#yatsenyuk

[darkmaga-retard]

The Fifth Amendment, it seems, is something Victoria Nuland is unaware of. The former undersecretary of state for political affairs just keeps incriminating herself. But her statements—both intercepted and public—have done more than incriminate herself: They have incriminated the United States. Nuland’s statements have acted as some of the most important sources for U.S. involvement in Ukraine from the roots of the war, the growth of the war, and the decision not to cut down the war and stop it.

The war in Ukraine is a tangled web woven from three separate, but related, conflicts: the conflict within Ukraine, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and the conflict between NATO and Ukraine. Nuland has had a hand in all of them.

The conflict within Ukraine goes back long before the war with Russia, but the proximate cause is the 2014 coup that removed Viktor Yanukovych from power and replaced him with the Western-leaning Petro Poroshenko. Nuland was a force in that coup, and her comments are among the most important sources of proof of U.S. involvement.

The “Maidan Revolution” received American financial backing. The U.S.-government funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funded a staggering 65 pro-Maidan projects inside Ukraine. Nuland revealed that there was much more U.S. money flowing into Ukraine than the money provided by the NED. In December 2013, she told an audience at the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation Conference that the U.S. had “invested over $5 billion” to secure a “democratic Ukraine.”

But Nuland did more than disclose U.S.-financed meddling in Ukraine. Nuland, who ran the Obama State Department’s Ukraine policy, revealed the deep involvement of the U.S. in the coup itself. Nuland was caught plotting who the Americans wanted to be the winner of the regime change. She can be heard on an intercepted call telling the American ambassador in Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, that Arseniy Yatsenyuk is America’s choice to replace Yanukovych. Most importantly, Pyatt refers to the West needing to “midwife this thing,” an admission of America’s role in the coup. At one point, Nuland even seems to say that then Vice President Joe Biden himself would be willing to do the midwifery.

[gregor-samsung]

" Il 7 febbraio [2014], mentre Barack Obama pontificava sul diritto degli ucraini all’autodeterminazione, è stata pubblicata su YouTube (forse dai Servizi russi) una telefonata intercettata fra [Victoria] Nuland* e Geoffrey Pyatt, ambasciatore americano a Kiev: i due già sanno che Yanukovich cadrà e decidono – non si sa bene a che titolo – chi fra i suoi oppositori dovrà essere premier e ministro del futuro governo. La Nuland confida a Pyatt di aver esposto il suo piano di “pacificazione” dell’Ucraina al sottosegretario per gli Affari politici dell’Onu, Jeffrey Feltman, che è intenzionato a nominare un inviato speciale sul posto d’intesa col vicepresidente americano Joe Biden, ma all’insaputa degli alleati della Nato e dell’Ue. «Sarebbe grande!», esulta la Nuland. Che non gradisce come futuro premier ucraino il capo dell’opposizione, l’ex pugile Vitali Klitschko («Non penso sia una buona idea»): meglio l’uomo delle banche Arseniy Yatsenyuk, che infatti andrà al governo di lì a un mese, mentre Klitschko diventerà sindaco di Kiev come premio di consolazione. Pyatt vorrebbe consultare l’Ue, ma la Nuland gli urla: «Fuck the Eu!» (L’Ue si fotta!). Anche il controverso finanziere ungherese George Soros si vanterà di aver partecipato al casting per il nuovo governo ucraino. La cancelliera tedesca Angela Merkel e il presidente del Consiglio Ue Herman Van Rompuy protestano per le «parole assolutamente inaccettabili» della Nuland. Ma non perché gli Usa decidono il governo e il futuro dell’Ucraina come se fosse una loro colonia. Mosca grida al golpe. Ma anche un alto esponente del battaglione Azov (nome di battaglia “Voland”), nel libro Valhalla Exspress tradotto in Italia nel 2022, ammetterà che «la Ue non ci interessava» e che Euromaidan «non fu una rivoluzione, ma un colpo di Stato». "

* Assistente del segretario di Stato John Kerry per gli Affari europei e asiatici.

---------

Marco Travaglio, Scemi di Guerra. La tragedia dell’Ucraina, la farsa dell’Italia. Un Paese pacifista preso in ostaggio dai NoPax, PaperFIRST (Il Fatto Quotidiano), febbraio 2023¹ [Libro elettronico].

