Document:The Anglo-American Axis: Losing Ukraine, Losing Europe

A Russian perspective on dealing with the Anglo-American globalisation thrust in general and the unrest in Ukraine in particular

 article  by Umberto Pascali dated 2013/12/13

---

Subjects: The Great Game, Ukraine 2013-14 unrest, Anglo-America hegemony
Source: Global Research (Link)


Wikispooks Comment

---

Interesting perspective on Russian strategy and tactics in its dealings with the Anglo-American axis in general and the 2013 contortions involving Ukrainian geo-political alignment in particular. It provides a very plausible explanation for Anglo-US apoplexy over the stalled Ukraine/EU negotiations.

Author's Note

---

What is it that really “scared the hell” out of the Anglo-Americans?

Could Ukraine become an area of cooperation between Russia and Europe? Could European countries break free?

Concerning Ukraine, it now appears that the fury shown by the Anglo-Americans (that seems really too excessive and reckless even considering recent standards) is due not simply to the danger of losing Ukraine, but to the danger of losing Europe.

This issue was brought to the forefront in a speech given by the Russian president Vladimir Putin in the Armenian capital Yerevan on 2 December 2013:

“The events in Ukraine, they remind me less of a revolution than of a pogrom. And strange as it is, this all has little to do with Ukraine-EU relations… As I already said, everything that is happening is not directly related to cooperation between Ukraine and the European Union…”

★ Start a Discussion about this document

---

The Anglo-American Axis: Losing Ukraine, Losing Europe

Trilateral Agreement

I have the impression that Putin is not just aiming at “taking back” Ukraine from the West. Actually he intends to use the Ukraine issue in a very subtle way to establish a trilateral agreement — EU (or at least part of it), Ukraine, Russia.

Russian spokesmen and a number of Russian controlled media have hinted repeatedly to this solution. A discussion on this very issue has taken place and has led to an internal debate among EU countries (especially, don’t be surprised, Germany, whose relation is the biggest prize for Russia).

Maybe some preliminary accords were “pre-discussed” with Europeans leaders now eager to get a larger margin of sovereign autonomy. This scared the hell out of Washington and London despite the many signs of thawing between Moscow and the West. Or better it has scared the hell out of a certain still very strong faction within the Anglo-american establishment. Hence a series of pressures have been applied to European countries, especially Germany. Germany has been asked to give a “proof of love.”

For the Anglo-Americans, namely the US and Britain, the EU must be deprived of any independent ability to move in the direction of an Eurasian strategy.

The scheme invoked by Donald Rumsfeld (use “New” Europe against “Old” Europe, i.e. against Europe) still is the party line. Europe must be weakened — suffocated by the embrace of Wall Street and the City of London, pushed into an escalating masochistic looting of its own economy and population, rocked by scandals to deprive it of any effective leadership, and constantly involved in aggressive military adventures — but above all, any sign –even the mildest – of cooperation with Russia must be dissuaded in the most energetic way. That is a line that must never be crossed. So, with the ongoing Ukrainian crisis we see at what level of open interference and blackmail the Anglo-American representatives can reach in order to impose to Europe “what is good for them”.

In fact, Germany has everything to gain from a relation with [Ukraine and Russia. Not so the EU bureaucracy that is controlled totally (not partially) by the big banks. See for example, Jose Manuel Barroso who is ending his mandate in the Spring.

Russia has even more to gain from a relation with Europe that is not totally subjected to the diktats of Brussels/bankers/NATO/ Supranational Powers. It would open the door to a relation free of NATO, IMF etc; a relation more concentrated on the direct national interests of the various countries.

If you look carefully, you will see that Putin has repeatedly been making these advances of solving the Ukrainian problems by direct, non-mediated relations with Germany and certain European countries. Ukraine could become a sort of common zone when a new kind of sovereign cooperation could be experimented. Not surprising, the reaction is ferocious.

But Putin seems to think he can “win the game”:

Either the opposition cannot always control what happens there, or it’s just a certain political screen for extremist activities. We believe that the situation will nevertheless become more normal, and that in the end the Ukrainian leadership, and Ukrainian people themselves, will determine their next steps for the near future and the long-term.
...
Regarding the events in Ukraine, they remind me less of a revolution than of a pogrom. And strange as it is, this all has little to do with Ukraine-EU relations. Because if you pay attention, no one is delving into these draft agreements, no one is looking at anything or listening to anything.
...
People say that the dream of the Ukrainian people has been stolen. But if you look at the contents of these agreements, then while it is good to dream, many will simply not live to see their dream be realised, never experence it, because the conditions are very harsh.
...
In my opinion, as I already said, everything that is happening is not directly related to cooperation between Ukraine and the European Union. This is an internal political process, the opposition’s attempt to destabilise the current and – I want to emphasise – legitimate government authority. And more than that, everything that is happening now is not a revolution, but a well-organised protest. And in my view, these events were not prepared for today, but for the presidential election campaign of spring 2015. What’s happening now is just a little false start due to certain circumstances, but is also preparations for the presidential election. The fact that these are preparations is obvious for all objective observers, judging from what we see on television, how well-organised and trained militant groups actually operate. That’s my assessment.
...
Either the opposition cannot always control what happens there, or it’s just a certain political screen for extremist activities. We believe that the situation will nevertheless become more normal, and that in the end the Ukrainian leadership, and Ukrainian people themselves, will determine their next steps for the near future and the long-term. Let me repeat once again, and I want to stress this: whatever choice the Ukrainian people make, we will respect it.