Of conducting a modern world war

As shown by all the wars of the last two decades arranged by the U.S., starting with Iraq and Yugoslavia and ending with Ukraine, they have a complex nature by the type of technologies used, where the actual military component functions as the " ultima ratio" and is used at the final stage. Prior to that, the main emphasis is placed on the internal destabilization of the region planned for the aggression, to which end cognitive information weapons are used aimed at destabilizing the public consciousness and discrediting the traditional value system of the national culture. In other words, the objective is loosening of the foundations of society, which is indoctrinated through the media with aggressive and even misanthropic reference points in order to unleash armed conflicts, both external and internal. At the same time, bribery and establishment of control over the ruling elite take place by involving influential families and promising youth in special relations with the U.S. and its NATO allies through foreign accounts and savings, training, grants, invitations to prestigious events, citizenship granting, property acquisition, etc. This allows the U.S. secret services to manipulate both public opinion and the ruling elite, provoking internal and external conflicts.

In so doing, the U.S. itself chooses opponents, then control the battling, and thereafter determine the winners and assign punishment to the losers. This was the case with Iraq, which the U.S. provoked to attack Kuwait and then punished making an example. This was the case with Serbia, the leader of which had been promised security in exchange for refraining from inflicting unacceptable damage on NATO countries, and then was demonstratively crushed and condemned. It happened to the countries of North Africa, the leaders of which were misled by courtesies and then given to be torn to pieces by the mob frantic with impunity. It happened to Yanukovych whom the U.S. consultants, and in the decisive phase, the leading officials and politicians of the U.S. and EU were cajoling for a long time for one purpose only, to persuade him not to use force against the unbridled opposition, sacrificing him thereafter to his fifth column and seizing power.

The pivotal role in the U.S. tactics of unleashing wars belongs to a combination of bribing the ruling elite, establishing control over the media, and personal cozying up to the country’s senior-most officials. Achieving control over the country’s public consciousness, on the one hand, and paralyzing the political will of its leadership, on the other hand, the U.S. secret services arrange conflicts and manipulate their participants, obtaining the result desired by the U.S.

The world hybrid war that is being unleashed nowadays by the U.S. is conducted with the widespread employment of weapons of the new technological paradigm, while being also a catalyst for its establishing in the U.S. economy. These are, most notably, information and communication technologies and high-precision weapons based on them, giving the U.S. military a systemic superiority in managing combat operations and minimizing losses. They are complemented by a wide application of cognitive technologies that turn the media into a highly effective psychotropic weapon of mass destruction of human minds, and turn diplomacy into a psycho-paralytic weapon that affects the political will of the adversary’s leaders.

As noted in the detailed book of Ukrainian and Belarusian experts on the topics of the ongoing U.S. wars, today one can confidently talk about the existence of methodology, technology, tactics and strategy and their applied nature in creating a single global totalitarian empire of a new generation, trying to establish control over resources on the planetary scale. These technologies are aimed not so much at destroying the population of individual countries (as labor force is also an important resource) and their infrastructure, as at turning them into politically and economically dependent territories with controllable administrations[40].

In recent decades, there has been a shift in emphasis from military methods, open armed interventions and aggressions against sovereign states towards unarmed, " nonviolent" methods of overthrowing the legitimate governments of various nations. An approach that can be called " humanitarian terror" is actively used, consisting in deliberate, politically and economically motivated pressure exerted through unarmed methods by organized structures with the support of engaged mass media against certain political and state figures or certain social groups, usually with the aim of removing various personalities from their office, influencing public mood, shaping public opinion, or impairing the rights of certain social groups.

Intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign states by unarmed methods has proved effective in comparison with a direct armed aggression, which is used only when the objective of changing power in a country needs to be achieved as soon as possible, or when implementation of the set tasks by unarmed methods is not possible. The instruments of exerting pressure on the manipulated territories include psychological impact and promotion of " universal values" through media, " cultural diplomacy, " formation of a new system of values and new personal attitudes that were previously considered unacceptable[41].

The practical accomplishment of these tasks has largely become possible due to invention by the analytical centers of new technologies for removal of the legitimate authorities without resorting to armed force. One of the most influential " think tanks" that Barron’s Magazine dubbed as " the shadow CIA" is Stratfor (Strategic Forecasting Inc.), led by political scientist George Friedman. It conducts intelligence and analytical activities around the world, currently focusing its efforts on the western borders of Russia. Stratfor is closely involved in the Ukrainian process[42].

