Robert Parry:When Is a Putsch a Putsch?

[eridani]

Robert Parry:When Is a Putsch a Putsch? (The US False Narrative about Ukraine Continues)

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/09-3

For instance, the New York Times on Sunday published a long and flattering profile of a Ukrainian man named Yuri Marchuk who was wounded in clashes around Kiev’s Maidan square in February. In the first half of the story, written by Alison Smale, we read about Marchuk’s courage in standing and fighting with his brave comrades.

Only in the latter half of the article do we get a hint of a darker side to the tale. We’re told that Marchuk is “carefully skirting questions about the arrival of guns stolen from a government depot in the western Ukraine city of Lviv,” which was sending hundreds of new militants daily to bolster the sagging protests.

But what we’re not told by the Times is that Lviv is a neo-Nazi stronghold where 15,000 members of the far-right Svoboda party held a torchlight parade in honor of World War II Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera and where Svoboda has been mounting a campaign to have the local airport named in honor of Bandera, whose fascist paramilitary force took part in the exterminations of Jews and Poles.


However, since it’s been the consistent MSM practice to white-out the role of the neo-Nazi brown shirts – all the better to protect the pleasant narrative of a Kiev Spring – the Times ignores the Bandera angle and the significance of the Lviv reference.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

1. I honestly, seriously don't get you people.

You rant and rave that the power change in Ukraine came about as part of a CIA/State/EU sponsored coup, meant to benefit the neo-cons, with officials in Washington and the like pulling the strings.

And somehow this was all accomplished by ultra-nationalists (who you would think would be the last people in the world to want to collaborate with foreign interests).

And the ultimate result of this "coup" or "putsch" is an interim government, limited in time, who arguably isn't strong enough to deal with keeping order in its own Parliament, let along fend off clear Russian meddling/interference in the south and east of the country. Some jack booted thugs they are.

Just admit it and say you're just throwing shit against a wall and seeing what sticks. That's all it is.

[socialist_n_TN]

5. Personally after much discussion with comrades and much study.....

of this situation, the conclusion I've come to is that western Ukrainian oligarchs bankrolled the fascists in Svoboda and the Right Sector to foment unrest against Yanukovych. Now, that unrest was a pretty easy proposition because Y was VERY corrupt and the people of Ukraine were in pretty bad shape economically. And because of the corruption and dissatisfaction with Yanukovych, the fascists won the day, at least temporarily.

I've suspected this scenario for a while now, but there was one sticking point for me. WHY would the big bourgeoisie turn to the fascists? Most of the time fascists are the "last resort" for capitalism because the capitalists always have to give up some power in order to unleash their fascist dogs and Ukraine didn't seem to be a "last resort" situation. Of course, the big bourgeoisie, just like Hindenburg in Germany in the late 20s, early 30s, feel like they can "control" the fascists and releash those dogs once they accomplished their mission of regime change, but historically, they are still reluctant to use this weapon in the class war too early in the process. And as I said earlier, Ukraine didn't seem like the typical "last resort" situation for the capitalists. There was no labor movement to speak of and thanks to Stalinism, the Ukrainian left was so disorganized and unpopular as to be a non-factor in Ukrainian politics. So why use the fascists?

Then after discussion it was pointed out that the fascists were directly funded BY the western Ukrainian oligarchs only after Yanukovych turned down the EU's austerity offer that would have put profit into the oligarch's hands. That's where the western money came into play too and for the same reason. Yanukovych's deal with Russia would result in the loss of profit by both EU AND American capitalists, in addition to the home grown owners. Ergo for the Ukrainian oligarchs, the deal with Russia WAS the last resort. They would lose too much profit unless they did SOMETHING to take out Yanukovych. so they acted in concert and by backing the only groups in Ukrainian politics that were able TO act in an extra-electoral manner, i.e., the fascist right.

[Oilwellian]

2. Parry tied it up neatly at the end

So, while the Feb. 22 coup in Kiev was portrayed as a simple uprising of Ukrainian patriots – with no attention paid to the $5 billion that Assistant Secretary Nuland herself said the U.S. has invested in Ukraine’s “European aspirations,” nor the 65 projects in Ukraine run by the U.S.-funded NED, nor with little notice of the organized violence by neo-Nazi paramilitary forces from western Ukraine – the resistance to the coup in Crimea and now in eastern and southern Ukraine could only result from dark manipulations orchestrated by Russian President Putin in the Kremlin.

It is that kind of biased journalism that has now become the norm of the MSM and, indeed, across significant parts of the “blogosphere.” Rather than learning to be more skeptical after the Iraq War deceptions a decade ago, the major news outlets appear to have become even more gullible, more integrated into the government’s propaganda structure, less able to provide balanced and independent journalism.

The U.S. reporting on crises in Iraq, Syria, Iran and now Ukraine reveal a nearly complete disconnect from the real world, as if the MSM is operating in a parallel universe.

Old-fashioned reporting – where journalists took pride in uncovering information that spoiled a U.S. government scheme to dupe the public – has almost completely disappeared. Now, we see what looks like a competition between government officials and mainstream journalists to produce the most extreme distortion of the truth.

Indeed, it is hard to tell if the officials are captive to the false narratives spun by the MSM or if the MSM is parroting back the lies of officialdom. They seem to feed off one another as Official Washington’s narrative spirals further and further from reality.

Now, eat your cookies.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

3. Question: Why hasn't the media glommed onto the "western coup" conspiracy theory?

Answer: Because it makes no logical sense when you get to the meat of it.


Duh.

[malaise]

4. Which is why I have been asking folks

why are the velvet revolutions fine and dandy, but when other citizens in their own countries revolt against them they are called terrorists.

I mean how naive and stupid do these people think we are re the Western agenda.
Why on earth would Russia allow herself to be surrounded by Western puppets?
I've had it will all the imperialists.