[williamkergroach55]

How Washington sold out Ukraine to take on Moscow…

Ten years ago, former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych signed an agreement with the opposition Euromaidan to resolve Ukraine's political crisis. The very next day, the opposition tore up the agreement and seized power by force. Behind Ukraine, the American Empire wanted to take over Russia. The story of a determined war.

After months of rioting, sparked by the Euromaidan movement, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych agreed to reform the constitution, form a "government of national unity" and hold early elections in December 2014. The Ukrainian president agreed to pardon rioters and launch investigations into abuses by law enforcement agencies. The February 21 agreements aimed at ending the political crisis in Ukraine were signed by Yanukovych and opposition leaders Vitaly Klitschko (Udar Party), Arseniy Yatsenyuk (Batkivshchina) and Oleh Tiagnybok (Svoboda Nationalist Party) in the presence of German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski and Eric Fournier, Director of the Continental Europe Department at the French Foreign Ministry. The day after the agreement, on February 22, 2014, the buildings of the presidential administration, the Verkhovna Rada and the Cabinet of Ministers were stormed by violent demonstrators. Maidan leaders appointed Oleksandr Turchynov as head of the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine's parliament, in violation of the country's constitution. Yanukovych was ousted. Speaking on television from Kharkiv, Yanukovych refused to resign: "I am a legally elected president. What is happening is blatant vandalism, banditry and a coup d'état", he declared. Nevertheless, EU leaders immediately declared that they would work with Ukraine's "new government", sweeping aside the agreements they had just secured the day before. February 2014. Yanukovych left Ukraine and fled to Russia.

Washington was behind the coup

Officially, the opposition was supported by the Europeans, but as Russian President Vladimir Putin declared in 2015, "We knew perfectly well that the real puppeteers were our American partners and friends."

In early February 2014, an intercepted conversation between US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, a descendant of Ukrainian Jewish immigrants on her father's side, and US Ambassador to Ukraine, now US Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Resources since 2022, Geoffrey Pyatt, spoke of bringing opposition leader Arseniy Yatseniouk to power, and putting Tiagnybok and Klitschko "on the sidelines". Nuland dropped: "Fuck the EU…" On February 27, 2014, Yatseniouk was appointed Prime Minister of Ukraine. Klitschko became mayor of Kiev on June 5, 2014. Tiagnybok was kept out of government.

Russia was the target.

After the coup, Arseniy Yatsenyuk's government brutally repressed its political opponents, promoting an openly Russophobic agenda, and sent the army against civilians in the Donbass, opposed to the coup against legitimate President Yanukovych. Larry Johnson, a former CIA intelligence officer and State Department official, believes that the West had simply decided to take control of Russia and its formidable natural wealth. "They were looking for a long-term strategy to isolate Russia. And the key to that was to get Ukraine into NATO, into the EU, and thus isolate Russia." At least, American strategists thought they could isolate Russia.

Broken agreements

Russia had hoped to put an end to the bloodshed in the Donbass thanks to the Minsk agreements. The Minska Protocol was signed on September 5, 2014 in Minsk, the capital of Belarus, by representatives of Ukraine, Russia, the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Lugansk and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), with the aim of ending the war in Donbass. The agreements called for a cessation of hostilities, the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the front line, the release of prisoners of war and constitutional reform in Ukraine to grant autonomy to the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics. Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and former French President François Hollande have since acknowledged that the Minsk agreements were maneuvers to buy time to arm and train the Ukrainian army. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, himself, admitted in an interview with Spiegel in February 2023 that he had never intended to observe the Minsk agreements; nor had the Euromaidan putchists intended to respect the agreements signed on February 21, 2014 with President Viktor Yanukovych.

Washington wants war.

