by Batko Milacic for the Saker Blog
On 24 February 2022, Russia started special military operation in the Ukraine. The main goals of the special operation was the denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine and the liberation of the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics.
After the far-right coup sponsored by US in Kyiv back in 2014 which resulted in overthrew of the pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych there was a revolt of the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine. The pro-Russian population of Ukraine makes it clear that they do not accept the coup that took place in Kiev. This resulted in the separation of Crimea as well as a similar desire of the people in other parts of Ukraine.
However, the new government in Kiev, which is under the full control of Washington, immediately declares them terrorists and an ‘’anti-terrorist’’ operation was launched. The result of that ’’anti-terrorist’’ operation is 13,000 to 14,000 killed civilians, destroyed civilian infrastructure and many, many other crimes were committed by the new Ukrainian regime against its own people.
Also, Russia’s “special operation” was a “response to what NATO was doing in Ukraine to prepare this country for a very aggressive posture against the Russian Federation.
The Ukraine was given offensive arms, including the arms which can reach the Russian territory, military bases were being built including on the Sea of Azov and many dozens of military exercises, including many of them on Ukrainian territory were conducted under NATO auspices and most of these exercises were designed against the interests of the Russian Federation.
Since 2014 and the coup in Ukraine Russia has been initiating draft treaties, draft agreements with Ukraine and NATO, with countries of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe and lately in December last year Russia proposed another initiative to the United States and to NATO to conclude treaties with both of them on security guarantees to all countries in the Euro-Atlantic space without joining any military alliance.
However, every time when Russia initiated these steps, they were basically rejected with more or less polite behavior. In 2009, Moscow proposed the European Security Treaty which NATO refused to consider and the treaty actually was about codifying something to which all OSCE countries subscribed at the top level.
Russia had suggested that the political commitments to give countries the right to choose its alliances and not to strengthen their security at the expense of the security of another country, meaning that “no single organization in Europe can pretend to be a dominant player in this geopolitical space.
NATO responded to Russia by saying that there would be no legally binding security guarantees outside NATO, which makes the OSCE, which was signed by several states across the continent, completely irrelevant.
NATO, despite its promises and promises of its leaders, was moving closer and closer to the Russian border. That was unacceptable for Russia.
All of the above, in addition to Kiev’s canceling everything Russian, including the language, education, media and day-to-day use of the Russian language was, in addition to violating basic human rights, an open provocation against Russia.
So when the Ukrainian regime intensified at the end of last year and early this year shelling of the Eastern territories of the country in Donbas, in the worst violations of the Minsk Agreements which were signed in February 2015 and endorsed by the Security Council resolution, when they were targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure, schools, hospitals, kindergartens, Russia.
More about the relations between Russia and Ukraine, the Kiev coup in 2014, American influence in Ukraine and the geopolitics of the current crisis can be seen in an excellent documentary ‘’Why the war between Russia and Ukraine began’’:
Thanks, Batko – that is truly an excellent documentary. Very well done to you and the other participants to making the documentary!
Thanks for the report. Yet it seems the Empire has always been looking into a complete regime change in Russia, since at least 90’s. This goes way beyond the conflict in Eastern Ukraine after the 2014 coup in Kiev, which was the first step toward their ultimate goal. There’s no doubt the globalist must achieve a complete regime change in Russia so as to realize their world government based on the WEF agenda. Once they’ve attained their Russian objective, taking over China and Iran would be just a child’s play. Ultimately, they would want a Russian breakup into several smaller and more manageable entities and all of their natural resources controlled by private western corporations. Perhaps the author is being too kind and gentle explaining about the real reasons behind the launch of the Russian special military operation. The reasons are much more solemn than what Kiev has in mind regarding the Donbass.
“…taking over China and Iran would be just a child’s play.”
No. I remember now a Saddam Hussein interview just prior to the invasion of Iraq, where he said that the whole purpose was to split Iraq into many parts; he did not say “several smaller and more manageable entities” but that was exactly the point. The invasion came, Iraq lost. It didn’t happen! There was a desire to make it happen from some people. There was also a desire to make it happen in Syria. Hillary Clinton is on video proposing it for Syria as the “solution” (speaking at the CFR, if I recall the occasion). Russia was not in Iraq. It can’t be done. Let’s not even count Afghanistan. No, they cannot do that to Russia or in Russia. Aren’t they the ones strengthening Russia again? It can’t be done to China; there’s a bigger language barrier, culture barrier, you name it, and they’re not even Christians or Moslems. It can’t be done to Iran either. I don’t know if Iran ends up doing it to them if they try and fail there too. It can’t be done by any such people…”to the facts I remit myself” goes a saying. Realizing this is where “child’s play” may fit in like a glove.
