waned, then intensified again in the Donbass region. Some 14,000 have died. The Ukrainian military has been responsible for the bulk of the death in recent years. Fighting escalated again over the past couple of weeks. The pretext Putin has offered for invading is to protect those in the Donbass and Ukrainian Russian speakers more generally.

While other geopolitical dynamics are also at play, the 2014 coup is important to understanding the horrific violence now on display.

In his investigation of Euromaidan activists’ use of the embassy in Kyiv Canadian Press reporter Murray Brewster writes, “Canadians are not very popular in some quarters and occasionally loathed by pro-Russian Ukrainians.”

Condemn Russia’s invasion but understand that Canada has often been the opposite of a force for good in that part of the world. It is important now, as war hysteria inevitably grows, that we do not fall into the trap of uncritically supporting “our side”. That way leads to escalation and the threat of nuclear annihilation.

Yves Engler’s latest book is ‪Canada in Africa: 300 years of Aid and Exploitation.  

 https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/02/25/canada-and-ukraine/

Putin Pulls a Kosovo

 

BY GARY LEUPP

Kosovo. noun: a part of a sovereign state where a separatist movement is supported by a superpower and pronounced a sovereign state itself.

To pull a Kosovo: the action of a superpower to recognize a separatist region as a sovereign state.

Putin just pulled a Kosovo. Recall that in 2008—9 years after NATO had been used for the very first time ever in warfare (to bomb Belgrade, the first such bombing of a European capital since 1945, and to carve out the NATO protectorate of Kosovo in the heart of historical Serbia—the U.S. announced it was recognizing Kosovo as an independent nation. The NATO bombing had been justified by Clinton as necessary to prevent “genocide” (the same excuse as used by Hillary in destroying Libya in 2011); some NATO allies participated reluctantly. When the announcement was made in 2008 the Spaniards and Greeks were indignant, noting that they’d agreed to participate on the assurance that Serbia would not be divided. NATO members Spain, Greece, Romania, and Hungary do not recognize Kosovo.

The Russians protested this recognition, noting especially the conditions of Serbian Orthodox communities in northern Kosovo, whose medieval monasteries had been destroyed by Kosovar vandals. They protested the U.S support for a government drawn from the Kosovo Liberation Army, who had been described by the U.S. State Department as “terrorists,” and whose chief sources of foreign earnings were human trafficking, organ trafficking, and heroin trafficking. But the U.S. brushed such protests aside. Condi Rice, U.S. Secretary of State, mindful that international law bans such behavior, explained with a dismissive smile that this was a sui generis thing.

Except, it wasn’t. It led in short order to the Russian support for South Ossetia and Georgia, which never wanted to be part of Georgia after the collapse of the USSR. Moscow then recognized these two republics, pulling its own Kosovo, or two of them. When the U.S. engineered the Feb. 2014 Maidan coup, Russia responded by supporting the Donbas separatist cause. Now, in response to Biden’s renewed effort to force it to passively accept infinite NATO expansion, and to rally his shaky allies to the great conflict to come, Russia pulls yet another Kosovo.

I forgot to mention the U.S. pulling another Kosovo little noticed during the Trump term, recognizing Western Sahara as part of Morocco. The U.S. had always agreed with the world that the former Spanish colony had the right to independence and did not recognize the Moroccan seizure in 1975. But now it’s decided to recognize its ally’s baseless claim. And nobody else on earth except the Israelis recognizes Syria’s Golan Heights as part of the state of Israel; Trump gifted this recognition to the Israelis and Biden continues it.

The renewed Cold War (following the pathetic Yeltsin interval, and Putin’s early outreach) began with a Kosovo, an arrogant statement by an expanding empire that it could invade countries and divide them at will, breaking the erstwhile rules because it has the power to do so. Stage One might be ending here, with Putin pulling today’s Kosovo, This move might calm the crisis short-term; the alternatives were quite ugly.

