Alexander Vindman (New York Times, 12/10/21): “A prosperous Ukraine buttressed by American support” could persuade Russians “to eventually demand their own framework for democratic transition”—i.e., regime change.
With the United States and Russia in a standoff over NATO expansion and Russian troop deployments along the Ukrainian border, US corporate media outlets are demanding that Washington escalate the risk of a broader war while misleading their audiences about important aspects of the conflict.
Many in the commentariat called on the US to take steps that would increase the likelihood of war. In the New York Times (12/10/21), retired US Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman wrote that “the United States must support Ukraine by providing more extensive military assistance.” He argued that “the United States should consider an out-of-cycle, division-level military deployment to Eastern Europe to reassure allies and bolster the defenses of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,” even while calling for a strategy that “avoids crossing into military adventurism.” He went on to say that “the United States has to be more assertive in the region.”
Yet the US has been plenty “assertive in the region,” where, incidentally, America is not located. In 2014, the US supported anti-government protests in Ukraine that led to the ouster of democratically elected, Russia-aligned Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych (Foreign Policy, 3/4/14). Russia sent its armed forces into the Crimea, annexed the territory, and backed armed groups in eastern Ukraine.
Since then, the US has given Ukraine $2.5 billion in military aid, including Javelin anti-tank missiles (Politico, 6/18/21). The US government has applied sanctions to Russia that, according to an International Monetary Fund estimate, cost Russia about 0.2 percentage points of GDP every year between 2014 and 2018 (Reuters, 4/16/21).
Furthermore, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)—a US-led military alliance hostile to Russia—has grown by 14 countries since the end of the Cold War. NATO expanded right up to Russia’s border in 2004, in violation of the promises made by the elder George Bush and Bill Clinton to Russian leaders Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin (Jacobin, 7/16/18).
“Russia has shown its intent to violate its international commitments by demanding NATO cease expanding,” Rob Portman and Jeanne Shaheen argue in the Washington Post (12/24/21)—ignoring the US’s violated commitment to not expand NATO eastward.
In the Washington Post (12/24/21), Republican Sen. Rob Portman and Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen jointly contended in Orwellian fashion that the Biden administration should take “military measures that would strengthen a diplomatic approach and give it greater credibility.” They wrote that “the United States must speed up the pace of assistance and provide antiaircraft, antitank and anti-ship systems, along with electronic warfare capabilities.” The authors claimed that these actions “will help ensure a free and stable Europe,” though it’s easy to imagine how such steps could instead lead to a war-ravaged Europe, or at least a tension-plagued one.
Indeed, US “military measures” have tended to increase, rather than decrease, the temperature. Last summer, the US and Ukraine led multinational naval maneuvers held in the Black Sea, an annual undertaking called Sea Breeze. The US-financed exercises were the largest in decades, involving 32 ships, 40 aircraft and helicopters, and 5,000 soldiers from 24 countries (Deutsche Welle, 6/29/21). These steps didn’t create a “stable Europe”: Russia conducted a series of parallel drills in the Black Sea and southwestern Russia (AP, 7/10/21), and would go on to amass troops along the Ukrainian border.
Afghan precedent
Max Boot (Washington Post, 12/15/21) suggests the US should point out to Russia “that Ukraine shares a lengthy border—nearly 900 miles in total—with NATO members Romania, Slovakia, Hungary and Poland.” Pretty sure they’re aware of that, Max.
Max Boot, also writing in the Post (12/15/21), argued:
Preventing Russia from attacking will require a more credible military deterrent. President Biden has ruled out unilaterally sending US combat troops to Ukraine, which would be the strongest deterrent. But he can still do more to help the Ukrainians defend themselves.
The United States has already delivered more than $2.5 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since 2014, with $450 million of that coming this year. There are also roughly 150 US troops in Ukraine training its armed forces.
But Ukraine is asking for more military aid, and we should deliver it. NBC News reports that “Ukraine has asked for air defense systems, anti-ship missiles, more Javelin antitank missiles, electronic jamming gear, radar systems, ammunition, upgraded artillery munitions and medical supplies.” The Defense Department could begin airlifting these defensive systems and supplies to Kyiv tomorrow.