Unlike the U.S. establishment, the " taskmasters" of the hybrid war do not hide their true goals. G. Friedman describes the U.S. policy goals as follows: " The United States has spent the past century pursuing a single objective: avoiding the rise of any single hegemon that might be able to exploit Western European technology and capital and Russian resources and manpower. The United States intervened in World War I in 1917 to block German hegemony, and again in World War II. In the Cold War, the goal was to prevent Russian hegemony. U.S. strategic policy has been consistent for a century... The United States has been conditioned to be cautious of any rising hegemon. In this case the fear of a resurgent Russia is a recollection of the Cold War, but not an unreasonable one." [43] Thus, the transatlantic speaker, explicitly acknowledging the point that the wars on the Eurasian continent were " good" for the U.S. at all times, added that the current sanctions pressure of the West is unlikely to achieve the desired result unless Russia itself is destroyed.

Well, the Anglo-Saxon anti-Russian paranoia remains the same. In September 1938 in Munich, the British prime minister gave Hitler his blessing for a war against the USSR with a view to the total extermination of the Russian people. In the course of this war, another British prime minister delayed in every possible way the opening up of the second front, nurturing up to the end of the war the insidious design of a separate peace with Germany in order to create a common coalition with it for the destruction of the USSR (Operation Unthinkable). Not daring to implement this plan during the Second World War, Churchill called on the U.S. to begin a cold war against the USSR almost immediately after its completion[44]. In March 2014, under pressure from the U.S., the leaders of the European powers signed with the criminal Ukrainian Nazi regime an agreement on the Association of Ukraine with the EU, blessing it for a fratricidal war with the Russian World. As they say, times, they are a-changing, whereas the maniacal hatred of Anglo-Saxon politicians towards Russians remains unchanged. In the third millennium, they still think in the same " sea against land" categories of the geopolitics they invented, as they did two hundred years ago. This also includes the geographical goals of their eternal anti-Russian intrigue. Thus, the reunion of the Crimea with Russia evokes in their imagination inflamed by the Russophobia images of the Crimean wars of the century before last.

It is interesting to note that one of the key objectives set by the U.S. military strategists in the post-Soviet space was to minimize the operational capabilities of the Russian fleet in the Black Sea and turn the Crimea (primarily Sevastopol) into a zone of its influence. That is why the decision to integrate the peninsula with Russia caused such a storm in the U.S. brain trusts[45].

The authors of the above-mentioned fundamental work[46] scrupulously investigated the technology component of arranging civil disobedience in order to accomplish " colored revolutions." They showed that, despite a wide variety of countries covered by them that belong to different cultures and have completely different political traditions, the methods of overthrowing the legitimate authority with the aim of replacing it with a pro-American puppet regime are the same and, moreover, standardized up to texts of instructions, leaflets, slogans, equipment and even speeches of " fighters for democracy."

The key technology of the American war tactics is arrangement of civil disobedience actions. In 1983, at the Harvard University Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Gene Sharp created his " Politics of Nonviolent Action, " popularly described in his book From Dictatorship to Democracy, A Conceptual Framework for Liberation, translated into 39 languages[47]. It has become a guide to action for anti-government movements in all countries of the U.S. periphery, including the post-Soviet space. It contains a description of about 200 methods of nonviolent action with the aim of overthrowing legitimate power. Their practical application with interference of the U.S. secret services in the internal affairs of sovereign states has been recorded in more than seventy cases.

In outward appearance, the wars unleashed by the U.S. seem to be a meaningless chaos. In fact, they are arranged and coordinated by all concerned structures, from the state to the big capital, the media, and an extensive agent network. The main intervention tools are non-governmental organizations of very different profiles, established in a variety of ways. The same book describes the network of such organizations, coordinated by the U.S. Department of State and the CIA. This network has tens of thousands of structures created in all countries having any significance to the U.S. These activities get annually 1% of the U.S. budget expenditure side, distributed through the notorious US AID. Along with the state, there are numerous non-state networks operating in the interests of big U.S. capital. The forms and purposes of their activities are boundless in their variety, from charitable foundations to private military companies.

The results achieved by the U.S. in the upshot of hybrid wars with other countries are planned in advance and calculated for self-sufficiency: American corporations receive control over the natural resources and infrastructure of the defeated countries, banks freeze their assets, specially trained vandals plunder historical museums, the financial system is tightly tied to the dollar. All wars arranged by the U.S. have paid for themselves over and over again, including wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

After the U.S. occupation of the latter, the drug flows to Russia and Europe controlled by the U.S. secret services increased 44-fold. It is noteworthy that under the pressure of the world community, the Taliban regime virtually nullified drug production by 2001. To date, 92% of the global heroin production is concentrated in Afghanistan, with 21% of global consumption falling on Russia alone. The international drug mafia cashes in on Afghan opiates (primarily heroin) over $100 billion, by the most conservative estimate[48]. The plundered treasures of Baghdad museums, the oilfields captured by the U.S. corporations, millions of hectares transferred to cultivation of the U.S. genetically modified plants have currently paid off in spades the cost of military occupation of Iraq by the U.S.[49]

