Crimea – a flashpoint for conflict in the new cold war?

Warning! Article contains Commie BS

THE forthcoming Kiev summit on reclaiming Crimea from Russia, timed to coincide with the 30th anniversary of the collapse of the Soviet Union, points to a likely flashpoint in the deepening new cold war.

China, as the US’s top rival – economically, technologically and ideologically – is certainly Washington’s main target.

Nonetheless there is absolutely no indication of a softening stance against Russia, and as in the original cold war both Europe and Asia contain trigger points that could explode into catastrophic conflict.

Tensions with Russia run through the Middle East, where its military intervention in Syria thwarted US designs, and in Europe, where the EU’s drive to absorb former Soviet states into its economic orbit combines with a US-led push to align them militarily with Nato.

This was graphically illustrated by Operation Defender Europe 2021, a mammoth set of military exercises which one participant – Ukraine – was honest enough to describe as a dry run for “the war with Russia.”

The Pentagon’s insistence that these manoeuvres are key to “interoperability” is a euphemism for Nato’s core purpose as a mechanism to subordinate their armies to Washington – a process with economic perks (Bulgaria is one country that has recently been instructed to ditch its Russian-built MiG aircraft and buy US-made F-16s to better facilitate “interoperability”).

From Russia’s perspective these war games rub salt into the wounds of 30 years of broken promises: the Soviet military withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact countries in 1989 was conducted in return for a pledge that Nato would not move even “one inch to the east.” Nato has, of course, swallowed up almost all the former Warsaw Pact nations and several former republics of the Soviet Union itself.

This is the context in which Ukraine plans a summit on reclaiming Crimea.

Russia’s occupation of Crimea in 2014 was certainly a breach of international law.

Whether its officials massaged the figures in the subsequent referendum on union with Russia is a moot point: few with any knowledge of the region doubt that a majority of Crimeans were genuinely in favour. The peninsula has a big ethnic Russian majority and was part of Russia before being transferred to Ukraine in an internal Soviet reorganisation in the 1960s. Even so, unilateral military action to redraw borders is always exceptionally dangerous.

Yet aside from the fact that the US and its allies have repeatedly done the same, the Russian action was a predictable response to the US and EU-backed coup against Ukraine’s elected government in 2014.

The extremists elevated to power in Kiev have rehabilitated Nazi collaborators like Stepan Bandera as well as anti-semitic butchers like Symon Petliura. They allow marches commemorating the achievements of the Waffen SS. They deploy neonazis like the Azov battalion to the war they provoked with the Donbass.

Just as with its jihadist proxies in Libya and Syria, Washington has no qualms about arming fascists to further its geostrategic goals.

Ukraine’s tragedy stems from the Maidan coup itself and, before that, from the very collapse of the Soviet Union whose anniversary Western leaders have picked for the summit. Its economy halved in size in the year from 2014 and has still not recovered. Living standards have never regained Soviet levels.

Since 2014 its public services have been subjected to aggressive privatisation, its health service has been marketised, its Communist Party banned and an EU-demanded law opposed by over three-quarters of the population has privatised its land and facilitated its sale to foreign agribusiness.

These are the fruits of co-operation with the “friends” invited to Kiev to help it reclaim Crimea.

Yet even that is not the real reason to oppose this summit.

Britain has recently demonstrated its willingness to provoke live fire from Russian ships by sailing through Crimean waters.

Cold wars can get hot. The continual goading of Russia by Western militaries could have disastrous consequences.

(c) Morning Star

3 comments

  • There is so many lies in this article, where do you start?

    “From Russia’s perspective these war games rub salt into the wounds of 30 years of broken promises: the Soviet military withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact countries in 1989 was conducted in return for a pledge that Nato would not move even “one inch to the east.”

    Wrong on two counts, NATO promised nothing, no documents exist with NATO signatures on them. If the Soviets pulled out in 1989, why was Lithuania invaded in 1991?

    “Even so, unilateral military action to redraw borders is always exceptionally dangerous.

    Yet aside from the fact that the US and its allies have repeatedly done the same, the Russian action was a predictable response to the US and EU-backed coup against Ukraine’s elected government in 2014.”

    Name the countries that the US and allies have annexed.

    “Living standards have never regained Soviet levels.”

    I saved the best until last. The minimum wage in Ukraine is 60% more than mafia land. So where does that place them in the grand scheme of things?

    Liked by 3 people

  • The MS is a filthy Marxist-Leninist rag that I had forgotten still existed. It was always a Russian lapdog. Interesting to see that it is still slavishly loyal to Russia 20 years after it became a fascist regime. Marxists and nazis are just two sides of the same coin. They compete with each other as to who can tell the biggest lies and who can cause the most death and misery.
    Note that these bastards are still using the nazi slur against Ukraine.
    The MS is as verminous as RaT.

    Liked by 3 people

    • The BBC released a statement regarding Sarah Rainsford. Instead of a statement they should withdraw all BBC employees from Russia, then send back every Russian propagandist.

      Tim Davie, BBC Director-General, said: “The expulsion of Sarah Rainsford is a direct assault on media freedom which we condemn unreservedly.

      “Sarah is an exceptional and fearless journalist. She is a fluent Russian speaker who provides independent and in-depth reporting of Russia and the former Soviet Union. Her journalism informs the BBC’s audiences of hundreds of millions of people around the world.

      “We urge the Russian authorities to reconsider their decision. In the meantime, we will continue to report events in the region independently and impartially.”

      Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.