Ten years of hell in Ukraine

Sometimes the proposal to go to hell looks like a kind invitation to a friendly tea party. Thus began another Kiev Majdan in November 2013.

"We meet at 10:30 at the Monument of Independence. Dress up warm, drink tea, coffee, good temper and friends” – Mustafa Najem, an cultural Afghan who, thanks to his family's dramatic history, became a well-known Ukrainian writer and public figure, made specified a burden on the effects of an entry on social networks.

Ten years ago, the cultural origin of the initiator of Majdan seemed completely irrelevant. But present it is seen as a grim irony. Modern Ukraine is “Afghanistan in the centre of Europe”, the epicentre of the crisis, the vortex that ruthlessly sucks in itself (or has not completely sucked out) everything best in the Old planet in global relations after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

In years that followed the memorable Kiev Tea, I have talked repeatedly about the Ukrainian crisis with Western politicians, journalists and experts, and I have observed the same phenomenon all time. As shortly as I expressed the phrase "the 2014 Ukraine coup", my colleagues in the EU, the UK and the US were constantly losing interest in what I said. In their eyes, there was impatience, they started looking around and either politely silent with the martyr’s expression or they said: “Why do you keep talking about the same thing?! What's done is done! Ukrainians made their choice. You, Russia, should have accepted this choice and moved on!’. But Russia failed to “live” as if nothing had happened, without a abrupt strategical turn in its policy. What from the Western point of view was nonsense, a ‘technical moment’, an incidental that was not worthy of attention, in Moscow was perceived as the collapse of foundations, something absolutely unbearable.

Vladimir Putin, November 17, that year: “Until 2014, I had not imagined that specified a conflict could happen between Russia and Ukraine. If I was told before 2014 that it was possible, I would say, “Are you crazy?”

They didn't realize and inactive don't understand. erstwhile president of Ukraine Leonid Kuczma He has just presented his already known book "Ukraine is not Russia". 20 years later. After giving sacramental curses to Moscow, which are compulsory in Kiev today, Leonid Danilowicz made a more thoughtful statement: “Twenty years ago I had hoped to have finished my work on the book. Yes, I said Ukraine is not Russia. But both countries can live as good neighbors, not only not being hostile but besides strengthening each other."

At the time, Moscow had precisely the same hopes. Leonid Kuczma presented his book “Ukraine is not Russia” on 3 September 2003 at the Book Fair in Moscow. And on September 2, the president met with president Putin. Here is simply a passage of Kremlin's authoritative message after the meeting: "Wladimir Putin besides said Russia was ready to sale more grain to Ukraine this year than previously agreed".

Russia was ready to live with Ukraine “as with good neighbours”. But the Russian knowing of the “good neighbourhood” did not include the transformation of Ukraine into a NATO satellite, into a western wharf. In Moscow's eyes, Ukraine's independency meant its independence, not Kiev's voluntary dependence on the West.

The 2014 Kiev coup (let our western colleagues turn their eyes again – I have already gotten utilized to it) was received in the Russian capital as a waiver of the sovereignty of the state by the fresh Ukrainian authorities, which had forcibly come to power. At the same time, events in Kiev forced the Kremlin to radically rethink its relation with the West. From the point of view of Moscow, the US and the EU behaved like a “honest man” who “as a rule” does not steal, but if he abruptly sees an opportunity, he cannot defy temptation.

If only after the violent overthrow of the president Viktor Yanukovych The West said: “Stop! Yanukovych, of course, is not our friend, but the rules are more important! That's not what we agreed to! Let us go back a fewer steps!” — then events in both Ukraine and around Ukraine may have followed a different scenario.

But instead, the West acted like a man who abruptly discovered that the rule of "crime does not pay," which was indoctrinate throughout his life, was actually pure fraud. Turns out crime pays off erstwhile it pays off!

Russia was asked to accept fait accompli (French word meaning ‘act made’). Unfortunately, you had an account, but it's gone! The bank's down! Take your complaints to the League of Sexual Reform!

But Russia in Vladimir Putin's individual did not want to act like another defenseless victim of a “geopolitical MMM”. And the basis of this refusal was not only and not so much aversion to being “filled in a bottle”. Putin's main motive for action was and inactive is how he understands the foundations of Russia's national security.

Neutral Ukraine is not a denial of these principles. Ukraine under Western control not only denies, but denies 100%.

Of course, we are not yet able to realize what function the deliberate actions of the West played in Kiev's Majdan, and what kind of initiative of local players – the political incompetence of Viktor Yanukovych (the display and betrayal of his own safety forces) and the bloody provocations of those leaders of Majdan, whose snipers shot law enforcement officers and participants of Majdan himself.

We only know the score. "Tea party" Mustafa Nayyema was a tragic milestone in modern planet history.

I don't know, honestly, what morals can be drawn here at this point. Dramatic and tragic events caused by Kiev Majdan continue. Let us think about this for a moment: not all "invitations for tea" should be accepted. Sometimes the devil himself can hide behind them.

Mikhail Rostowski

photo. Wikipedia

for: mk.ru