The ongoing conflict in Ukraine is a catastrophic situation with deep historical roots. The United States of America (USA) and its NATO allies have played a significant role in destabilizing Eastern Europe through their interventionist policies. This interference, driven by a desire to provoke Russia into a proxy war, has resulted in a series of conflicts, including the current crisis in Ukraine. Despite the defeat of Communism with the fall of the Soviet Union, the specter of the Cold War continues to haunt international relations. This article delves into the history of Western involvement in Ukraine, particularly the whitewashing of Ukrainian ultranationalism and the promotion of anti-Russian sentiments and argues that these actions have contributed to the current conflict. Furthermore, it highlights the lack of viable solutions from the West to resolve the crisis.
The Roots of Conflict: Ukrainian Ultranationalism
The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), founded in 1928, emerged as a nationalist revolutionary group striving for Ukrainian independence. Led by figures such as Evhen Konovalets and later Stepan Bandera, the OUN gained support in western Ukraine, particularly in Galicia. The OUN's ideology took a fascist turn, with Bandera admiring figures like Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, viewing an alliance with Nazi Germany as a means to advance their cause.
The OUN's brutal methods included acts of terrorism, such as the assassination of Poland's Minister of the Interior in 1934. They perpetrated murderous pogroms against Jews in 1941 and carried out genocide against the Poles of western Ukraine in 1943. Even the Germans were taken aback by the OUN's ruthlessness. However, driven by staunch anti-communism, the OUN decided to align with the USA and Britain in 1943.
Collaboration with Western Intelligence Agencies
The CIA and MI6, driven by their shared anti-Communist stance, partnered with the OUN. American military intelligence had already assisted Bandera in establishing an intelligence school as early as 1945. These schools trained OUN militants in espionage, explosives, code cracking, and courier systems. The CIA and MI6 found the OUN's anti-communist stance useful, despite their troubling views on Poles and Jews.
While the CIA grew weary of Bandera's unpredictable behavior, they continued to work closely with the OUN. MI6 also maintained its relationship with Bandera, training OUN militants in London. Bandera even taught recruits that Britain and the USA would soon attack the Soviet Union, aiding Ukraine in gaining independence. The Western intelligence agencies protected Bandera and the OUN from Soviet intelligence, as their arrest would undermine the cooperation of Ukrainian émigrés with Western intelligence agencies.
Rehabilitation of Ukrainian Nationalists
Similar to Operation Paperclip, which sought to rehabilitate Nazi war criminals, Western governments pursued the rehabilitation of genocidal Ukrainian nationalists. At the end of World War II, a large Ukrainian diaspora, including displaced persons (DPs) who had retreated with the Wehrmacht, resided in camps within British and American occupation zones. These DPs, comprised of radical right intelligentsia, staunchly opposed repatriation to the Soviet Union and lobbied the British and American governments for resettlement.
Their staunch anti-communist stance appealed to these governments. With the assistance of the Vatican and Western governments, including Canada and Britain, the screening processes for these DPs were circumvented. The British government proposed ending Nazi war crime trials in their zone of Germany, expediting the resettlement process. As a result, approximately 90% of the 250,000 Ukrainian DPs were allowed to emigrate abroad, with a significant majority settling in North America.
American Intelligence Operations and Collaboration with Ukrainian Militants
Following World War II, American intelligence agencies, including the CIA, engaged in covert operations within Ukrainian territory. Operation Belladonna aimed to gather information about Soviet actions, while Operation Lynx (later known as Trident) sought to gain better control over Ukrainian affairs. The National Security Act of 1947 led to the establishment of the CIA, which then began working directly with Ukrainian operatives behind the Iron Curtain. Soviet defectors, many from western Ukraine, were screened and utilized for future operations.
In 1948, the CIA opened an office of operations in Ukraine, led by Reinhard Gehlen, former head of Nazi Germany's Fremde Heere Ost. The remnants of the OUN in Galicia became CIA assets, trained to sow discord and promote anti-Communist sentiment. This partnership laid the foundation for ongoing CIA-sponsored operations against the Soviet Union and later Russia.