An important prerequisite for the effective implementation of the " organized chaos" technology[50] is clearing away from the nation and its elites of the understanding and sensation of the war being waged against the country. The public consciousness of the country being " chaotized" is consistently indoctrinated by various means of psychological influence designed to represent the American wolf in sheep’s clothing. A typical example of such long-term conditioning is embedding into consciousness of Ukrainians of the myths of " European choice, " omnipotence and friendliness of the U.S., and Russia’s hostility and inferiority. Twenty years of consistent work with all social groups and layers of the Ukrainian population yielded their result – tens of millions of people have believed in fictional myths, lost political and value reference points, stopped discerning between truth and lies, and even lost their common sense. Through manipulation with public consciousness, a people not only loses its will to resist, but also becomes a blind tool of external forces. As a result of using the means of information influence, people enthusiastically perceive changes imposed from the outside, despite the drastic drop in the standard and value of life. The population is deprived of the ability to social mobilization outside actions arranged and financed by the " chaos" masterminds.

Of paramount importance to the U.S. tactics of starting a war are negotiations with a potential victim, whose vigilance is lulled by infinite demagoguism on inadmissibility of using violence, violating the freedom of speech, the principles of democracy and the rule of law. The main trump card of the U.S. negotiating tactics is banal deception. It is so cynical that a victim that has moral values cannot believe that it is simply being scammed in order to be slaughtered. A classic example of such tactics is organization of the coup d’é tat in Ukraine.

So far as the President of Ukraine Yanukovych was agreeing to sign an association agreement with the EU, he was being coaxed in every way possible and praised by high-ranking officials and politicians of the U.S. and the EU, who were simultaneously supporting the opposition controlled by them and digging a pit for him. As soon as he refused to sign this agreement, the U.S. and European secret services immediately started arranging a coup d’é tat. They provided powerful information, political and financial assistance to the EuroMaidan, making it a springboard for seizing power. Anti-government actions, including criminal attacks against law enforcement officers, seizures of administrative buildings, accompanied by murders and beatings, were planned, organized and carried out with the participation and support of the U.S. embassy, European officials and politicians who not simply " interfered" in the internal affairs of Ukraine, but carried out a real aggression through the Ukrainian Nazi militants raised by them.

During numerous negotiations with Yanukovych and Russia, the Western representatives have never fulfilled their obligations. The invariable result of all negotiations was a direct fraud on the part of U.S. and EU officials and politicians who used the negotiations to disorient the partners and gain time necessary to prepare the following operations. Thus, high-ranking American and European officials, while lulling Yanukovych’s vigilance with persuasion to refrain from using force, were preparing the Nazis for his violent deposition. Thereafter, they used the Geneva talks on a settlement of the conflict on the Donbass to ensure that the junta under their control has enough time to mobilize the armed forces against the Russian population of Ukraine. Immediately after reaching an agreement on disarmament of illegal military formations and commencement of the nationwide dialogue, the U.S. Vice President Biden arrived in Kiev to support the junta’s actions in carrying out the punitive operation of the Ukrainian army against the Donbass resistance forces. Endlessly assuring the Russian president of the commitment to peace and espousing violence cessation, the leadership of the U.S. and the EU consistently supports strengthening of the Ukrainian military terror against the Donbass population. At the same time, as soon as Russia accommodated the agreements on conflict de-escalation and withdrawal of troops from the Ukrainian border, the Nazi junta started an abrupt increase of its armed forces in the conflict zone and began using aviation and armored vehicles against the population of the Donbass.

Posing as peacekeepers and human rights advocates, the U.S. representatives were actually paving the way for the forcible power grab by the Nazis, who were then supported in legalizing their militants in military service and egged on to punitive actions against the Russian population. In so doing, the media controlled by the U.S. and their proté gé s accuse Russia of everything, diligently making of it an image of the enemy for Ukraine and a bogey for Europe.

The apotheosis of the U.S. cynical policy was the provocation with shooting down of the Malaysian commercial Boeing. This crime was necessary for them to internationalize the conflict and draw the EU into the war after it became clear that the Nazi junta is unable to suppress resistance in the Donbass. The attempts to provoke the Russian leadership to send troops in and enter the war with Ukraine with massacres of Donbass civilians and public burning of people alive in the Odessa Trade Union Building did not have the desired effect either. After that, the U.S. secret services decided to try another into aggression against Russia by accusing " pro-Russian separatists" of shooting down the civil aircraft with European passengers. The unmasking of the SBU’s fraud with their radio exchange, as well as the irrefutable facts of involvement of the Ukrainian armed forces in this plane crash reported by the Russian General Staff, prove that this provocation was planned and accomplished to demonize the Russian leadership by accusing it of aiding terrorism. This crime had to play the part of a missing argument in Washington’s conduct of an aggressive campaign to internationally isolate Russia and draw the European NATO states into the war against it.

