Home / Editorials / More than 50,000 U.S.-Backed Troops Are Fighting in Ukraine’s Civil War. Why?
iraq-us-troops-1024x682

More than 50,000 U.S.-Backed Troops Are Fighting in Ukraine’s Civil War. Why?

Eric Zuesse 
RINF Alternative News

The U.S. Government installed in February 2014 the current Ukrainian Government, which started Ukraine’s civil war against the residents in Ukraine’s southeast, who reject this Government. The U.S., and the Ukrainian Government that the U.S. installed, call the residents there “terrorists,” for refusing to be ruled by the people that the U.S. imposed in February to lead Ukraine.

According to the man whom we installed to lead Ukraine, “by now about 50 thousand soldiers and officers appear participants in the antiterrorist operation: ‘Thousands are wounded. Many families were left without a breadwinner’.” That quotation is from an article that was published on August 11th by the Press Service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Ukrainian Government. Their press release was quoting Arseniy Yatsenyuk, whom Obama’s agent Victoria Nuland had selected on February 4th (18 days before  the overthrow) to become the Prime Minister of Ukraine. (The transcript of the complete phone call in which the EU came to know that the U.S. had engineered this regime-change is here.)

And here is the result of the bombs that our people have been dropping on those ‘terrorists.’

And here is what these ‘terrorists’ themselves have to say about that.

Western ‘news’ media don’t report this news, which is why all of it might come as a shock to 99% of Americans, and of the residents of other NATO countries. (That’s why I provide those links: so that you can easily verify these things for yourself.)

We call this a “free press” and a “democracy.” This is what America is trying to impose worldwide. But there is lots of resistance to it, not only in Ukraine, but worldwide.

People throughout the world believe overwhelmingly that the United States is the greatest threat to world peace; and if our invasion and corrupt and disastrous occupation of Iraq don’t suffice to make the point, then our coup and installation of nazis into control over Ukraine certainly should.

Why Are We Doing This?

It’s not by happenstance; it’s by careful design. A reader-comment at the site of a specialist on Ukraine described in the following words the February coup:

 

Otto Tomasch “daisygarden”: 

I am Ukrainian. At present I do not live in Kiev (I lived before), but by chance, at that time I was in Kiev. 

1) There was about 20 000 p[eople] on Maidan [in the public demonstrations to bring down the corrupt President Yanukovych; like all of Ukraine’s Presidents, Yanukovych was very corrupt]

2) most of them were paid (Right Sector, Nazis) by US. 

3) [also] lots of paid addicts [and] unemployed 

4) some naive people [unpaid] (including my son, educated but ignorant), in search of democracy. 

 

The U.S. paymasters wrote the script, and directed the show. (It’s ugly.) The 20,000 Maidaners did not. On 13 December 2013, Victoria Nuland, Obama’s agent masterminding the operation along with the CIA, said “We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine,” and she used euphemisms such as “democracy” to describe our objectives there, but the people whom she chose to run the post-coup Government did not restore the democracy that we overthrew; they actually ended it — that’s what they were being paid to do.

The real reason we are doing all this in Ukraine, is so that the voters who had elected the Ukrainian President that we overthrew on February 22nd will be removed from Ukraine, and so that the U.S. will thus in the future get Ukrainian leaders ‘elected’ in Ukraine whom our leaders (America’s aristocrats, the people who actually fund American politicians’ campaigns) want to be ‘elected’ to lead Ukraine.

This is the new way for one country’s aristocracy to control another country: now that the international standard is ‘democracy,’ the cheapest way for aristocrats to control another country is to get rid of the voters who elect leaders that ours don’t want to lead those countries.

For example, in Ukraine’s May 25th Presidential ‘election,’ only the areas in Ukraine that favored our coup were allowed to vote, and the other regions didn’t even want to vote in that election because the government that was holding it was (and is) bombing them. See the electoral turnout map at wikipedia, which is here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2014#mediaviewer/File:Явка_виборців_на_позачергових_виборах_Президента_України_2014_по_округах.PNG

and this turnout (as you see: almost zilch in the southeast) contrasts sharply with the turnout in the election that chose the President, Viktor Yanukovych, whom Obama overthrew

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Ukraine#mediaviewer/File:Активность_избирателей.svg,

in which election — the last truly nationwide election in Ukraine — the turnout was approximately the same percentage of voters throughout the entire country. Basically, the Obama-installed Government doesn’t represent the people in Ukraine’s southeast at all: it is instead exterminating them, with our money. (That’s money U.S. taxpayers lend them via the IMF, and which cannot actually be repaid. Ukraine is already bankrupt: only our continuing loans keep the war that we started, going. We aren’t investing in this genocide; we are funding it.) So, what today’s Ukrainian Government insists was a ‘democratic’ election on May25th that includes the regions they’re bombing, is in fact not that at all.