NATO Expansion and Broken Promises
The formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949 aimed to promote security in Europe and protect against the perceived Soviet threat. However, NATO's expansion eastward and broken promises played a significant role in heightening tensions. Initially consisting of 12 members, including the USA, Britain, and Canada, NATO expanded to include Greece and Turkey in 1952, West Germany in 1955, and Spain in 1982.
Following the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, negotiations took place between Mikhail Gorbachev and US Secretary of State James Baker regarding the reunification of Germany. Baker promised that NATO would not expand "one inch" eastward if Russia allowed Germany to reunify. However, this promise was broken, as subsequent US President George H.W. Bush did not adhere to it. The lack of inclusion of the "not one inch" language in the agreement left Gorbachev powerless. The subsequent enlargement of NATO disregarded Russia's concerns and created further tensions.
NATO's Expansion and the Balkans Precedent
NATO's strategy of intimidating and fragmenting states not aligned with the West can be observed in its approach to the Balkans. The United States, with the intent to undermine Yugoslavia's Communist government, facilitated the breakup of Yugoslavia and utilized NATO to exert hard power in the region. The NATO military interventions in Yugoslavia targeted Serbs and Serbia while enticing post-Yugoslav states into NATO.
In 1999, NATO's first significant expansion took place, welcoming Poland, Czechia, and Hungary into the alliance. Additionally, individualized "Membership Action Plans" were created for several countries in the region, fast-tracking their entry into NATO. These actions disregarded Russia's clear opposition to eastward expansion, signaling a disregard for its security concerns.
Title: Unveiling Western Interference: The Role of NATO and CIA in Ukraine's Political Landscape
In 2006, NATO openly expressed its intention to extend membership to Ukraine and Georgia, despite knowing that this crossed Russia's red line. However, a poll conducted in the same year revealed that only 25-30% of Ukrainian citizens were in favor of joining NATO. WikiLeaks documents exposed discussions between Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried and Poland's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Anna Fotyga, in which they discussed incentivizing Ukrainian government officials with a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP).
In 2007, Oleh Rybachuk, a prominent figure in the 'Orange Revolution,' collaborated with Ukrainian oligarchs to finance a pro-NATO information campaign. This campaign utilized pop stars and branding techniques to create a positive image of NATO in Ukraine. Contrary to being an entirely indigenous effort, NATO actively promoted itself and sought to alter public perceptions of the alliance. NATO financed media and social engagement initiatives, including pamphlets, TV debates, regional conferences, and the establishment of NATO centers at Ukrainian universities.
The Bucharest Summit in 2008 further escalated tensions. The declaration issued during the summit welcomed Ukraine's and Georgia's aspirations for NATO membership. Russia immediately recognized this expansion as a direct threat to its security and warned of serious consequences for pan-European security. The subsequent 2008 Georgian War can be seen as a direct consequence of the statements made at the Bucharest Summit. These events set the stage for the Euromaidan protests in 2013-2014, which eventually led to a coup on February 22, 2014.
CIA Involvement and Covert Operations
The CIA's involvement in Ukraine dates back to 1945, and it continued to exert influence throughout the 1990s. In collaboration with NATO, clandestine facilities were established to train and arm far-right militias in western Ukraine. Taking advantage of Ukraine's economic vulnerability after the collapse of the Soviet Union, both the CIA and NATO capitalized on the offer of aid to shape Ukrainian politics.
Far-right political parties, including Svoboda and Right Sector, had already gained seats in the Ukrainian Rada (parliament) and fostered anti-Soviet and anti-Russian sentiments. With the support of the CIA and NATO, these parties transformed into the Nazi militias known today as the Azov, Aidar, Kraken, and Tornado battalions. The International Peacekeeping and Security Center (IPSC), a NATO training center, opened in Lviv Oblast in 2007. It has been a popular destination for far-right individuals from Canada, the US, and the UK to conduct training sessions and exercises with Ukrainian far-right militants, including the Azov battalion.
The Orange Revolution: Western Manipulation of Ukrainian Politics
The Orange Revolution, which took place from November 2004 to January 2005, was portrayed as a legitimate response to a corrupt and fraudulent Ukrainian presidential election. However, closer examination reveals the extent of Western interference. Organizations such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and USAID had invested billions of dollars into training journalists, judges, and trade unionists to bolster Western-oriented civil society groups in Ukraine.