The United States could have refused to integrate Ukraine into NATO, refrained from conducting military exercises with Ukraine, reopened discussions with Moscow on reviving the ABM Treaty and the INF Treaty on intermediate nuclear forces. The ABM Treaty (Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty) was signed in 1972 between the United States and the Soviet Union. The aim of this treaty was to limit the deployment of missile defense systems in order to discourage an arms race in this field. Both parties undertook to deploy only a limited number of missile defense systems, thus limiting the possibility of defense against intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), signed in 1987 between the USA and the Soviet Union, prohibited the production, stockpiling and deployment of ballistic and land-based cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. This was a key element in reducing tensions during the Cold War, as it prohibited the deployment of an entire class of short- and medium-range nuclear weapons in Europe. These two treaties were seen as pillars of strategic stability between the USA and the Soviet Union, then Russia after the dissolution of the USSR. However, in 2002, under the George W. Bush administration, the United States announced its unilateral withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. The development of missile defense systems resumed. Similarly, in 2019, under Donald Trump's first term in office, the United States unilaterally withdrew from the INF Treaty. Russia announced its own withdrawal from the INF Treaty, and arms control no longer existed. President Biden repeatedly voiced his opposition to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project, claiming that it would increase Europe's energy dependence on Russia and weaken Europe's "energy security". The United States has threatened sanctions against companies and entities involved in the pipeline's construction, as well as against countries supporting the project. On February 6, 2022, at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, US President Joe Biden warned: "If Russia invaded Ukraine, there would be no Nordstream 2. We will stop it. Asked how he would go about it, he replied, "I promise you we'll be able to do it." The sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines actually took place on September 26, 2022 in the Baltic Sea, resulting in major gas leaks. The first, on Nord Stream 2, was discovered southeast of the Danish island of Bornholm. Several hours later, two further leaks were discovered on Nord Stream 1 to the north-east of the island. This was a deliberate act, as traces of explosives had been found. In an article published on his blog on February 8, 2023, Pulitzer Prize-winning American journalist Seymour Hersh asserts that the USA and Norway are behind the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, citing a single anonymous source with direct knowledge of operational planning.

The Russian Bear is patient.

Russia has always been open to negotiations. Moscow has maintained a dialogue with the Poroshenko and Zelensky governments to implement the Minsk agreements in order to respect the rights of Ukraine's Russian speakers while preserving the nation's territorial integrity. Petro Poroshenko's government was in office in Ukraine from June 7, 2014 to May 20, 2019. Poroshenko was elected President of Ukraine in May 2014, succeeding Viktor Yanukovych who had fled to Russia. As for Volodymyr Zelensky's government, it has been in office since May 20, 2019. Zelensky won the Ukrainian presidential election in April 2019, succeeding Petro Poroshenko as President of Ukraine. His government was formed shortly after his presidential inauguration and remains in office to this day. The Western press is silent on the fact that, before launching the military operation in Ukraine, Moscow sought to conclude agreements with the USA and NATO to ensure common European security. Draft agreements providing for NATO guarantees against eastward expansion and for Ukraine's neutral status were deliberately ignored by Washington, Brussels and, of course, the NATO leadership.

A month after the start of the special military operation, Russian and Ukrainian representatives signed preliminary peace agreements in Istanbul in March 2022. Davyd Arakhamia, who headed the Ukrainian delegation at the March 2022 Istanbul talks with Russia, told Ukrainian TV channel 1+1 in November 2023 that Moscow was ready to end the conflict if Ukraine committed to neutrality and refused to join NATO. However, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson forced President Volodymyr Zelensky to fight to the bitter end. Ex-Prime Minister Johnson was backed by European Commission Vice-President Josep Borrell Fontelles, in April 2022, who promised hundreds of millions of euros for Kiev: "This war will be won on the battlefield", he tweeted… US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin declared that Washington wanted to see "Russia weakened." The U.S. has spent over $100 billion, the European Union has given around €85 billion, to support Ukraine's military effort. The result is inconclusive.

worldnewsdigest@protonmail.com Source : Ekaterina Blinova https://sputnikglobe.com/20240221/euromaidan-was-part-of-wests-proxy-war-against-russia--cia-

[ohsalome]

In April 2014, during a hot phase of the war, the Kyiv International Sociology Institute surveyed the public opinion among the citizens of the eastern regions of Ukraine. The results showed chaos in their heads and a rise in anti-Ukrainian sentiments, but still, the majority was pro remaining within Ukraine. The situation was objectively difficult, but not hopeless.

According to the results of the survey, 70% of citizens of Donbas considered the temporary government of Yatsenyuk and Turchynov illegitimate, but also 60% considered Yanukovych to be illegitimate. 65% considered Maydan to be a western coup, 45% believed that Yanukovych should have used violence against the rioters, and 35% were against this scenario.

