These things are not so clear as might seem to be when caricatures are drawn from afar: ‘who lost Ukraine?’ even as Russia undoubtedly invaded Ukraine.
"Ukraine" is a word implying a geographical entity of political agreement, more or less, near enough for government work, if not popular assent.
Rumour has it that lots of people in the east of Ukraine are more like the Scots and the Irish = not totally in agreement with being ruled harshly by English toffs from Eton, who don't share the Catholicism of Ireland or the Whisky and haggis ways of Edinburgh and Glasgow. There was a divide between Scots and Pommy Bastards going back to Hadrian's Wall. The Irish are something to do with Vikings and Papal perfection rather than English teutonic tendencies.
The Crimeans and Donetsk and Luhansk people are not in psychic harmony with the Azovs and Zelenskys of Kiev. The Zelensky type seem to be a bit more zionist/Klaus Schwab globohomo. The Azov insignia and actions are derived from those who did Barbarossa which was nasty for the Russians. It's hardly surprising that ne'er the twain shall meet. Not while they spend time blathering on about the past instead of the future, as so many do.
So while there was in some respects an identity called "Ukraine", just as there was an identity called Great Britain, the word doesn't represent a definite permanent entity. More of an ephemeral collage of temporary political power which changed in Ukraine greatly when the evil Nuland, Peace Prize Obama, DementiaJoe10%, Hunter, Lindsay Graham, John McCain and co-conspirators bought and paid for a coup in Kiev to start the ball rolling.
Sometimes Americans get all foamy at the mouth when Russia Russia Russia is imagined to have given Donald Trump the victory over Hideous Harpie Harridan Hillary = "They interfered in our election" when in fact nothing happened other that Hillary paid for Russian fake dossier with criminal Fisa approval to trump Trump.
When Americans not only interfere in Kiev elections, but arrange a coup, and supply weaponry and money, to be recycled in part back to Bidens [Hunter and the Big Guy] along with many others, in exchange for dictating the rules of Ukraine including military action and things like the lease of Sevastopol to Russia and where USA rockets should be placed ready to nuke Moscow, it's not really surprising that the definition of "Ukraine" becomes subject to questions of who invaded what and interfered in where and who owns which?
Given the USA success in Kiev, with the intention to attack Russia further, it's hardly surprising that Russia and Russians in the east and Crimea became very unsettled and decided to defend themselves against Azov and Kievan onslaught loaded up with USA weaponry and financial backing.
Right now there are similar disputes over who owns Hong Kong and Taiwan, and lots of little islands in the sea. I say the local yokels own Hong Kong and Taiwan, Donetsk, Luhansk, Crimea, Ireland, Scotland, England, Barbados. But thugs in Kiev and Beijing lay claim to them against the will of the locals who created the value that the thugs wish to acquire by theft.
Sometimes it's not quite that simple, but in these cases it is.
Sure, there was hideous history in Ukraine, Crimea [which was Greek, Roman, Turk, Mongol, Tartar and what have you] but we're dealing with how things are. Recreating the past is not possible. Everyone from then is long dead.
Who invaded Ukraine? Nuland, Graham, McCain and a lot more besides were right there in Kiev, creating coup, supplying arms, training, loot, satellite information, GPS coordinates, instructions. Looks like USA invasion before Russian agreement to defend autonomous eastern countries. Russia was invited in by the independent countries who were self-defending under UN rules, with Russian support, also under UN rules. USA doesn't even bother with rules such as the USA invasion of Syria.
Tradable Citizenship and reconstituted UN is the way to go.
Meanwhile, it's uncertain that China particularly wants peace in Ukraine. While the war continues, Russia becomes more and more dependent on China. So China doesn't necessarily want Russia to win and the war to stop. Maybe some sanctions by China on Russia might kill two birds with one stone = weaken Russia further, stopping it from winning, making it beg China for support and agreeing to swap Siberia for agreeing to buy methane from Russia.
While the war in Ukraine continues, China could keep buying more and more and more of Siberia until it owns all the way to the Urals and what the heck, why not to the border of Hungary and Norway?
Americans are certainly short-sighted. Boris and Euroserfs will soon be reporting to Saudi Arabia's Koran quoters. China is back!
Americans should immediately call a truce, say sorry to Vlad and agree to put Russia in NATO and start shipping resources west instead of east. Exxon could start oil and gas exploration and production, mining and whatnot in Siberia. Heck, even sell some to China.
Mqurice |