Similar to previous interventions in Serbia and Georgia, the West employed strategies to undermine Ukrainian elections and sow discord. The Centre for Non-violent Resistance, based in Belgrade, provided expertise and was hired to work in Ukraine. The 2004 Ukrainian presidential election resulted in a slim victory for Viktor Yanukovych, but Western-funded campaigns ignited protests that forced a recount. The figureheads of the Orange Revolution, Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko, were closely associated with Western-backed initiatives.
Viktor Yanukovych was elected as Ukraine's president in 2010 through an internationally recognized free and fair election. He campaigned on a promise to bring stability and address the challenges left by his predecessors. During his tenure, Yanukovych navigated a delicate balance between cooperation with NATO and the EU, which deepened, and maintaining friendly ties with Russia. However, his actions, such as granting official language protection to Russian and extending the Russian lease on Crimea's Black Sea Fleet base, raised concerns among Western governments.
As Yanukovych moved towards closer ties with Russia, Western governments urged him to seek International Monetary Fund (IMF) loans and pursue European Union membership. Moscow, on the other hand, offered Ukraine significant financial assistance in exchange for rejecting EU membership. Yanukovych accepted the more favorable deal offered by Russia, which sparked protests on Maidan Square, also known as Euromaidan.
Covert Operations and the Euromaidan Protests
During the period leading up to the Euromaidan protests, NATO continued to train snipers at the International Peacekeeping and Security Center (IPSC) in western Ukraine. The protests turned chaotic, resulting in approximately 100 deaths. Eyewitness testimonies and participant accounts alleged that the snipers involved in the violence were not only trained by NATO in Ukraine but also included mercenaries from NATO member states.
Evidence suggests that the Maidan killings were a false flag operation aimed at sowing chaos and dissent, with the ultimate goal of overthrowing the government. A study conducted by Dr. Ivan Katchanovski analyzed extensive evidence and concluded that far-right organizations, such as the Right Sector and Svoboda, along with oligarchic parties, were involved in orchestrating the violence. Furthermore, testimony from Georgian sniper Alexander Revazishvili indicated that snipers were deliberately positioned to provoke both protesters and Ukrainian riot police, creating a situation of mass confusion.
Western Involvement in the Coup
During the Maidan protests, the United States openly supported the demonstrators, with senators like John McCain and Chris Murphy expressing their solidarity. US government officials, including Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, were actively involved in developing plans to install a pro-Western government in Ukraine. A leaked phone call between Nuland and US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt revealed their intentions, where they discussed the individuals they believed should hold key positions in the new Ukrainian government.
Despite a brokered peace deal in February 2014, the far-right-dominated Maidan refused to recognize the agreement, leading to the storming of government buildings and President Yanukovych fleeing to Russia. This turn of events resulted in a coup d'état, with Arseniy Yatsenyuk, a pro-Western figure chosen by Nuland, assuming leadership until Petro Poroshenko was elected.
Unforeseen Consequences and Escalation
The violent overthrow of Yanukovych triggered a chain reaction that had unintended consequences for both the West and Russia. In Crimea, the Russian military took control, leading to its eventual annexation. In eastern Ukraine's Donbass region, protests emerged in response to the overthrow of Yanukovych, demanding autonomy and even incorporation into the Russian Federation. While Moscow was hesitant to fully support these demands, the sympathy within Russia's society threatened Putin's hold on power.
The Ukrainian Government's Response and Far-Right Elements
Following the Maidan protests, the Ukrainian government deployed the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) with heavy equipment, including tanks and artillery, in Donbass. Financial resources meant for the Ukrainian National Guard found their way into the hands of oligarchs, while privately financed right-wing militias became instrumental in the war efforts. Poroshenko's administration, supported by the USA, legitimized and incorporated the Azov battalion, a neo-Nazi militia, into the state apparatus.
The conflict in Donbass witnessed indiscriminate use of heavy artillery and airstrikes by the AFU, resulting in significant civilian casualties. The actions of the Ukrainian government and the atrocities committed by far-right militias were rarely investigated or condemned, perpetuating a climate of impunity. Despite these brutal tactics, the AFU struggled to break the resistance in Donbass, leading to the signing of the Minsk II agreements in February 2015 as an attempt to seek a pathway to end the civil war.