43% blamed Yanukovych and his party for the murders of the protesters, and 48% blamed the opposition. 55% believed the police had no right to use violence against the protestors. Here is a paradox: 60% believed that Pravy Sektor was a "myth" and a "marginal group" that had no real power and should be demilitarized, but approximately the same amount of people believed that Pravy Sektor controls the government.

All those statements are so contradictory their co-existence can only be explained by the influence of russian propaganda.

Besides, nowhere in the regions could you find aggressive anti-Ukrainians beliefs. Only 10-15% supported the seizure of administrative buildings, and about the same percentage of people were neutral on this. But 72% in the Donetsk region and 59% in the Lugansk region disapproved of it. About half of the people believed it to be inexcusable, and about a third justified it by the precedents in other Ukrainian regions. A quarter believed it to be "the last chance to be heard by the central government".

What were these people afraid of?

Most of all people were afraid of the economy crashing (43%), breaking economical contact with russia (36%), and the rise of criminal activity (50% in the Donetsk region and 30% in the Lugansk region). Other worries - loss of pensions, nationalism and radicalism, and potential civil war worried about 27-29% each. The risk of civil war specifically worried about 40% of people in the Donetsk region. It should be noted that NATO membership, loss of russian TV, singular official language and potential visa regime with russia concerned almost nobody - only 7-10% of citizens noted these topics among the list of their worries.

The sociologists also asked directly about the separation of the eastern regions and their union with russia. Around 30% were fully or partially supportive of the idea, while the majority - over 50% - wanted to remain in Ukraine. Among 10% wanted russia to send their troops. In the middle of an active war with russia, 55% believed that there is no war and about the same percentage expected a civil war to come.

Practically no one was eager to fight either. 55% were ready to pick up arms only for self-defence, and 30% were against any fighting in any circumstances. Only 6% were willing to go to war with the "Kyiv junta". About 20% expected military help from russia, and 55% were against it.

This research was done in April, just after the takeover of the SBU building in Lugansk and Igor Girkin's russian mercenaries appearing in Slovyansk. By the end of the month they cut off Ukrainian tv, and the only information remaining for the people was russian propaganda. The main sources of info for the majority of the population were russian social networks "Odnoklassniki" and "VKontakte" (controlled by the FSB - transl. note), and russsian state TV.

The research done by the KISI is probably the most reliable we will ever have. Even if you consider the potential percentage of people who might have been afraid to talk about separatism honestly, there still is no ground for talks about the "overwhelming separatism of the Donbas region". Even the leaders of the separatists themselves would later admit it, accusing them of being too passive, not loving russia enough and not supporting the militia. 

// Denys Kazansky, Marina Vorotnytseva. "How Ukraine was losing Donbas"

[ennish]

Bukovel, Ukraine Anton Yatsenyuk

[summeroffice]

Вадим Радионов for И грянул Грэм

Podolyak is annoyed.  

33:42 This is Evgeniy, from Zaporizhzhia. I'm about the duties of citizens. I would like to remind Mr Podolyak that all citizens of Ukraine have responsibilities. Absolutely everyone, not just the poor. And for some reason the poor are fighting. [Podolyak shakes head] I want to ask the question. Where is Bakanov [former head of the Security Service of Ukraine] now? Where is Yatsenyuk [former Prime Minister] now?  

These people are not doing their duty, they are in the military age. Why are you sending Zaluzhnyi to London, a military man? You let Arestovych, a military man, out of the country, and you collect mechanics, welders, guards, grab them and send to fight.  

36:42 There are a lot of questions. Well, it's clear, Arestovych was mentioned and it's predictable, we understand, that's how the information system works. With Arestovych, there's immediate reaction. I'll actually read a question from the chat. How did Arestovych manage to leave the country? 

[Podolyak shrugs. You can hear that he's fed up] 

He has three children. Look, people... I just want to point out, people don't even know. They just want to speculate; how did he leave the country. Please specify his social status. Another question, that Arestovych took a certain informational position, a very strange one when he left. This is another question. But the person left the country absolutely legally. That is, for this it is enough to make two clicks and get the information, not ask questions that are, you know, with such causticity, how smart I am, look, you are all stupid and I am smart. How did Arestovych leave the country? [He gives a toothy smile and shakes head] 

44:47 Now in the Russian-speaking segment of YouTube, Maria Pevchikh's film about the nineties [documentary series “Traitors”] sounded very powerful. Have you watched this film? 

I have seen the first part. The second part, not yet.  