In saying we no longer recognize Luhansk and Donetsk as part of Ukraine, Russia is saying that the Minsk II agreements, that Kyiv has not implemented in party due to neofascist opposition, have failed. It will no longer try to observe them. It will station troops in them as peacekeeping forces, rather like the U.S. does in Kosovo.

Is it an invasion? On the one hand, no, it’s not. On the other, Biden has predicted invasion with such certitude, so consistently, it would be embarrassing not to have one. So the obvious temptation is to say that this recognition is itself the prophesy fulfilled. If you can call the peaceful re-annexation of Crimea in 2014 an “invasion” of Ukraine, surely you can call Russia’s recognition of these Kosovos an invasion too!

Thus Biden gets his invasion, Putin gets hit by sanctions, differences within NATO grow, the U.S. public remains divided and confused on this issue, Russia grows closer to China, and the Republicans sweep the midterms. Maybe Nord Stream II will be suspended, and the Germans will freeze a bit to show alliance loyalty. But I wouldn’t be surprised if Scholtz reasons, “It’s a good thing that all they did was recognize those republics like you made us recognize Kosovo. How does that differ from them recognizing Abkhazia? How harmful is it to us? Putin has made the world realize he thinks NATO is a threat to Russia. We Germans, as Europeans, whose country has been invaded many times as the U.S. has not, understand our fellow Europeans’ needs for security. Anyway, their recognition should not affect our energy partnership.”

To such reasoning, Biden and Blinken will respond: “How dare you try to split the Alliance!” They cannot imagine a world without NATO, and they don’t want you to. More than that, they don’t want you to THINK about NATO, or ask what it even is. They want you to forget Kosovo. Ah yes, my students weren’t born at that time And no one’s mentioned to them its role in regenerating the Cold War, whose current phase is perhaps peaking as we speak.

Gary Leupp is Professor of History at Tufts University, and holds a secondary appointment in the Department of Religion. He is the author of Servants, Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan; Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and Interracial Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900 and coeditor of The Tokugawa World (Routledge, 2021). He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, (AK Press). He can be reached at: gleupp@tufts.edu         

   https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/02/25/putin-pulls-a-kosovo/

Europeans to ‘pay a price’ for Russia sanctions – top EU official

 

European commission president Ursula von der Leyen has said Brussels will stand behind Ukraine nevertheless

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivers a press conference in Brussels, Belgium, February 25, 2022 © AFP / Olivier Hoslet/POOL/AFP

The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has acknowledged that the sweeping sanctions the bloc has imposed on Russia in recent days over Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine will have a negative impact on Europeans, too.

Responding to a Euronews correspondent’s remark on Sunday that “of course Europeans and Europe will have to pay a price for these measures,” von der Leyen replied in the affirmative, saying that “every war comes at a cost.”

However, according to the official, Brussels is not daunted by the possible economic blowback from the Russia sanctions, and will continue to prop up Ukraine with a “strong solidarity.”

The EU boss listed the bloc’s willingness to take in Ukrainian refugees, the “financial support,” as well as the “military equipment support” as proof that the EU is committed to backing Kiev.

The European Commission president also opined that Ukraine shares “EU values” and is defending its “principles.”

READ MORE: EU to send fighter jets to Ukraine

On Friday, Paschal Donohoe, the Irish Minister for Finance and President of the Eurogroup – a body that is comprised of finance ministers of the Euro area – also stated that “there will be economic costs” for Europe which “will emerge over the coming weeks and months.” The official added that the “impact will be different for different member states.” Donohoe reassured everyone, however, that the Euro zone’s finance ministers would review their fiscal plans in the near future, and make sure there was enough support for the European economy.

The president of the European Central Bank, Christine Lagarde, for her part, said that she saw rising energy prices and sagging business confidence and consumption as the two main risk factors for the EU’s economy. She clarified that “persistent uncertainty will probably be a drag on consumption and investment, and will impede growth,” while dismissing concerns over the sanctions’ impact on trade as insignificant.