Later in the article, Boot contended that the US should help prepare Ukraine to carry out an armed insurgency in case Russia intensifies its involvement in Ukraine. He said that “outside support” is “usually the key determinant of the success or failure of an insurgency”: Because of aid from the US and its allies, he noted, the mujahedeen in Afghanistan “were able to drive out the Red Army with heavy casualties.” Amazingly, Boot said nothing about the many alumni of the mujahedeen in Afghanistan who joined the Taliban and al-Qaeda (Jacobin, 9/11/21).
That it might be possible to reach an agreement in which Ukraine remains neutral between NATO and Russia (Responsible Statecraft, 1/3/22) is not the sort of possibility that Boot thinks is worth exploring. He apparently would prefer to dramatically increase the danger of armed conflict between two nuclear powers.
Whitewashing Nazis
The Nation (5/6/21): “Glorification of Nazi collaborators and Holocaust perpetrators isn’t a glitch but a feature of today’s Ukraine.”
US media should present Americans with a complete picture of Ukraine/Russia so that Americans can assess how much and what kind of support, if any, they want their government to continue providing to Ukraine’s. Such a comprehensive view would undoubtedly include an account of the Ukrainian state’s political orientation. Lev Golinkin in The Nation (5/6/21) outlined one of the Ukrainian government’s noteworthy tendencies:
Shortly after the Maidan uprising of 2013 to 2014 brought in a new government, Ukraine began whitewashing Nazi collaborators on a statewide level. In 2015, Kyiv passed legislation declaring two WWII-era paramilitaries—the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA)—heroes and freedom fighters, and threatening legal action against anyone denying their status. The OUN was allied with the Nazis and participated in the Holocaust; the UPA murdered thousands of Jews and 70,000–100,000 Poles on their own accord.
Every January 1, Kyiv hosts a torchlight march in which thousands honor Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, who headed an OUN faction; in 2017, chants of “Jews Out!” rang out during the march. Such processions (often redolent with antisemitism) are a staple in Ukraine….
Ukraine’s total number of monuments to Third Reich collaborators who served in auxiliary police battalions and other units responsible for the Holocaust number in the several hundred. The whitewashing also extends to official book bans and citywide veneration of collaborators.
The typical reaction to this in the West is that Ukraine can’t be celebrating Nazi collaborators because it elected [Volodymyr] Zelensky, a Jewish president. Zelensky, however, has alternated between appeasing and ignoring the whitewashing: In 2018, he stated, “To some Ukrainians, [Nazi collaborator] Bandera is a hero, and that’s cool!”
Furthermore, according to a George Washington University study, members of the far-right group Centuria are in the Ukrainian military, and Centuria’s social media accounts show these soldiers giving Nazi salutes, encouraging white nationalism and praising members of Nazi SS units (Ottawa Citizen, 10/19/21). Centuria leaders have ties to the Azov movement, which “has attacked anti-fascist demonstrations, city council meetings, media outlets, art exhibitions, foreign students, the LGBTQ2S+ community and Roma people”: the Azov movement’s militia has been incorporated in the Ukrainian National Guard (CTV News, 10/20/21). Azov, the UN has documented, has carried out torture and rape.
Absent information
The fact that that Ukraine’s government and armed forces include a Nazi-sympathizing current surely would have an impact on US public opinion—if the public knew about it. However, this information has been entirely absent in recent editions of the New York Times and Washington Post.
From December 6, 2021, to January 6, 2022, the Times published 228 articles that refer to Ukraine, nine of which contain some variation on the word “Nazi.” Zero percent of these note Ukrainian government apologia for Nazis or the presence of pro-Nazi elements in Ukraine’s armed forces. One report (12/21/21) said:
On Russian state television, the narrative of a Ukraine controlled by neo-Nazis and used as a staging ground for Western aggression has been a common trope since the pro-Western revolution in Kyiv in 2014.
Nothing in the article indicates that while “controlled” may be a stretch, the Ukrainian government officially honors Nazi collaborators. That doesn’t mean Russia has the right attack Ukraine, but US media should inform Americans about whom their tax dollars are arming.