Well, in your opinion, does it explain what happened to Russia and what led to the war? Since the reaction is very big, the resonance is very big, I'm interested in your opinion and how it is seen from Ukraine now. 

In my opinion, it doesn't explain, and doesn't even come close to explaining. The discussion itself, I like it, it is not bad that they are discussing their history and try to find the reasons that gave birth to such a monstrous image of Russia that we see today. Well, and that gave birth to such an absolutely, you know, not an intellectual at the head. Well, in principle, I would say that he is very similar to the same Stalin, also a poorly educated subject with hyper ideas, I mean Putin.  

Discussion, yes, but to be honest, it's a bit mysterious for me because today there is a fact of the concrete war and first you need to sort out the war as such. Well, by the way, Khodorkovsky also talks about it, he says, look, yes, you can blame me, you can blame any of the oligarchs from the members of the so-called seven bankers of those who ensured Yeltsin's passage in elections and so on and so forth, but first you need to solve the problem of how to stop the war as such, how to ensure the loss of Putin here and now. 

And then reflect on why in principle this arose. It is possible, for example, that the same FBK is considering that if we simultaneously reflect on how this all happened, this will lead to an understanding of how to stop it all. I think that this is a very long path. In my opinion, the path should be shorter. Look, as a cultural discussion or a discussion of cultural history, it's probably interesting. As a discussion that will somehow lead to the just finalisation of this war, no, it distracts attention. But people probably have nothing to do, they have the right. That is, it is their life. They see themselves this way. They see themselves in this type of discussion.

[chaussuresdeballet]

Bukovel, Ukraine Anton Yatsenyuk

[xtruss]

Elon Musk Calls 2014 Ukraine Regime Change a ‘COUP’

The billionaire described Viktor Yanukovych’s election as ‘dodgy’ but said the coup was beyond question

— 25 February 2023 | RT

Elon Musk calls 2014 Ukraine regime change a ‘coup’ © AFP/Justin Sullivan

Twitter CEO Elon Musk polarized his followers with a tweet declaring there was “no question” that the 2014 change of government in Ukraine was a “coup.” On Saturday, the billionaire tweeted that while “the election” – presumably referring to the 2010 vote that elected Viktor Yanukovych president – was “arguably dodgy,” what followed “was indeed a coup.”

The tweet was a response to a post from user @KanekoaTheGreat that featured the front page of an article by University of Chicago Professor John Mearsheimer titled “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is The West’s Fault.” Dating from 2014, the piece – subtitled “The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin” – argues that “NATO enlargement” and Western meddling in Ukrainian politics, and not “Russian aggression,” are to blame for Crimea’s accession to Russia.

Mearsheimer states that “for Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically-elected and pro-Russian president – which he rightly labeled a ‘coup’ – was the final straw,” an explanation Musk appeared to agree with, at least in part.

Criminal Thug Zelensky threatens unsupportive Americans! The Ukrainian leader alleged the US would lose its influence in the world if it stopped backing Kiev. The US has thus far Pledged $113 billion to Ukraine's war effort, vowing to continue pouring money into the conflict for "As Long As It Takes."

While the 2010 election that installed Yanukovych as president was deemed an “impressive display” of democracy by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the West soured on the Party of Regions politician when he abandoned a 2013 economic cooperation agreement with the EU.

Massive violent protests followed, forcing Yanukovych to flee. The US’ hand in the unrest was confirmed in a leaked phone call between then-assistant US Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt in which they appeared to be plotting to overthrow Yanukovych and install Arseniy Yatsenyuk – who indeed briefly became Prime Minister following Yanukovych’s ouster.

Fewer Americans Perceive that Ukraine is Winning – Poll! Just 21% of voters consider that Kiev is heading for victory, while 46% see a stalemate with Russia, a new poll has shown

Musk also replied approvingly to a previous post by Kanekoa that featured a video clip of All In podcast host David Sacks claiming that the US “courted” the Ukraine conflict. The video likened Nuland to former Biden administration medical adviser Anthony Fauci, a frequent target of Musk's ire.

“The same way that Fauci was supposed to be protecting us from viruses and then funded gain of function research, Victoria Nuland was supposed to be our chief diplomat with respect to Russia and Eastern Europe and what did she do instead? She ginned up this conflict. How? We backed an insurrection in Ukraine in 2014,” Sacks said in the video, which Musk described as an “accurate assessment.”