European Commission Vice President, Valdis Dombrovskis, too, suggested that the “crisis will weigh on EU growth,” however, according to him, it “will not stop EU growth” entirely.

Since February 24, the EU as a whole, as well as individual member states, have slapped a raft of crippling sanctions on Russia, with the freezing of Moscow’s central bank’s assets being one of the latest blows.

Last Thursday, Russian President, Vladimir Putin, announced the beginning of what he described as a special military operation in Ukraine, with the aim being the “demilitarization and denazification” of the country. Ukraine and its Western allies accused Russia of waging an aggressive war and seeking to install a pro-Russian puppet government in Kiev.

https://www.rt.com/news/550818-eu-official-russia-sanctions-hurt-europeans/

Why is the West Silent about the Aggressive Actions of the US Armed Forces in Syria?

 27.02.2022 Author: Vladimir Danilov

Column: Politics

Region: Middle East

Country: Syria

On February 24, the Syrian Arab news agency SANA reported that the United States was sending another military escort to Syria, which again acknowledged Washington’s ongoing occupation policy in this Middle Eastern country. It has been continued since 2014 without any UN sanctions and without any permission from official Damascus authorities.

The US military convoy from Iraq, consisting of 23 transport units, including 18 trucks with weapons, ammunition and logistics equipment, as well as 5 empty tank trucks, crossed the border at the illegal Al-Waleed border crossing. The military convoy headed to the Rmelan district in the north-east of the Al-Hasakah Governorate, where the US military bases, in particular, Al-Tanf, are located. The American convoy was accompanied by two vehicles belonging to the opposition Syrian Democratic Forces, equipped with small arms.

It is assumed that the next batch of weapons delivered by the United States to Syria is intended for the military bases of Kurdish insurgents from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) located in the north of the country, who regularly receive assistance from the Americans. The tank trucks in the above mentioned US military convoy are, for sure, intended to transport the oil as part of continued Washington’s pillage of Syrian oil resources, most of which are concentrated in the east of the country where the major Syrian oil fields are located: the Conoco, Al Omar, and Al Tanak oil fields are located on the left bank of the Euphrates, in the area controlled by the pro-American SDF. US Kurdish allies are also actively involved in smuggling oil from Syria, and in exchange, the Americans supply them with weapons.

The Kurdish illegal armed groups that appeared in the midst of the civil war in Syria managed to gain support in the United States, which was facilitated by lobbyists hired by the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (Rojava) to build links with the American establishment. The names of those people in the USA who promote the interests of SDF in the United States, can be easily found in the database of the US Department of Justice, which contains relevant information provided in accordance with the law about registration of FARA foreign agents.

The Syrian Democratic Forces were formed in the midst of the civil war which began in Syria in 2011, right after the “Arab spring,” their official date of formation is October 11, 2015. The skeleton of this organization consisted of Kurds, and also includes Arabs, Assyrians, Turkmens, Armenians and Circassians. By now, SDF has taken control over parts of the North-East of the Syrian Arabian Republic (SAR). The United States is interested in having the Kurds as the opposition to the official regime in Damascus, and for this reason, in 2013 the administration of the then President Barack Obama took a decision to supply weapons to that armed group. However, in July 2017, when Donald Trump was in office, this “CIA’s secret program for weapons provisioning and training of certain groups of insurgents” who were fighting against the government of Bashar Al-Assad, the Syrian President, was terminated. Already in early 2018, SDF launched their first representative office in Washington, the US mission of the Syrian Democratic Council, which was headed by the US citizen, Ahmed Al-Khendi, having declared in its US registration documents its goals. The Kurds managed to establish relations with a number of MPs, including a representative of the Republican party, Marco Rubio.

In 2021, with the beginning of Joe Biden’s presidential term in the White House, the US office of the SDF expanded its activity, including mining and sale of illegally extracted Syrian oil with the participation of Delta Crescent Energy, a US-based company registered in Delaware. Up to three million barrels of raw materials are extracted monthly at the fields in the Al-Hasakah, Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor Governorates. About a third of the stolen oil is sold to the Kurdish Autonomous Region of Iraq at a price of USD 35-40 per barrel, with the US support. According to Al-Monitor, this “cooperation” was made possible with the support of the White House and under the protection of the US military.