Economic Consequences and the Zelensky Administration
The Ukrainian economy suffered severe blows as a result of IMF-mandated reforms and austerity measures under Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Privatization, pension age increases, and gas subsidy cuts devastated industries, especially in eastern Ukraine, and alienated Russian speakers. The country experienced a significant contraction, with the economy being 6% smaller in 2021 compared to pre-Maidan levels.
In 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky, a former actor-comedian, was elected with promises to end the war, tackle corruption, and boost the economy. However, Zelensky faced challenges and accusations of being influenced by powerful internal and Western pressures. Despite his initial popularity, his presidency became marred by corruption scandals, oligarchic influences, and a failure to deliver on his promises. The economy relied on aid from NATO countries, and opposition voices were suppressed through media shutdowns and the outlawing of opposition parties.
Growing NATO Involvement and Proxy Dynamics
Contrary to the West's claims of taking NATO membership off the table, the alliance continued to train Ukrainian soldiers and provide increasingly sophisticated weaponry. Military exercises near Russia's borders and the escalation of military aid created a de facto membership situation for Ukraine. The West's involvement grew, while Ukraine's disinterest in implementing the Minsk Accords became evident.
Tensions escalated in 2021 when Russia amassed troops on the Ukrainian border, citing aggression against Russian speakers in Donbass. President Putin proposed a deal, urging Ukraine to refrain from seeking NATO membership and reduce the number of NATO troops within its borders. However, NATO rejected the deal on behalf of Ukraine, and Ukraine further strengthened its military presence in Donbass. In February 2022, Russia recognized the breakaway republics and commenced a Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine.
The Proxy Nature of the Conflict and International Involvement
The conflict in Ukraine transformed into a proxy war involving Russia and NATO nations, with Ukraine serving as the battleground. Substantial monetary and military aid poured into Ukraine, intensifying the conflict. The United States emerged as the primary contributor, followed by the European Union. Peace talks were hindered by the United States and Britain, driven by political motives and military interests.
Examining recent history, one may begin to understand that state of Ukraine was destined for failure from the start. Lacking the democratic and communal values that serve as a foundation for state-building, the extremist Ukrainian Nationalists were inherently incapable of creating the ethnically cleanse utopia they so desperately wanted. Their lack of foresight and abundance of hatred made them easy prey for intelligence agencies to manipulate and employ for their anti-communist crusade. In its more formative years, after the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine once again found itself in the stages of infancy lacking expertise in economics and domestic and foreign policy. Their ignorance and need to fill the void that was created by the collapse of the Republic, Ukraine’s gaze was easily guided westward to liberal institutions such as NATO and the European Union. A new state, without a sense of belonging, and an absence of cohesive national identity within its borders made for a hotbed of corruption and volatility. While in an economic freefall, Ukraine was advised to take out an abundance of loans, recommended by now-President Joe Biden who was fully aware of the incapability to get out from under them any time in the near future. Ukraine indebted to Western powers was left without the ability to choose its own destiny. Barely surviving the Orange Revolution, less than a decade later, the USA would manufacture the devastating Euromaidan which resulted in an outstandingly violent civil war. The constant empty promises of both EU and NATO membership, left Ukraine hanging in the lurch without guaranteed allies to fall back on. The United States was able to virtually hand pick three governments that would work against the best interest of the Ukrainian people to satisfy their American overlords. A Turkish proverb states, “When you elect a clown, he does not turn into a king, the palace turns into a circus.” Kiev has turned into a charade, a laughingstock, unable to provide for her people or to protect them from the neo-Nazis that roam freely within her borders. This continuous detrimental behavior has led Ukraine down a terrible path lacking any allies that have her best interests in mind or any positive plan to get her out of this mess. Through this conflict, it has become clear that the West, namely the USA, has successfully created a money laundering scheme as well as a proxy out of the once most prosperous member of the USSR without a single tear for her people. Senator Lindsay Graham revealed the intentions of the United States when he recently stated, “as long as we help with the weapons they need and economic support, they will fight to the last person” and it seems the West is perfectly fine with watching.