In the same period, the Post ran 201 pieces that mention the word “Ukraine.” Of these, six mention the word “Nazi,” none of them to point out that the Ukrainian state has venerated Holocaust participants, or that there are Nazis in the Ukrainian military. Max Boot (1/5/22) and Robyn Dixon (12/11/21), in fact, dismissed this fact as mere Russian propaganda. In Boot’s earlier Ukraine piece (12/15/21), he acknowledged that the UPA collaborated with the Nazis and killed thousands of Polish people, but his article nevertheless suggested that the UPA offer a useful model for how Ukrainians could resist a Russian invasion, asserting that “all is not lost” in case of a Russian invasion, because “Ukrainian patriots could fight as guerrillas against Russian occupiers”:
They have done it before. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) was formed in 1942 to fight for that country’s independence. Initially, it cooperated with Nazi invaders but later fought against them. When the Red Army marched back into Ukraine in 1943, the UPA resisted. The guerrillas carried out thousands of attacks and inflicted thousands of casualties on Soviet forces while also massacring and ethnically cleansing the Polish population in western Ukraine. The UPA continued fighting until the 1950s, forcing Moscow to mobilize tens of thousands of troops and secret policemen to restore control.
“All is not lost,” for Boot, though the lives of thousands of Poles and Jews were, the latter of whom he didn’t bother to mention. Calling the perpetrators of such atrocities “Ukrainian patriots” is a grotesque euphemism that, first and foremost, spits on the victims, and also insults non-racist Ukrainians. After a two-paragraph interval, Boot wrote that
the Ukrainian government needs to start distributing weapons now and, with the help of US and other Western military advisers, training personnel to carry out guerrilla warfare. Volodymyr Zelensky’s government should even prepare supply depots, tunnels and bunkers in wooded areas, and in particular in the Carpathian Mountains, a UPA stronghold in the 1940s.
Evidently neither the UPA’s precedent of fascist massacres, nor the presence of similarly oriented groups in contemporary Ukraine’s armed forces and society, give Boot pause. He’d rather the US continue flooding the country with weapons; the consequences aren’t a concern of Boot’s.
Readers seeking riotous calls to violence in Eastern Europe should turn to the Times and the Post, but those who are interested in a thoroughgoing portrait will be disappointed.
Whitewashing the brown shirts
Um, YOU repeat a tired lie regarding Crimea. Russia didn’t “take” Crimea; Crimeans VOTED in an ELECTION that the CARTER CENTER oversaw and authorized as FAIR and FREE. Ukraine is a basket-case and many would rather be in/part of Russia rather than Ukraine. I don’t care about lines and borders, but if the people vote to align a certain way, I respect that right. You need to correct, and clearly and loudly your error; for IT is one of the key elements in this whole deception being played by the US.
I appreciate your article and agree with the thrust; but you fell victim to the very propaganda campaign that has pervaded our media
You said “Russia didn’t take Crimea” and Shupak apparently agrees with you, because nowhere in the article did he claim Russia took anything….here is what he said –
“Russia sent its armed forces into the Crimea, annexed the territory, and backed armed groups in eastern Ukraine.”
Maybe you equate annexation to *take*? Either way, what Shupak wrote is about as linguistically different from “Russia takes Crimea” as one can probably be while mentioning what happened.
Then you claimed –
“Crimeans VOTED in an ELECTION that the CARTER CENTER oversaw.” with no references, and I couldn’t find anything about that online.
Where did you hear or read this? Thanks.
I read the same thing , though I can’t remember the source—but it referred to Crimea voting to stay in Russia— which had always been part of Russia. And too, that the people of Crimea voted to remain with Russia with another point being that the location of Crimea was their open source to the sea. Why would Russia give that up?
Clinton was the president in 1997, and he seemed to be working more on his affairs of self, rater than affairs of state.
I think he was wondering about the reference to the Carter Center overseeing the Crimean annexation referendum. It’s common knowledge that a vote was held, but I don’t think any American observers were present.
Well, the Crimeans weren’t bound to accept the unelected Coup Government that we in the US with the help of the Ukrainian far-right installed in Kyiv in 2014.
Why? Because the folks in Crimea, just like the folks in the Donbas, had overwhelmingly voted for the incumbent that we overthrew. They thus had a right to separatism, and they overwhelmingly voted to align with Russia rather than with the rather dysfunctional state of Ukraine.
I’m for peace and completely disagree with all of the militaristic nut flexing going on with NATO right on the Russian border. NATO needs to step off….and all western nations need to reopen their diplomatic channels in the region.
Can you imagine if the same thing were happening by Russian and Chinese backed military forces in the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, or on the Mexican border? You know the U.S. Military Industrial Complex wouldn’t let that happen and would be melting down.
Russia has already started exploring the placement of missiles in Cuba and a military presence in Venezuela.
Saber-rattling aside, Putin lacks the ability to create “Thirteen Days in October II.”