Hundreds of terrorists in Syria were released to join the US-controlled armed groups, some of which have been delivered to the territory of the Al-Tanf zone.  The US intelligence agencies plan to offer to the extremist cells in Damascus and Latakia to commit actions against the Syrian, Russian and Iranian military forces, and try to arrange a media campaign to provoke protest sentiments in the Syrian civil society.

With its illegal activities in Syria, the US military continues to kill hundreds of civilians in this country. At the same time, the United States kept hiding the real data on the number of civilians killed after the air raids in Syria, as well as in Afghanistan and Iraq, as evidenced by the results of the investigation by the New York Times, in particular. So, on February 22, as a result of another armed attack by landing troops in the village of Ad-Dakhla in the east of the Deir ez-Zor Governorate, the US armed forces together with SDF commenced intense and random fire attack at the residential buildings and agricultural land. As a result, the elder of the Al-Bakkara tribe, Ibrahim Al-Omar, was killed.

Alexander Efimov, Russia’s ambassador in Syria, in his interview with RIA Novosti on February 9, 2022, made the following comments on the US presence in Syria: “First of all, I shall repeat what has been repeatedly said: the presence in Syria of the forces of the so-called “international coalition” led by the United States has no legal basis — such as the resolutions by the UN Security Council or the consent of the legitimate Syrian authorities – and this presence should be terminated immediately. Moreover, the United States obviously has not succeeded in combating terrorism in Syria. In addition to the Trans-Euphrates region, there is another “grey zone” that emerged thanks to the efforts of the Americans, and located in the south of the SAR – the Al-Tanf zone, where Magavir Al-Saura gunmen (an organization banned in Russia) do whatever they want, acting in the atmosphere of impunity and permissiveness, in particular, they hinder the overdue resettlement of the Rukban camp for IDPs located there.

In other words, they divide terrorists into “bad guys” and “good guys,” many of them are given a “second start,” and they continue to accumulate power potential and radicalize civilians. And the longer the United States stays here, the more powerful the delayed-time bomb may turn out to be. We shouldn’t forget the fact that Washington continues to support the illegal appropriation of the SAR’s natural resources – primarily oil and wheat in the North-East of the country.

These facts are sufficient enough to persistently demand the illegal American occupation of the SAR to be terminated.”

This appeal to terminate the US illegal aggressive operation in Syria and to have the presence of the US occupation forces in Syria recognized as illegal by the UN, is a burning issue today, especially in the context of the criticism against Russia by Washington and NATO countries regarding Russia’s military special operation in the Donbass. Recall that this operation is intended to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, and it was started because no reaction from the Ukrainian authorities followed to stop the policy of genocide of the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine, a policy supported by Kiev militants since 2014, which resulted in killing hundreds of civilians.

It makes one wonder, how come the political demagogues from Washington and Western Europe have the right to criticize other countries, impose unilateral sanctions, at the same time being silent about their war crimes in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and earlier in Yugoslavia? Thus, they are demonstrating “double standards” in assessing international events and understating Washington’s blatant violation of international norms!

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

https://journal-neo.org/2022/02/27/why-is-the-west-silent-about-the-aggressive-actions-of-the-us-armed-forces-in-syria/

Western Hypocrisy Over Ukraine Knows No Limits

 28.02.2022 Author: James ONeill

Column: Politics

Region: Russia in the World

A few days ago, Russian troops invaded Ukraine. The movement of Russian troops went far beyond removing Ukrainian forces from the Donbass region that they have occupied and challenged for the past eight years. The uproar from Western nations was as predictable as it was hypocritical. In 2014 an American backed coup took place against the lawfully elected and legitimate government of Ukraine. The silence then at this blatantly undemocratic move from western nations was stunning.