Hi tranquilocomp. Many top Russians including Sergei Glaziev mentioned about the Western regime change plans directed at Russia. Whether they could do it is a different story. I don’t think they could simply because Russia is too big for that. Also, if the West – generally- hasn’t been too triumphant in its plans against Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya…. so far, is because of their fear of Russia. There’s no doubt if Russia wasn’t a member of the Security Council and/or acting as a counterweight against the West, the Americans would have had no second thoughts about dropping nuclear bombs on Baghdad, right away, as an ultimate warning to anybody who dared challenge the dollar hegemony. At least from the Second World War, Russia was a thorn in the eye of the western globalists which they couldn’t ignore and forgive. In fact, since the time of the Crusaders all the way to WWII, Russia stood against Western expansionism. No they can’t achieve regime change in, but it doesn’t mean the silly western think tanks don’t want to push their luck. Only Russia posses the ultimate military/strategic challenge to the West. Iran and China, may be strong, but not an end in themselves. They have circumstances which differ from those of Russia.
“There’s no doubt if Russia wasn’t a member of the Security Council and/or acting as a counterweight against the West, the Americans would have had no second thoughts about dropping nuclear bombs on Baghdad, right away, as an ultimate warning to anybody who dared challenge the dollar hegemony.”
No, not for the dollar, don’t make it funny. Times changed, Truman did that. Others might not have. You can see Harry Truman on youtube laughing as he announces that a nuclear bomb had been used that day (they cut it out for the broadcast, but you can see it now). The man who laughed like that is the one who is responsible for his own decision. In the interview of Putin by Oliver Stone, Putin revealed what must have been a state secret before; it’s the most impactful thing in that interview. He revealed how the USSR got the knowledge to build the bomb so soon after the United States used it. He said that the same scientists who built it in the U.S. gave it to them, and that they didn’t work for the Soviet Union. He said that the married couple that was blamed for this and executed was innocent; again, that the USSR got it from the same scientists that were responsible for its creation. He volunteered that they shared it because they were concerned about only one power having it. That’s all he said. We can easily infer from his information the full consequence of Truman’s decision (I know this is far from Iraq but forget that). When the scientists saw what happened so soon, they felt guilty. Indeed, a corrective measure for them might have meant to give it also to another power so that there is a “nuclear balance” (as Putin concluded or knew). It’s possible that Putin did not tell all the details. Who can read Putin? …He may lie to you in a position of a man at war, but he won’t lie to you in an Oliver Stone interview…He may not have revealed all, but what else is there to tell? Would others have done what Truman did if no one else had it? The sure thing is that Putin gave news that belonged on the first page of newspapers. I doubt it was a front-page story. I saw a TV program where Stone was invited to speak about the series of interviews. No one asked him about the nuclear issue. I thought about this issue of both countries having the bomb at almost the same time many years ago, some four years before this interview, and I almost got it right…Looking at the closeness of the dates in which both had it, I concluded this could not be a natural event and that the bomb appeared to have been given by the U.S. to Russia directly. It was given differently, but close enough.
In 2002-2003 Russia was still regarded as a power that had largely fallen. Had Russia been this strong in 2000, it would have been an entirely different century; a power balance is needed in any case, I think.
Isn’t that what was said in Major Jordan’s diaries?
I don’t know his diaries, Andrew. What did he say?
You seem to refer to the point about history being different when Russia is strong. Syria is a clear example. It was clear that everybody was ganging up against Syria. Formally and in the newspapers, the United States said, “Assad must go.” The terrorists – Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, and more such groups – also said that Assad must go and they fought against him. They all were fighting against Assad openly. Nobody asked how could this be.
Assad has to be great to have a situation like this. He cannot be “bad” in a situation where Al Qaeda and Al Nusra are seeking to bring him down. The U.S., though, can look bad for sharing the same foe as them. Not surprisingly, Assad looked on TV interviews like a more intelligent and better person than all of them put together. Then one day Russia came. An ‘expert’ on CNN said that Russia brought everything needed to set up a big airfield and base under a big plane(s), and that it couldn’t be detected because of that. Like suddenly, there was this Russian base in Syria all set up. We all knew right away that the terrorists would be wiped out, didn’t we? On the first or second day after the Russians started to drop more than thirty bombs a day against the terrorists, I wrote to a Facebook friend, “Cheers, the 911 people are finally being bombed!” Exactly what I wrote. Obama said the terrorists in Syria were like a “JV” team and everybody seemed to criticize him for that, but it was obviously true. It was always obvious that they were no match for a real army that meant to destroy them. Russia bombed the hell out of the terrorists, and no one could stop it or defend them when they (terrorists) were cornered in some city and cried “uncle.” That all this would happen was known as soon as Russia came in strong…Secretary Kerry himself said that when a power like Russia comes in to fight like that, there’s really nothing anyone can do. It was not the only time he spoke honestly and clearly like that (ask Israel). There can be no doubt that this century would have been totally different if Russia had been this powerful earlier. Only intelligent Westerners suspected that Russia could or would rise from communism to become this powerful. I even married a Russian lady (ha, ha, joke).