Yeah, I saw Super Fly in a snazzy Cuban uniform in Columbus Circle and Joe Stalin was down Zuccotti Park, yet again, setting up hypersonic cigarillos, dressed like Woody Allen? Let’s all give Ol’ Joe a chance, distracting suburban Republican nazis with war in Russia, China and Iran, so we can get Trump out of the White House and get back to NORMAL?
Thank you Gregory Shupak. You are hands down my favorite contributor to FAIR. You bring astute media criticism that is also informative of the situation on the ground.
Thank you for the excellent article, Mr. Shupak. The belligerent actions of the US and NATO have pushed the Russian/Ukrainian situation almost to a flash-point. The last thing the world needs is a war (which would very possibly go nuclear) between the US and Russia. The pathetic excuse for fact-based journalism from the Times and Post is a travesty.
Quoting Max boot leads to chaos, like Victoria F***the EU Nuland!
Check it out- Obama in 2013 planned to take over Sebastopol (in Crimea) as a US base, and that was before the overthrow of the 2014 election in Ukraine and installation of Poroschenko and his anti-Russian team. (see other FAIR articles on this!) Russia wants Ukraine to be neutral, and whatever happens it remains next door to Russia!!! why would Russia want to destroy it and have to rehabilitate it and deal with the hatred of many Ukrainians in the western part? The Minsk agreement from 2015 is waiting for Kiev to follow through (ceasefire, talks with Donbass, new constitution) but Kiev refuses and the Russians are not part of it!!! Who wants war???NOT Russia (or even Ukraine if the people were asked!)
The U.S. NEVER asks those most at risk what they think before initiating aggression.
And fracking oilgarchs elsewhere wouldn’t pay Biden or Kerry’s kids to launder billions for Albright Stonebridge Group while WaPo used Prop’RNot & Bell¿ngcat, The Atlantic Council to hide installing a pretty up front Nazi regime and sell RussiaRussiaRussia as excuse for Debbie Robbie & John installing Trump? But that’s all FAKE news! Russian subs & icebreaker tankers simply cross the arctic now, anyway?
Great information. Thank you.
I’m not really sure Russia is really against Nazism these days either though
OK, Mr. Weasel Words. What, exactly, is your proof that “Russia” (as in the whole country or even major elements of its government and military) is pro-Nazi?
The president has a secret police that kills people with impunity. How about that for evidence.
What is it that you believe “operators” and drones do on behalf of Biden?
Say what you will about drone strikes but 1) there’s a who/what/where to the deaths. 2) Biden has not used them as much as Obama. He doesn’t really even seem like he wants to be the president.
I didn’t vote for him, but im not really seeing an autocracy here. Just standard, miserable militarism
Obama killed an innocent American citizen from Colorado in a drone.
Biden killed 10 people (all innocent) in a drone strike last year in Kabul.
Why do you choose to minimize the extrajudicial violence of U.S. presidents (of BOTH major parties) which violates international law?
*with
Agreed. Putin is looking more fascist everyday. He’s far more conservative socially than most western conservatives. His economic policies embrace nepotistic capitalism. Russia is hardly a progressive poster child… Putin makes Trump look liberal and progressive.
Maybe you’ve forgotten Leningrad (1941-1944), but Russians DEFINITELY have not!
Having grown up proud of my father’s participation in the US Army Air-force to defeat the Nazis, I am grossly offended by the pro-Nazi stances of the Washington Post and New York Times.
It is hardly surprising that the US corporate media is so strongly slanted towards Ukraine and against Russia, given the opportunity to plow even more US taxpayer dollars into the bloated Military/Industrial Complex in this country and away from critical domestic needs that might actually help all Americans to live better lives here. Moreover, how would the county and our leaders react to military weapons placed on our borders? There are no winners in a war that can so easily be avoided by compromise. The expansion of NATO should not come at the obvious cost of Russia’s security.
100 percent agree with the motive. The US has zero interests in Ukraine. Neoliberal and Neocon foreign policy created this mess. Russia’s reaction is logical. The US has a Monroe Doctrine. Why can’t Russia have the same thing?
Much appreciated essay. As one who has followed this situation I am discouraged at the rank lies perpetuated by our media and politicos who seem to know squat about Ukraine. It is so frustrating, so yes, thanks again.
one word: Holodomor. Get a grip.
You can cherry pick history all you want. Facts are that the Soviet Union, which was Russia, committed genocide in Eastern Ukraine. As a result, Ukrainians treated invading Germans as liberators and some even joined them.
