U.S. Prefers New Cold War and a Ukraine Modeled on Kosovo

Fighting continues in Slovyansk. Both the Associated Press and David Herszenhorn of the New York Times turn once again to putsch interior minister Arsen Avakov's Facebook page for the details. According to the AP account:

Ukrainian military operations that began Monday to expunge pro-Russia forces from the city of Slovyansk were the interim government’s most ambitious effort so far to quell weeks of unrest in Ukraine’s mainly Russian-speaking east. 4 government troops and 30 militants were killed in the gun battles, Ukraine’s interior minister said Tuesday. The pro-Russia militia said 10 people were killed, including civilians. There was no immediate way to reconcile the figures. Interior Minister Arsen Avakov gave the death toll on his Facebook page Tuesday, adding that 20 government troops were also injured during fighting in Slovyansk. He said about 800 pro-Russia forces in and around Slovyansk used large-caliber weapons and mortars on Monday. By Tuesday morning, Ukrainian forces had taken hold of a key checkpoint north of the city, dealing a blow to insurgent lines of communication.

Herszenhorn's story, "As Ukrainian Election Looms, Western Powers and Russia Campaign for Influence," outlines the West's attempt to push through the May 25 Ukrainian presidential election despite an active military campaign in the southeast:

Russia has made clear that it wants the election to be delayed. Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov pressed the point again on Tuesday, insisting that the interim government end bloodshed and amend the Constitution to devolve power to the regions — and that it do so before Ukrainians are asked to choose a new leader. 

Such changes would presumably address the demands by some pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine for a new system that would weaken the central government and expand the authority of regional and local officials. 

“Holding elections in a situation where the armed forces are being used against part of the population is rather unusual,” Mr. Lavrov said at a news conference in Vienna, where about 30 foreign ministers met under the auspices of the Council of Europe to discuss the situation in Ukraine. 

“The criteria of any process involving citizen choice are well known to all,” Mr. Lavrov said, according to the Interfax news service. “Elections and referendums must be free and fair, and they must proceed in a situation excluding violence and under objective and unbiased international monitoring.” 

At the Vienna meeting, the British foreign secretary, William Hague, said that Russian worries about violence were disingenuous as the Kremlin had fed the conflict in Ukraine to undermine the presidential election. “Russia is clearly intent on preventing or disrupting those elections,” he told reporters, according to The Associated Press. He added that the foreign ministers at the meeting supported the vote being held without outside interference.

I suppose Hague doesn't consider the United States underwriting the Ukrainian presidential election to the tune of $11 million as "outside interference."

The U.S. is threatening Russia with another round of sanctions if it doesn't support the May 25 poll and if it does support the upcoming autonomy referendums in Donetsk and Lugansk. The noxious Victoria Nuland appeared yesterday before uber-corrupt Bob Menendez's Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Let's recall here what the United States and its EU toadies are trying to accomplish. You have a Kiev junta that came to power via a violent putsch led by neo-Nazi organizations. An interim government, the current junta, was hastily slapped together with input from the U.S. It is a combination of corrupt Fatherland Party politicians and neo-Nazis from Svoboda and Right Sector. The May 25 election is meant to confer legitimacy on the putschists.

The problem with this is Ukraine is historically divided between a Ukrainian-speaking west and a Russian-speaking east. The junta has no representation from the east. To deny this, to argue that an election can proceed while a western-dominated Kiev junta is attacking with heavy armor "Occupy"-type protests rocking the country's east is delusional.

My feeling is that the U.S. suffers from this delusion because for decades it has been able to rely on unchallenged force, usually air power, to terrorize its enemies into submission. The overarching precedent here seems to be Kosovo and the bombing of Belgrade. USG planners forever seem to be returning to that NATO campaign as a template for success. It was the model for Libya, and it was constantly being bandied about in the run up to the aborted attack on Damascus last summer.

But the reality of Kosovo is that it was not a success. The Chinese embassy in Belgrade was blown up, risking relations with China, and NATO Commander Wesley Clark almost began World War III when he ordered troops to attack Russian forces at the Pristina airport. And, after near cataclysm, at the end of the day, today, you have a tiny, criminal rump state that exists at all because of United Nations administration. Is this the future we want for a large, important state like Ukraine? Apparently the U.S. does.

But it is not clear that the important member states of the European Union do. The Kosovo template breaks down immediately when you try to apply it to Ukraine. First, and critically, Putin is no Milosevic, a politician that was easily cowed. Second, the citizens of the Donbass will never agree to be subjects of the Kiev junta. A real federalized system for the regions, along with Ukrainian neutrality, is the only way forward. The U.S. is unwilling to let this happen. It prefers a New Cold War and a dysfunctional Ukraine on the Kosovo model.