The West will never stop, This will be a bitter battle to the very end. Whatever that maybe.
“The pro-Russian population of Ukraine makes it clear that they do not accept the coup that took place in Kiev. This resulted in the separation of Crimea as well as a similar desire of the people in other parts of Ukraine.”
Why were they so ready to do it is the question. I hope the documentary covers it. I think I know from a few articles, too few, about the strong tensions that existed prior to the coup. This alone deserves a whole documentary in my opinion. We know the rest, starting with the coup, all too well or can easily know it.
“However, the new government in Kiev, which is under the full control of Washington, immediately declares them terrorists and an ‘’anti-terrorist’’ operation was launched.”
Sounds like them, I didn’t know or remember.
“Also, Russia’s “special operation” was a “response to what NATO was doing in Ukraine to prepare this country for a very aggressive posture against the Russian Federation.”
Yes. More deeply, it became the response in the time between the two proposals and when it happened. It brings to mind the power of words, for good or for ill. And in this case it was for ill. Specific points in the proposals were even ignored, not responded to, said the Russians. That sounds like what happened even at Geneva, where the world was regaled with a “free membership” military alliance concept, that is free for all because it is only defensive, but defensive against one threat that has a name, and “what’s your problem with that?” One had to believe it because it was published and it was on TV. It’s an “unbelievable” stance. Those who believe that such stances have not or do not continue to matter, or that words are nothing, do not understand their role in causing the SMO, and their continuing effect on the future (I like any mutual agreement that stops the war and the deaths).
“Since 2014 and the coup in Ukraine Russia has been initiating draft treaties, draft agreements with Ukraine and NATO, with countries of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe and lately in December…”
I heard that but not much has been reported on that. The Minsk agreements were drafted by Russia. They were so good that the West, until most recently, strongly supported them. It always called my attention that those supporting the Minsk agreements did not note nor praise the role of Russia in bringing them about, since they liked them quite a bit themselves and said they were important to keep. Needless to say, it called my attention, too, that they were blaming Russia and not Ukraine for the lack of progress. They could have taken the opportunity to acknowledge the Russian role in coming up with those agreements. Russia had not let the Donbass fighters advance farther as they wanted to do, but this was not appreciated even by Ukraine…
It must be a good documentary; good article.
…The result of that ’’anti-terrorist’’ operation is 13,000 to 14,000 killed civilians…
These were the total casualties afaik.
Thanks for interesting article. Unfortunately the penultimate paragraph is cut short – any chance of supplying the missing words?
A question – was the action of Ukraine in shelling the Donbass really a reason for the SMO? Why I am uncertain is that the SMO was planned before 24th Feb and resources moved into position first. A military expert might be able to say when this began which would give a cut-off date for the reasons for going ahead. Assuming that a detailed plan had been worked out in case it was necessary, how long would it take to bring up to date and implement?
I seem to remember that in a speech by either President Putin or Sergei Lavrov that Zelansky’s speech at the Munich Security Conference (16th Feb 2022?) suggesting Ukraine would re-acquire nuclear weapons was a factor. However the recognition of the LPR and DPR by Russia followed by the Treaty of Friendship between them (22nd Feb) thus allowing Russia to legally give aid means this window of time was further narrowed. In other words, if it took 3 weeks after the decision to invade then anything after the end of January was not a contributing factor.
No, nothing is missing. There was a full stop missing after the words:-)
@Haymer that’s a very interesting question. I’ve had to ask myself that almost everyday since the SMO begun. Maybe a sakerite can help us out here.
But think , maybe the Russians predicted that after that Ultimatum in December the West would push that panic mode and ask their most obedient puppet in Ukraine to intensify the attacks on Donbass.
Typical Sun Zu, ” To defeat your enemy you must to become your enemy”.
Yes, as Zbigniew Brzezinski(Director of NSA and Kissingers close “friend”)wrote in the 90s, the goal is to break Russia up into five(if I remember correctly) more “manageable” pieces.
Yes, Brzezinski’s “Ring of Fire”, which he promulgated in the 70’s, has been being implemented ever since. It’s been bad for so many.
Anyone knows that the West has no courage to confront Russia and that is why it uses a Nazi puppet and thousands of professional international assassins paid and armed by the West to attack Russia while Western leaders only count how many deaths they have achieved for the next elections. And in the face of Western racial hatred, Russia has to defend itself, because we all know it is white racism in action once again.
Remind you of BLM/ANTIFA in the US? Havent heard from them since Pedo Joe took office. Guess the money stopped flowing to these groups after Joe came into office. George Soros has a playbook.
I remember the days when Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Gorbachev had a good working relationship. They were all replaced…… Reagan by end of term. And Thatcher and Gorbachev by being overthrown…
The many fascists too many on the ground in the west hiding under the neocon neoliberal banner and I am totally sick of living under their dogma!!