It says everything you need to know when a nation has to pick between the lesser evil of two unspeakable evils.
I do not defend nationalists anywhere. In Poland, in Ukraine, in Russia, or anywhere else. This is why EU was created, to suppress nationalism. Today Ukraine is a nation of 42 million people who deserve to be left alone, to govern themselves without being bombed and shot at by Russian soldiers. Russia has evolved into an openly fascist country, treating everyone outside of their borders as lesser people who can be violated at will. “Historical politics” in Ukraine, though no doubt present, has nothing to do with anything here. Accusing Ukraine of somehow being a fascist country because people there may be ambivalent about some of their past is just Russian propaganda.
Yes, I am well aware of the Nazis in Ukraine. Ukraine’s World War 2 record is abysmal. And Neo Fascists appeared to be a problem with the American backed coup in 2014 (backed with some money and intelligence – as Putting backed Trump).
However, today the landscape has shifted dramatically. The “united far-right front obtained only a miserable 2.15 per cent of the vote and thus failed to secure a single seat in the Ukrainian parliament”. Ukraine elected a Jewish President and Jewish Prime Minister. And even Azov now has Jewish members according to the Times of Israel. As one states “I know it’s hard for Jews abroad to understand, but these actions were intended as anti-Russian, not anti-Jewish,” Petukov said. “And when it comes to those supporting Ukrainian sovereignty and culture, this is really a tiny element.” Ukraine which voted overwhelmingly (around 92%) to become independent from Russia in the early 90’s now appear to have become even more resolute.
Yes, neo Nazis are a problem in every nation these days including the USA and Russia which has a large catchment of neo Nazis, including RNU who have been fighting in the Donbas with Putin’s blessing. Not to mention that Putin has been running his country like a neo-fascist (ultranationalism, militarism, a de facto police state and a healthy contempt for democracy).
I agree that the hawkish talk of no-fly zones is insanity and that perhaps there could be more leeway given by the USA and NATO to Russia. However, I can understand how those former Soviet republics and client states might be frightened by Russia…now more than ever, and desire protection. Don’t you?
I have been getting very tire of some people on the “left” supporting Putin’s lie of de nazifying Ukraine. It is not useful and it is a lie. I have been a supporter of FAIR for at least 30 years. But you have gone too far on this one. I’m done.
https://www.scribd.com/document/563193486/Truth-About-Ukrain-Crimes-in-the-Donbass#download&from_embed
https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-reverses-ban-praise-ukraine-far-right-forces-2022-2?op=1
https://archive.org/details/presentation-ukrainian-war-crimes/mode/2up
French Reporter, living in Eastern Ukraine:
https://youtu.be/OXpBtWDdHSU
Ukraine on Fire Documentary:
https://youtu.be/LHH10jIRJmQ
https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/eur500402014en.pdf
Just a few of the links I saved in my own personal research. I don’t take sides of any government, but I am concerned for all people involved, especially those whom are being afflicted by unjust harm. It definitely seems from the evidence I have seen that there is Ukrainian government support for some far right extremists “Neo-Nazi” battalions and last time I checked I thought our government was supposed to be against those types. Also, in researching some of these battalions I saw that the AZOV Battalion has been active in recruiting in many countries, including the USA, Russia, & Germany. I saw an article about the Russians banning certain radio stations who were supporting such ideologies in their country. I am not an expert in any of this, just a concerned citizen, but I do see a lot of double standards and from the many articles I have read and this document: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB10014.html
it definitely seems like the USA & NATO are “poking the bear” to provoke, weaken, & control it. After all, our governments new agenda (along with Europe, NATO allies, UN, WHO, etc.) is the NWO.
Here’s the problem. 48 Burned alive in Odessa on May 2, 2014. Little covered by our media, because the victims were separatists and the perpetrators the ultra-nationalists who exert force and violence, which are the coins of the Ukrainian realm.
Now, there was no investigation of what were very public murders. No arrests were made. Much of the incident is on film. So, this shows that Ukraine has no effective criminal justice system, as its police and its judges are intimidated by the paramilitaries (Right Sektor and Azov) that carried out this massacre in Odessa. None of the victims was a combatant.
Unfortunately, the same holds true of the multiple and uninvestigated death during the 2014 Maidan. According to EU Catherine Ashton and the Estonian Prime Minister, such an investigation of the Maidan would implicate the Azov Battalions in most of the deaths.