Donbass Bloodletting to Continue

From the outset, when the Euromaidan protests broke out in November 2013, the New York Times has been an indispensable ally of the Obama administration in shaping perceptions of the revolution underway in Ukraine. First, rather than labeling the February ouster of the president, Viktor Yanukovych, what everyone could plainly see it was, a coup d'état spearheaded by neo-Nazi street fighters, the Gray Lady reported, and continues to report to this day, that Yanukovych fled a popular uprising of young parents pushing infants in perambulators alongside babushka-clad pensioners.

Yanukovych was depicted as a bloodthirsty, venal, weak toady of Russia. There was ample coverage of his abandoned manor house. The Gray Lady relished his demise.

That was phase one. Phase two was the high-decibel wailing that commenced when Crimea joined the Russian Federation.

Phase three, which is a phase that we're presently still locked in, is the presentation of the uprising in Novorossiya, which began in earnest in April, as illegitimate, and this despite a successful autonomy referendum conducted in both Luhansk and Donetsk that exceeded everyone's expectations. Euromaidan was democratic, while Donbass was nothing more than the evil Vlad Putin pulling the wires on his secret special forces who were crossing the porous border to terrorize and sow havoc.

This is the story that the New York Times has stuck with through one retraction and months of shelling of civilians in cities and towns of the southeast. Russia has pulled backed its military from the border and Putin requested from the Russian parliament that it rescind its authorization for the use of military force, which parliament did; yet despite all this the Gray Lady persists, absent any proof, that the Donbass uprising is merely the work of Putin.

It is an embarrassment for the "newspaper of record," one that Robert Parry has been regularly drawing attention to at Consortiumnews. This morning it is on display with David Herszenhorn's puff piece on the newly effective Ukrainian military, "Ukraine Military Finds Its Footing Against Pro-Russian Rebels." With the canard that the Donbass uprising is due to Putin's belligerence in tatters, Herszenhorn has to admit that it is the Russian president who is the one actively trying to bring an end to hostilities:

Officials and experts agreed that the most urgent task facing the Ukrainian government was sealing its border with Russia to prevent any further influx of fighters or weapons, and the military has made progress doing so. And though he is hardly trusted by Ukrainians, Mr. Putin also sent signals that he would not order a full-scale invasion, announcing, for instance, that Parliament had withdrawn formal authorization for him to use military force in Ukraine. 

It is not clear why Mr. Putin eased some of the military pressure, but it appears as if he has decided to put his emphasis on peace talks being coordinated by a close friend of his, Viktor V. Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian businessman and political operative. Although similarly supported by the leaders of Germany and France, the talks have sputtered.

Herszenhorn does not continue on to describe why the talks have been unsuccessful to date -- the Kiev junta believes that using terror against a civilian population is a replacement for bargaining on federalization issues.

Herszenhorn's piece is noteworthy for its celebration of the Ukrainian military's clearing the hurdle of butchering its own population:

But even more important, experts said, was a reorganization of the chain of command and a crucial psychological shift: Soldiers surmounted a reluctance to open fire on their own countrymen, a serious issue after riot police officers killed about 100 protesters last winter during civil unrest centered on Maidan, the main square in Kiev. 

“They have overcome that psychological barrier in which the military were afraid to shoot living people,” Mr. Sungurovskyi [director of military programs at the Razumkov Center in Kiev] said. “They had this barrier after Maidan, after the death of that hundred — not simply to shoot living people, but their own people. After the forces were restructured a bit, and it became clear who were our people, who were foes, the operations became more effective.”

But as Herszenhorn acknowledges, the capture of Slovyansk and Kramatorsk by the junta is peanuts. The real challenge awaits in Donetsk:

The biggest test is just ahead. 

After fleeing south from Slovyansk, large numbers of rebels appeared Sunday to be regrouping in Donetsk, a city of one million, where any push to contain them will involve dangerous urban warfare. Signaling resilience, insurgents on Sunday seized a building belonging to the state penitentiary service.

In Luhansk, the region’s second-largest city after Donetsk, other rebels attacked a jail, allowing eight prisoners to escape. In each case, officials said the rebels, after suffering losses, appeared to be searching for weapons. In recent days, rebel leaders have pleaded with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to send additional aid.

Is Donetsk going to go the way of Aleppo? I think if it were up to junta officials like Banderist Andriy Parubiy, the head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, and his U.S. backers the answer would be "Absolutely." If Russia is waiting for Europe to come down forcefully to end the violence it might be waiting in vain.

I think Russia has been successful in winning Germany over. But whether this is enough to bring the mad dogs in Kiev to heel is unclear. Kiev answers to Langley and Foggy Bottom. So the bloodletting will probably continue for some time.