[news247worldpressposts]

#Breaking: "This war is about more than #Ukraine." Former #Ukrainian PM #ArseniyYatsenyuk says the war is about "liberties, freedoms, the free world and the value of every single free country"

'This war is about more than Ukraine." Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk says the war is about "liberties, freedoms, the free world and the value of every single free country"https://t.co/PAiZ4D1jU3 📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube pic.twitter.com/ns8SBDmxUs — Sky News (@SkyNews) February 24, 2023 Source: Twitter

[nebris]

The siege of Sloviansk was an operation by the Armed Forces of Ukraine to recapture the city of Sloviansk in Donetsk Oblast from pro-Russian insurgents who had seized it on 12 April 2014. The city was taken back on 5 July 2014 after shelling from artillery and heavy fighting. The fighting in Sloviansk marked the first major military engagement between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian government forces, in the first run of battles in 2014.

On 12 April 2014, as unrest grew in eastern Ukraine following the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, masked men in fatigues, armed with Kalashnikov assault rifles, captured the city administration building.[31] These men, who claimed to be pro-Russian fighters under the banner of the Donetsk People's Republic, subsequently gained control of the rest of Sloviansk and began to fortify it. In response, the Ukrainian Yatsenyuk Government created the first Anti-Terrorist Operations zone (ATO) and launched a series of counter-offensives against the insurgents, resulting in a standoff and violent skirmishes.[32]

As tensions in the city increased, the insurgents began to take journalists and others captive, instigating a hostage crisis. The Security Service of Ukraine said on 18 April that "Sloviansk remains the hottest point in the region."[33] On 20 April, Right Sector was ordered by acting President Oleksandr Turchinov to sabotage an insurgent-controlled television tower, leading to the first combat fatalities.[34] By June, roughly 40% of the city's population had fled.[35] On 5 July, after the insurgents had retreated to Donetsk City, Ukrainian authorities retook control of the city.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Sloviansk

[thefree-online]

U.S. Regime Now Tempts Ukrainian Kiev Regime to Invade Russia – Counter Information

December 20, 2022 / AGR News The U.S. Government, after its extensive planning for the February 2014 coup overthrew the democratically elected neutralist President of Ukraine and selected the rabidly anti-Russian Arseniy Yatsenyuk to replace him and to install a rabidly anti-Russian junta. They did this to ethnically cleanse the areas of Ukraine that had voted more than 70% for the elected…

[agreenroad]

U.S. Regime Now Tempts Ukrainian Kiev Regime to Invade Russia – Counter Information

U.S. Regime Now Tempts Ukrainian Kiev Regime to Invade Russia – Counter Information

The U.S. Government, in its extensive planning for the February 2014 coup that overthrew the democratically elected neutralist President of Ukraine and selected the rabidly anti-Russian Arseniy Yatsenyuk to replace him and to install a rabidly anti-Russian junta to ethnically cleanse the areas of Ukraine that had voted more than 70% for the elected Ukrainian President that Obama had just…

[404ua]

undefined

Главные военные преступники Украины The main war criminals of Ukraine

[globalhappenings]

Arseniy Yatsenyuk: Mariupol is one of the biggest tragedies after World War II

Arseniy Yatsenyuk: Mariupol is one of the biggest tragedies after World War II

The head of the KBF asks the defenders of Mariupol to hold on and survive, and the West to provide the Armed Forces of Ukraine with even more weapons The situation in Mariupol is extremely difficult, said Arseniy Yatsenyuk / Photo: Collage: Today Putin’s statement about the complete capture of Mariupol is a lie, the situation in the city is extremely difficult, but Ukrainian soldiers are…

[malenipshadows]

  The U.S. Embassy in Kyiv said two days later that Russia committed a war crime by attacking a nuclear power plant in Ukraine.  "It is a war crime to attack a nuclear power plant," the embassy said on its official Twitter feed. ...    Russia's suspected use of cluster bombs and so-called vacuum bombs in dense areas with many civilians has also been described as a war crime.    "I want to be very clear about this, that Mr. Putin is a war criminal," former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk told the Council on Foreign Relations recently. "He has to sit behind the bars in International Criminal Court."    However, if justice in general moves slowly, international justice barely moves at all. Investigations at the ICC take many years. Only a handful of convictions have ever been won.