Ukraine risks becoming another Syria, and guess who that benefits?
By: Rachel Marsden
PARIS — Here we go again. Yet another round of ramped-up rhetoric about how
Russia is supposedly on the verge of invading Ukraine. Does it strike anyone
else as just a bit too convenient an argument for flooding the area along the
Russia-Ukraine border with weapons and troops?
Does Russia want some sense of control over what’s going on in Ukraine? Well,
British foreign secretary, Liz Truss, claims to “have information that indicates
the Russian government is looking to install a pro-Russian leader in Kyiv as it
considers whether to invade and occupy Ukraine.” She lists former Ukrainian
officials with whom “Russian intelligence services maintain links.”
The insinuation is that Moscow is planning to overthrow the actual president and
install one of these guys — to which one of the candidates, Yevhen Murayev,
replied by pointing out that, in reality, he’s under Russian sanctions — a fact
that undermines London’s claims of him being a future Kremlin puppet. “All I can
think is that the British Foreign Office was given misinformation by some
elements in Ukraine, and they repeated it without proper checking,” Murayev told
The Independent. “I also think that myself and some others are getting caught up
in the geopolitical confrontation going on between the US, UK, NATO and Russia.
I think we are getting caught in the middle.”
While the propaganda is being exaggerated, it isn’t a stretch to imagine that
Russia would be concerned about a hostile neighbor with an open-door and
open-fridge policy for Washington: the world’s most ardent practitioners of
regime change. Moscow is seeking national security guarantees directly from the
U.S., in much the same way that the U.S. under President Trump, for example,
sought the same from neighboring Mexico under threat of crippling tariffs of up
to 25 percent if it didn’t prevent undocumented migrants from attempting to
cross into the U.S.
Moscow’s concerns are hardly unfounded, at least going back to the
western-backed attempt to overthrow the Kyiv government in the winter of 2013
after then-president Viktor Yanukovych stalled on signing an association
agreement with the European Union. That unrest left an opening for Moscow to
swoop into neighboring Crimea (home to Russia’s long-standing leased Black Sea
Port of Sevastopol) under the then-trendy United Nations’ Responsibility to
Protect principle, evoked just two years earlier by NATO member states in Libya
and ultimately used to overthrow leader Muammar Gaddafi.
So now, eight years later, the same western players are overtly moseying right
up to the Russian border and bringing weapons and proxies with them. The
CIA-backed Azov Battalion, whose covert training under the supervision of the
Agency’s Ground Branch reportedly began as soon as the Ukraine unrest ended in
2014, is frequently described as a “Neo-Nazi Ukrainian National Guard unit.” Now
integrated into the Ukrainian military, it represents the kind of proxies that
Washington has historically embraced, going back to the jihadists who fought the
Soviet Union in Afghanistan during the Cold War, or more recently, the “Syrian
rebels” backed by Pentagon and CIA funds to the tune of a billion dollars in a
failed effort to oust President Bachar al-Assad.
Washington and its allies are well aware the closer they can get troops and
weapons to the Russian border, with Moscow at a distance of just 490km (about
304 miles) away, the more low-intensity proxy conflicts or covert action it can
dial up or down against Moscow – all under the guise of “protecting” the locals,
despite subjecting them to endless war and instability.
It’s such a well-worn blueprint. Washington has just left Afghanistan in tatters
after two decades of selling the locals a pipe dream while stoking endless
conflict. And Syria is just now getting back on its feet after years of
Washington-backed regime change efforts, which were ultimately stymied by
Moscow.
Moscow’s request for guarantees that NATO troops and hardware won’t be placed
against its border is being countered by the massively peddled narrative that
Moscow could invade at any time. Why? Because it has amassed troops inside its
own country. OK, and why would that be? Because of legitimate concerns about the
proximity of foreign military buildup against its own border, backed by
countries outside of the region known for employing regime-change tactics to get
their way.
As Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin play a game of chicken against a backdrop of
ongoing diplomacy, spare a thought for the poor people of Ukraine, whose country
risks becoming the next Syria or Libya if this all pops off. Three guesses whom
that would benefit most (hint: not Russia).
COPYRIGHT 2022 RACHEL MARSDEN