Basically, the extermination-program in the southeastern half of Ukraine antagonized the residents there toward the regime that was choosing the candidates and that was holding the May 25th, 2014, election; and, yet, this Ukrainian Government claims that the regions that are breaking away from this ‘democracy’ have no right to do so, even despite this government’s ethnic cleansing program to get rid of the residents there. If that ‘reasoning’ sounds crazy, it is, but there are plenty of fools for it: a vast majority of the American public believe it: they believe that the U.S. generously helped the idealistic Maidaners replace a ‘dictator’ (Yanukovych) with a ‘democracy’. The public belief is based on myth that’s packaged and marketed to the U.S. masses — the people who simply foot the bill.

The United States insists on Ukraine’s ‘sovereign right’ to exterminate the residents in its regions that don’t support the government that the United States has imposed upon all of Ukraine (and imposes by force against the regions that don’t accept it). For the residents in Ukraine’s southeast to resist being exterminated is for them to be ‘terrorists.’ That’s America’s reasoning. It’s also the reasoning of the Government that we installed there. And the aristocracy, the oligarchs (who also own the ‘news’ media), sell it in their respective country: U.S. or Ukraine.

The people in the regions that our Ukrainian Government is now bombing, had, in the final authentically democratic election in Ukraine, in February 2010, voted overwhelmingly for Viktor Yanukovych, whom Obama overthrew; and, so, Obama wants to get rid of these people in order to prevent a leader like that (a leader favorable toward Russia) from being elected in Ukraine again; and those residents also oppose fracking for gas (and they live on a huge shale-gas field) because they don’t want their water to be poisoned (and Ukraine’s environmental laws and enforcement are virtually non-existent; so, only the people need to be gotten rid of there, our aristocrats want the land; they want to sell that gas; and Obama wants to block Russia, or any of its oligarchs, from selling Russia’s gas to Europe; he wants to choke Russia). Western oil companies, and Ukraine’s own oligarchs, want to frack Ukraine’s shale-gas; and one of the reasons why Obama perpetrated his coup to overthrow Yanukovych was to let them do that.

Furthermore, Western arms-makers want more war in order to restore their glory-days during the Cold War.

So: not just Obama but oil companies and arms-dealers also want US (the United States, via our appointed Ukrainian Government) to drop bombs onto the residents in southeastern Ukraine, to either kill those people, or else scare them away (to become refugees in Russia or elsewhere). These massacres of people in the southeast started on May 2nd.

A reader asked me why we’re doing this; and my reply listed at least 4 reasons for our bombing them:

1) The U.S. aristocracy is committed to its global dominance over all other nations’ aristocracies (including Russia’s).

2) Removing the residents from S.E. Ukraine will allow fracking by the U.S.-affiliated oligarch Kolomoysky and by publicly owned oil companies.

3) That fracking will end up selling to Europe gas produced by our favored oligarchs, not by Russia’s; so, we must defeat Russia’s aristocracy, and the ethnic cleansing is a key part of that plan.

4) U.S. military contractors will boom from this renewed Cold War.

As regards the third point, there are lots of articles about the gas back-story to Ukraine.

This is basically an aristocratic operation, which, as they usually do, is set up for us to fund it and for them to profit from it. According to the leading authority on income-distribution in the U.S., Obama’s vaunted “economic recovery” after the 2008 Bush crash is fictitious for the bottom 99% of the U.S. population, but very real and plentiful for the top 1%: “Top 1% incomes grew by 31.4%, while bottom 99% incomes grew only by 0.4%, from 2009 to 2012. Hence, the top 1% captured 95% of the income gains in the first three years of the recovery.” Incidentally, that’s virtually unprecedented in economic history: usually, the income-distribution becomes more equal after an economic crash, not less equal — less equal is normal only for economic boom-times, not for economic recoveries. So, while Obama gets the American public to subsidize the business (actually the mega-theft) operations of the U.S. aristocracy, how sincere, actually, is his liberal rhetoric about the need to reduce economic inequality in the U.S.? If he says to us, “Well, I tried,” then it can only be asserted with a wink and a nod to his ultimate expected benefactors, especially when he’s getting us to fund a very bloody land-clearing operation for American oil companies and for a complicit Ukrainian gas-oligarch, and for arms-dealers.

The question of what the residents of Ukraine’s southeastern provinces think about what we’re doing to them is ignored in the Western press, because our media are owned by our aristocrats, who largely placed into power the current U.S. Government. However, the residents in southeastern Ukraine, tell you what they think about our bombing of them, right here.

