insane in the ukraine

enough

most of history, even near history, is fiction, fiction written by winners, fiction written by those who control media and publishing and who render proclamation from pulpits, bully or otherwise.

while a certain amount of this is inevitable owing to subjective biases and incomplete knowledge, much is deliberate, designed and cultivated to push agenda and to accumulate and to retain power:

for he who controls the present controls the past and he who controls the past controls the future.

this hard, pitiless dictum is why we wrestle so to be the ones telling “the story of what happened” and why so much of that story is lies.

“the past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth.”

it’s all made up history to create made up pretext to push to a future suited to some agenda or other and “the ukraine” seems a particularly bad example of this about which an extraordinary number of people seem to have very strong opinions based on what could charitably be described as “very few facts and even less perspective” and i find it’s often useful to explore how the world looks from multiple sides when trying to predict what actors (or comedians) are going to do.

i have been deeply surprised at the ignorance of history both recent and more, well, historical and at the peril of playing the pedantic pussycat, perhaps some lessons are in order because folks like congresscritter mike seem dangerously bereft of context and general sense and this seems as good a place to start as any.

the current instantiation of the ukraine is a very new country. it was a part of rus, then the polish lithuanian empire then was mostly absorbed by the russian empire in the 18th century. from 1917 to 1991, it was a part of the soviet union and was governed from moscow.

anyone who can read a map can see why the soviets/russia viewed this territory as integral to their own borders and safety for not only is it rich farmland and rich in minerals, but (at least eastern ukraine down through the crimea) stabs into russia and controls both the black and azov seas.

if you draw a line just slightly east of kiev and odessa, this is plain to see and the ukranian border is a scant 500 miles from moscow, a veritable stone’s throw by russian standards and a march many from napoleon to hitler have tried mostly losing to “distance and russian winter” (but that was back when belarus and ukraine were russia). russia has long relied upon “defense in depth” and 1000 mile marches with little cover as a cornerstone of defensive posture.

this is part of what made stalin so keen to grab eastern europe post WW2 pushing all the way to austria and into germany. the ruskies wanted the front lines drawn far, far away in someone else’s lands and that is where they put their walls and NATO put their tanks and missiles.

then came the heady days of perestroika, the wall fell, and change was in the air. the soviet union collapsed, eastern europe left its mandated orbit, the eastern bloc was done, and lots of new nations formed or reformed.

russia had very little power at this time.

in 1991, hastened by the failed coup in moscow, the ukrainians held a referendum, 92% voted for independence, and and on december 26th, the USSR officially dissolved and ukriane was internationally recognized.

so let’s keep that in mind. this country is only 34 years old.

like many newly minted states, ukraine had a fair few problems, this one more than most. it was an insanely corrupt place initially run by former communist strongmen turned nationalists and finally given free hands to steal and plunder. it also had some severe ethnic divisions (more on this later).

under president kravchuk (1991–1994), hyperinflation peaked at 10,155% in 1993, devastating the economy and creating fertile ground for corruption. they played the same scuzzy privatization games as elsewhere and rapidly built a hyper rich, hyper corrupt, hyper violent oligarchy. kuchma made this far worse ruling for the decade up to 2005. prime minister lazarenko fled with $100’s of millions. the whole place was a thieves forest and went full, unapologetic kleptocracy under yanu. ukraine consistently ranked among the top few most corrupt countries on earth.

this mostly suited russia who did not seem to care who stole what from whom, had their own propensity to oligarch, and seemly did not begrudge others their own so long as they remained a non-threatening buffer zone.

when yanu fell in 2014, things changed and the geopolitical calculus shifted.

yanu fell to what many (especially russia) have called a coup. i think they are basically correct. the so called “revolution of diginity” has all the greasy fingerprints of a CIA op with asst sec state victoria nuland and CIA director brennan pulling strings and “never met a bad neocon idea we didn’t like” john mcain, and chris murphy jumping in on site to say “we’re with you” to the “protesters” that sure looked a lot like the garden variety USAID funhouse gang. they brought in then VP biden to “glue it” per a famously intercepted and leaked call.

we did it. because we meddle. like “blow up the nordstream to meddle” kind of meddling. it’s the US IC signature move and all slime was there. 2014 was the pivot. the US helped overthrow the government and put in “yats” as PM because he was “the guy.” speaking of “guys” 2014 is also when young crack enthusiast hunter biden joined the burisima board.

it’s also when russia invaded crimea. the US knew or should have known they were going to provoke this. sevastopol is a major port, home to russia’s black sea fleet and pivotal to security and shipping. the black sea is not a place russia wants NATO or NATO puppets. crimea was also 58% russian by ethnicity and more than a few there were glad to see them after 25 years of ukrainian mess. this was a neighborhood of frying pans and fires.

looked at from russia’s perspective, this coup was extremely aggressive on the part of the US. this would be like russia staging a coup in a newly independent louisiana, jutting into the american flank and controlling key shipping lanes.

they had already seen 1500 miles of defense in depth gone in eastern europe and the baltics joining NATO. one can see how they felt pressed.

then came the biden presidency, blinken, and a whole host of badly calibrated adventurists in the white house.

adding ukraine to NATO was an obvious, known, and knowable red line that half the experts in the US state department and even president puddinhead himself knew to be an intolerable provocation.

it’s honestly still not clear to me what they were trying to do. putin made it VERY clear that ukraine joining NATO was a hard red line, a line not to be even approached, much less crossed. yet the US was suddenly making it a priority. why? it made no sense. what US interest would be served by setting off a flashpoint like that? what security or economic goals were served?

unless we were trying to start a war, we did not need it.

a truly cynical cat might posit something like this:

but i suspect it may have just been pig ignorance and arrogance at the US state department et al, thinking they were making a power move or that “luring russia into such a war would degrade them and weaken them economically.”

keep in mind a lot of the cheney clan neocons were involved and that kind of warmongering and profiteering is just their bag.

it’s certainly taken a toll on russia’s military, but the rest has been price supports. even post the US blowing up nordstream (and yeah, we did it guys. it’s not exactly subtle) they have just been using shipping cut outs to mark their gas way up and sell to europe who keeps shutting off nuclear reactors and doubling the price of energy until whole industries collapse. they have been raking in money and tightening ties with china.

we like to call them the bad guy (and have a long history and some great 80’s movies) but the simple fact, though many won’t want to hear it, is that the US has been the predominant provocateur here. we have been twisting the bear’s tail and daring it to do something. and it did.

