Is it conquest if your territory is invaded and taken over by another country of which you’d rather be a part? From Stephen Karganovic at strategic-culture.org:
The referendums set a dangerous precedent for the rulers of Western “democracies,” in addition to constituting a direct and serious non-military threat to the sustainability of their Ukrainian project.
Yes, that is the unanimous refrain of Western opinion makers following the referendums conducted in the four regions of Eastern Ukraine. That the overwhelming majority of the population there, braving deadly Ukrainian artillery barrages, expressed their preference to be part of Russia, and not of the discriminatory Ukrainian state (or whatever is ultimately left of it) makes no difference to these opinion shapers and policy makers.
The mechanical unanimity which prevails in the West concerning the major geopolitical shift that has just taken place in the East is a disturbing reminder of the single mindedness which, in roughly the same part of the world but under a different ideological guise, used to characterise political and media discourse about a generation ago.
To anyone with a superficial knowledge of the historical and political context, the epilogue of popular consultation in the four regions, as well as in the Crimea eight years ago, should be an open and shut case. (Doubters will be edified, while being entertained, here.) Invocations of international law, not to mention human rights, in these situations work entirely in Russia’s favor.
Continue reading →
Any election whose results the U.S. and NATO don’t like is deemed per se rigged. From Declan Hayes at strategic-culture.org:
Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility of any elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.
As Germany’s Foreign Office and the European Union both directly fund The European Platform for Democratic Elections (EPDE) and indirectly through the “13 independent European citizen election observation organizations” that are members of this shadowy group, Germany and the European Union have the backs of anyone wishing to undermine the credibility not only of the recent referenda held in Eastern Ukraine but those in Crimea and other elections that didn’t secure NATO’s imprimatur.
Because the EPDE is concerned that non NATO approved elections lack “integrity”, it preaches that problematic elections, including those internal to Russia, can only gain that stamp of approval by having EU approved monitors drawn from the EPDE and similar NATO front bodies. Thus, because it notes that “no international politically-biased observers [were] identified during the 2022 Russian regional elections”, it argues to its EU paymasters that those elections failed its litmus test that internal elections in Russia and allied states can only be kosher if held under the watchful eye of the EPDE and similar EU and NATO funded Big Brother groups.
Crucially, regarding its claims of independence, the EPDE posits “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” as being a primary factor in causing EPDE and other “experts” not to observe those Russian elections on behalf of NATO and other interested groups. The EPDE citing “Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine” is simply further proof the EPDE, whilst parading its independence, is, in fact just a blunt tool of EU and NATO soft power, whose mantra the EPDA parrots to the letter. The EPDA, in other words, very much has a dog in the fight, and that dog is NATO, which is its eyes as well as its ears.
Continue reading →