So: under Obama, feudalism is being restored, in its new form, which is fascism. What feudalism was for the Agrarian Age, fascism is for the Corporate Age — the Age in which power comes from owning shares of corporate stock, instead of from owning acres of agricultural land. Corporations, rather than landed estates, are now the aristocracy’s basis. That’s why Mussolini sometimes referred to fascism itself as “corporationism.”

If racism is added to fascism, as Hitler did, then the resulting ideology is called “nazism,” which isn’t any political party — not the Party in Hitler’s Germany (the original Nazi State, run by the original Nazi Party), nor in Ukraine (which has two nazi parties, which share this one ideology, and neither of which calls itself Ukraine’s “Nazi” Party). The lower-case term, “nazism,” refers to the ideology itself, just like the lower-case term “fascism” does. So, that’s the difference between, for example, the Fascist Party in Italy, and a fascist party (such as the post-Nixon Republican Party in the United States).

Although Obama isn’t himself a racist (only a fascist), he is exploiting a popular racism in Ukraine, one that’s against ethnic Russians, so as to attain his goal, which is to lock-in the global supremacy of America’s aristocracy.

For example, the leadership that Obama installed into Ukraine want to exterminate ethnic Russians, not only within Ukraine, but in Russia too. This is a key reason why Obama installed this governing coalition of nazis and fascists there: the nazis among them hate ethnic Russians. (It’s an old story in Ukraine’s northeast: a hatred of all Slavs.) Whereas Obama (and the rest of America’s aristocracy) is fascist (and this includes, for examples, not just the rabidly anti Democratic Party pro-Republican Koch brothers (for whom Obama is fighting in his Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations against the EU), but there’s also the specifically Russia-hating pro-Democratic Party Obama-backer George Soros. He’s like a Captain Ahab against this Russian Moby Dick that he’s fighting to the death. The end of the ideological Cold War evidently didn’t slake his craving for sheer conquest, which has turned out to continue even after Russia ended its communism. His battle here turns out to be racist, not ideological per se — neither democratic, nor merely fascist, but rather nazi, in nazism’s anti-Russian embodiment. Thus, consider a TV station that’s funded by the West including by George Soros’s International Renaissance Foundation, Hromadske TV. In July, with the ethnic cleansing in Donbass raging full force, a guest on the West’s Hromadske TV Channel (a channel whose audience mushroomed after the Obama coup), an unknown ‘journalist’, Bogdan Butkevich, was interviewed, and said, “Donbass must be exploited as a [gas-producing] resource, which it is. … Donbass … is severely overpopulated with people nobody has any use for, … approximately 4 million inhabitants, at least 1.5 million of which are superfluous. … There is a certain category of people that must be exterminated.” Hromadske TV in 2013, during the lead-up to the coup, received 8% of its funding from Soros’s International Renaissance Foundation, 16% from the U.S. Embassy (which appointed the new Government in February 2014), 31% from the Netherlands Embassy, and 44% from “Individuals,” who are Ukraine’s oligarchs, including the gas baron Ihor Kolomoysky. The U.S. regime installed Kolomoysky in 2014 as a regional Governor, and he co-masterminded the extermination program against ethnic Russians, starting with the massacre of regime-opponents at the Trade Unions Building in Odessa, which began the extermination program. Kolomoysky owns fracking rights to more of Ukraine’s gas than any other person, via his Burisma Holdings, to which he appointed as a board member in 2014 Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden. Potentially, the Biden family could become billionaires from this, but the residents in Donbass would need to be cleared out first. Kolomoysky also owns Privat Bank, which holds the bank account for Hromadske TV. So: in a sense, saying that at least 1.5 million Donbass residents should be “exterminated” is promoting among the Ukrainian public the business plan of Kolomoysky and his friends.

Forbes’s Mark Adomanis headlined on 15 April 2014 “Ukraine’s Economy Is Nearing Collapse” and he wrote: “the currency has been in free fall, losing more than 35% of its value against the dollar this year. The Hryvnia has been the world’s worst performing currency in 2014. … The only reason that things haven’t totally imploded is because of the $18 billion package of assistance from the IMF and the $9 billion in additional assistance pledged by the United States and the European Union. This financial assistance is desperately needed and will obviously help the Ukrainian government keep the lights on. The problem is that Ukraine’s … economic outlook is darkening, [and] Ukraine’s already large funding needs have grown commensurately.” Only the (taxpayers in) U.S. and EU, and the IMF (funded mainly by U.S. taxpayers) are funding this slaughter. Moreover, Adomanis’s very next article, 10 days later, was headlined “The European Union Isn’t Going To Bail Out Ukraine.” So that leaves only US to keep Ukraine’s soldiers paid, fed, and supplied.