NATO was created to threaten and contain russia. this would have been like warsaw pact troops in new orleans.

imagine the US reaction to that. (certain events in cuba come to mind)

you stage a coup in a state poking into my heartland then seek to militarize it into your “anti-me” alliance, i’d get aggressive too, especially if part of your play was “gato is too weak or scared to stop it.” then i have to.

we backed russia into this and pushed them past plausible endurance.

so everyone got set off.

so we get two years of grinding groundwar, piles of aid, who knows how much stolen money, new chateaus in france for zelensky and his droogs (nazis not excepted), misappropriated weapons sold wholesale to mexican drug cartels, and who knows what dirty money being kicked back to whom. everything about funneling a half a trillion unaccountable dollars into the most corrupt crime state on earth stinks. no one sane does this and they certainly don’t do it by waging endless propaganda wars on their own citizens to jingle up some jingo fever.

gatopal™ carson nails it here: this is straight orwell.

and it’s getting seriously ugly because people are seriously fooled and have no idea that their “war dwarf” good guy is actually a criminal clown in a bad sweater and nothing brings out the “i bought my kid’s che gueverra t-shirt at baby gap” crowd like alleged freedom fighters whose reality is something vicious and corrupt.

every. single. time.

zero discernment.

those who never have to fight shrill for those who do to be cast yet again into pointless meatgrinders in service of nation scale theft and corruption. the amounts of money stolen in this “wag the dog” war is likely somewhere around the GDP of greece. (yes, really) the whole thing seems like a made for TV event.

the question of “was this a war for an unpopular president to try to rally support?” looms large.

“10% of gross for the big guy”

the EU/EC leadership cadre is all in as well. they seem to love war. good for business and fine for them. ursula von doom is all hot and bothered to “rearm” ukraine but, of course, neither she nor any of her friends will be among the dying or war torn.

because war works like this.

jump to trump, the election that was not supposed to happen. trump is not in on the gag. he does not want this war. he’s not getting 10%. he just wants peace and for people to stop dying and to go worry about other stuff. this is not work he wants on his plate. he’d also like some shot at getting some of the money we “loaned” ukraine back in the same manner the EU plans to. so he’s been looking to cut a deal.

the simple fact is that the deal is obvious. the war cannot be won by ukraine. russia has the lines it wants and is willing to settle back down. many, possibly most of the people in the regions they hold are ethnically russian, a group the ukrainian government has been discriminating against strongly.

“fair” is not really relevant here. there’s a bad situation, a terribly human toll in an endless unresolvable meatgrinder, and a ukrainain government that won’t hold elections because “war” and wants to steal more money before they run.

this brings us to the question of “what the hell just happened in the oval office?”

here’s my take:

zelensky wants to steal more money and keep playing the hero. he’s been resisting the minerals deal trump wants to pay back the US.

the minerals deal makes sense. the US gets paid, the ukraine get a a major US interest in the country which draws a line for russia not to cross but that poses no offensive threat. it’s a sustainable situation, but war dwarf decided to blow it up.

this seems to be the third time he said he would do the deal only to back out 11th hour.

many are saying he met with a number of top democrats (including chris murphy who egged on the coup back in 2014) beforehand who advised him to do this.

whatever the case, he asked for media in the oval then tried to play chicken with trump on a deal.

and he got wrecked and could not salvage it.

he thought the media would give him leverage and that trump would need to back down under the hot lights.

that’s right up there with “let’s invade moscow in january” as bad ideas go. i suspect he’s just plain stupid, arrogant, misinformed, and thought the old paradigm still held.

clearly it did not.

so, what happens now? here’s my guess:

zelensky is cooked. it’s over for him. his “going away” is now a key plank in any deal. v-dog himself likely wants this. time to take the money and run while looking like the selfless hero who stepped down to save the nation instead of the fleeing bandit. big win for him. see you in croatia for yacht week.

whoever takes his seat signs the minerals deal, locks the border in place along lines very similar to those now prevailing, and everyone breathes a sigh of relief.

the EU is irrelevant and starmer and ursula can wail and gnash teeth, but it’s just theater kids doing theater kid things. nothing will come of it. without the US, none of them want any part of this for real. not when bullets start meeting meat.

it’s time to end this farce. there are wars that are justified, but from our side this is not one of them. never was. we picked a nasty fight for reasons not entirely clear but are almost certainly impure and ground the ukrainian men to kibble over it.

no answer will satisfy everyone, especially the bloodthirsty, so it’s time for “enough” and let’s reach a stable outcome and end this.

trading land for peace is a common end to war.

america needs to stop stirring up, rooting for, and funding foreign adventurism.

it’s ineffective and immoral.

perhaps this seems like a game to aristocrats, but no one else feels that way.

“war is a place where young people who do not know one another kill each other based on the decisions of old people who know and hate each other but do not kill each other.”

enough.