The two regions of the Donbass, and the island of Crimea declared their independence. In Crimea’s case the government held a referendum of the people. They overwhelmingly (more than 90%) voted to leave Ukraine and apply to re-join Russia. The word “re-join” is used advisably. Crimea had been part of Russia for hundreds of years until 1954 when the then Russian leader Nikita Khrushchev gifted Crimea to Ukraine. Neither the Russian parliament, nor, more significantly, the Crimean people were consulted.

The western attitude to Crimea has been marked by hypocrisy ever since it voted to re-join Russia. The British, for example, have refused to recognise the legitimacy of Crimea’s actions. Late last year a British war ship violated Crimea waters and had to be chased away by a Russian warship.

The two Donbass republics have had a hard time of it since their similar declaration that they wished no part of the new Ukrainian government. It is not an overstatement to call that government fascist, a fact that seems not to trouble western governments that are now loudly proclaiming Ukraine’s right to be free of Russian interference.

Among those western nations that have condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine are France and Germany. These two nations are part of the Normandy grouping that negotiated a settlement of the Donbass problem. They then did nothing for the next eight years as Ukraine refused to implement the agreement to which they had been a party. The protestations that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a violation of international law rings especially hollow. For eight years they have remained silent, not only on Ukraine’s refusal to abide by the terms of an agreement that they had willingly signed, but worse, waged war against the two Donbass regions.

The arrogance and hubris of the Australian government has been especially notable. The Prime Minister and the Opposition Labor Party have both condemned the Russian move. In Australia’s case they have gone so far as to shut down the Russian television channel Russia Today and prevented it from being broadcast in the country. Even the Americans have not gone that far.

The actions of the Australian government in isolating Russia for its invasion of Ukraine demonstrates a particular historical blindness. Australia has been a consistent cheerleader and willing participant in multiple acts of United States aggression around the world. Australian troops willingly joined the United States invasion of South Vietnam and waged war against the North. This was despite overwhelming evidence that the initial justification for the war, an alleged attack on a United States warship in Vietnamese waters, was manifestly a staged operation. Australian participation in that war lasted more than a decade before the newly elected Labor government withdrew Australian troops, an act that earned the Australian Labor Party the enmity of the Americans who were instrumental in the overthrow of that government three years later.

Obviously, no lessons were learnt by Australia as in 2001 they willingly joined the United States invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. That was only ended last year with the ignominious withdrawal of United States troops from that country. It is notable that the Americans loyal allies, including Australia, were not consulted about that decision. The result was an ignominious and rapid withdrawal of Australian forces and the messy betrayal of thousands of Afghan citizens who had been employed by the Australians.

The invasion of Afghanistan was followed in short order by an equally illegal and unjustified invasion of Iraq. The difference here however, is that 18 years later Australian troops still occupy Iraq and have refused a demand from the Iraqi government that they should leave. In that decision, Australia simply looked once again the to United States who similarly refused to leave Iraq.

This history is worth bearing in mind when one listens to the sanctimonious prattle of the Australian Prime Minister talking about the sanctity of national borders and the right of governments to be free of the fear of invasion and occupation. It is a lesson that his own government should heed, but that is unlikely to happen.

We are many more examples where the Australian government has refused to condemn, this alone sanction, egregious acts by foreign powers.

One has to look no further than the actions of the state of Israel. Its treatment of its own Palestinian population, the illegal seizure and takeover of the Syrian Golan Heights and Israel’s constant bombing of Syrian territory are all subjects that were met with complete silence from the Australian government.

It may well be that Russia has gone too far in invading Ukraine. One sincerely hopes that the matter will be resolved and Russian troops can return to their own country. But the west is far from justified in sanctimonious condemnation of the Russian move. There is an old biblical saying, “ those who are without sin amongst you, cast the first stone.” There are precious few western governments that are in a position to throw that stone.

James O’Neill, an Australian-based former Barrister at Law, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

https://journal-neo.org/2022/02/28/western-hypocrisy-over-ukraine-knows-no-limits/