The racism that is being utilized here to get rid of the undesired voters isn’t necessarily shared by its American sponsors, who are merely trying to increase their own international dominance. Beyond a certain amount of wealth, the main motivation becomes sheer power; and, so, that’s what the biggest aristocrats are trying to maximize — their power, not their wealth in itself. They just do it with our money. But Republicans (the ones who declare themselves as such, and not merely fake ‘Democrats’ like Obama who are actually closeted Republicans), say that this nation doesn’t have enough money to feed and shelter the homeless and to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and get our unemployed and underemployed back to work and skill-trained at public expense so that they can become public assets.

We have only enough money to invade Iraq, ethnically cleanse southeastern Ukraine, and … maybe, install nuclear missiles right next door to Russia in Ukraine.

So, that’s why “More than 50,000 U.S.-backed Troops Are Fighting in Ukraine’s Civil War.” We’re feeding them, and paying for their weapons — and for their coffins. After all: that country’s in debt to everybody, because its oligarchs have skimmed off most of the ‘foreign aid’ and socked it away in Switzerland and other tax-havens (such as Burisma Holdings in Cypress).

As for the people of southeastern Ukraine: we’re just getting rid of them, that’s all.

And, of course, we’re blaming Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, for it. That’s part of the plan: to blame him for whatever our press and its aristocratic owners can get away with blaming him for. Because they’re the ones, after all, the aristocracy, whose plan it really is.

And that’s why “More than 50,000 U.S.-backed Troops Are Fighting in Ukraine’s Civil War.”

Aristocrats come up with the plans. We merely fund their plans. And this is what ‘democracy’ and ‘capitalism’ have come to refer to.

And Americans keep believing their fantasies. And more and more wealth thus comes to be held by fewer and fewer people. The American public’s fantasies are very profitable for some people.

———-

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,  and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • wildman

    Good one Eric. Thank you for being one of the few in the alternative media who has put it all together. Now if you could just get it all printed in the NYT or some other MSM……….why are you laughing?

    Anyway, keep up the real investigative journalism. Youre one of the few left.

    • cettel

      Thanks. This is Eric Zuesse. I send virtually every one of my articles to all major English-language ‘news’ media, including The New York Times, Washington Post, New York Review of Books, London Review of Books, Guardian, Independent, New Statesman, Nation, Progressive, Harper’s, Atlantic, National Review, American Prospect, Mother Jones, Fair, Media Matters, Foreign Policy, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, PBS, NPR, Huffington Post, Salon, Slate, Alternet, CommonDreams, Truthout, Truthdig, Consortium News, Nakedcapitalism, Dailykos, Raw Story, Drudge, AP, Bloomberg, and on and on. Some ‘news’ editors have obliquely indicated to me that if they posted my pieces they could lose their jobs. The impression I’m getting is that 99.9% of the owners (“publishers”) just don’t want their audience to know the bigger picture, how things actually fit together; they don’t want their audience to understand (or at least not accurately) what’s happening. Some owners have been plain nasty to me. None has ever explained why. Perhaps even some small media have been blackballed for offending some business-associate. I just don’t know what’s behind this. But some news-editors have indicated to me that they greatly respect my work but (for unnamed reasons) cannot publish it — and they don’t publish it, though I keep them on my distribution-list. If, for any one of my articles, you want to find out which media do want their audience to understand what’s happening and why (and I consider them the best news-media), maybe just google that headline with quotation-marks around it, and, for that piece at least, you will know. Generally speaking, the only sites that are publishing anything from me on Ukraine (the most prohibited of all news-topics, it seems to me) are: Rinf, Washingtonsblog, Pontiac Tribune, OpEdNews, Smirking Chimp, Global Research, Informationclearinghouse, InfoWars, and Blacklistednews. In addition, I have myself started UkraineWar.Info but haven’t yet gotten to posting to it every Ukraine article that I do; I haven’t yet gotten around to putting my own site onto my general distribution list (there, meaning to post onto it myself every article I do). But I’ve gotten some other terrific UkraineWar journalists to post theirs. It’s just starting.

  • Holy Davina

    LOL, you are full of cow crap. Fiction adventure news story. 50K US troops would have wiped out the Russian thugs and secured the border / country. This is fake journalism like “The Onion.”

    • cettel

      This article didn’t say that they are “US troops.” It said that they are “US-Backed Troops.” There is a big difference; and if you had clicked onto this article’s links, you’d know that they are “US-Backed Troops.” Please learn to read.