This means that the U.S. from the very start of the Ukrainian crisis has been steadfastly following the strategy of blowing it up into the European-Russian war, by justifying all the crimes of the Nazi junta, financing and arming it, covering diplomatically and forcing its European allies to do the same.

 

 

Section 2

WHY UKRAINE?

 

 

Above, we have already partially addressed this issue. The choice of Ukraine by the U.S. as a springboard for unleashing a war in Europe is explained by a combination of unique factors:

· an impossibility for Russia to wage a full-blown war with Ukraine as part of the Russian World core;

· the European geopolitical tradition that views Ukrainian breakaway from Russia as a key strategic goal for weakening and subjugating the latter;

· a fairly large size of the territory, economic potential and population, the establishment of control over which allows the U.S. to extract considerable profits and bolster the competitive strength of the U.S. corporations through appropriation of Ukrainian assets;

· the great cultural and historical significance of Kiev, Malorossiya (Little Russia) and Novorossiya (New Russia) for the Russian World, the separation of which from Russia inflicts irreparable moral damage to it;

· the possibility of unleashing the war by the hands of the Ukrainian military without serious losses for the U.S.;

· the dependence of the Russian economy, including the defense contracting enterprises, on cooperation with Ukrainian companies, the severance of which will cause substantial damage to it[51].

Another ground for choosing Ukraine as the key target of the U.S. aggression against Russia is thorny character of the Ukrainian issue for many Western powers with historical claims to Ukraine. The U.S. aggression against Russia in Ukraine was led by Americans largely by the hands of Poles, Germans, Austrians, Swedes who have long-standing designs on Ukrainian lands, as well as Canadians and even Australians, among whom turned up many descendants of Ukrainian Nazis who served Hitlerites.

The combination of these factors allowed the U.S. to drag European powers into the struggle for separating Ukraine from Russia. Raising the Ukrainian neo-Nazis to power, the U.S. raised before the EU the need to support its Russophobic policy, including war crimes and genocide against the Russian population of Ukraine. By early 2015, a number of European leaders began to realize their puppet role in the game played by the U.S., as well as the real threat of escalation of the local conflict in the Ukrainian southeast into a suicidal all-European war threatening the EU security. This is evidenced by the speed march of the leaders of Germany and France to Kiev and Moscow on February 6, 2015, which resulted in signing of the Minsk Protocol and the corresponding declaration[52], in which F. Hollande and A. Merkel have assumed obligations to fulfill the peace plan.

At the same time, the Ukrainian crisis highlighted the lack of self-sufficiency of European leaders, and their critical dependence on the U.S. The latter still manages to impose its policy on its European partners. This is done through pressure of the American-controlled European media, operation of the U.S. agent network in the leadership of European countries, as well as through European integration institutions, the bureaucracy of which serves rather the interests of the U.S. than those of the EU. Therefore, the signatures of the French and German leaders are hardly worth more than the guarantees of their foreign ministers, given to Yanukovych on the eve of the coup. The U.S. needs the war, and the U.S. secret services continue pushing their Ukrainian puppets to its continuation. Contrary to the Minsk Protocols, bombardments of Donbass cities go on, mobilization and buildup of the Ukrainian armed forces do not stop, the U.S. military assistance is becoming more and more extensive. There is no doubt that the U.S. will not be stopped by the opinion of its European allies, the interests of which it will no doubt sacrifice for the sake of achieving its own goals.

In this part, this issue is addressed in more detail in the context of both current and past Western policy towards Ukraine. It begins with analysis of the goals of the current American aggression. It was started in May 1992 by signing the " Agreement between the Government of Ukraine and the Government of the United States of America regarding humanitarian and technical economic cooperation" which formed the legal basis for work of the U.S. NGOs in Ukraine.

 

 

The goals of U.S.

Aggression in Ukraine

The most damage from the American strategy for the forced European integration of Ukraine is taken by Ukraine itself, which is doomed to the split that has transformed to civil war, humanitarian and economic catastrophe. Obviously, this strategy in no way corresponds to Ukrainian national interests, as well as to interests of the overwhelming majority of its citizens. Therefore, the talk that the U.S. is pursuing the goals of Ukraine’s protection, prosperity and development should be immediately dismissed as completely incongruous and contrary to the actual results of the U.S. policy. This is not believed even by the Ukrainian grant eaters of the U.S. programs who tirelessly praise America to the skies for its touching care for the unfortunate Ukrainians, whom it allegedly saves from aggressive Moskal dimwits.

The Eurointegration of Ukraine cannot be considered in itself to be the goal of the U.S. strategy, if the term " Eurointegration" is to be understood as propagation of so-called " European values." The Ukrainian government form established by the U.S. secret services has nothing to do either with the values of the rule of law, or with the principles of democracy and human rights protection, which are openly flouted each day by the Nazi junta committing massacres of Ukrainian citizens. By its policy, the pro-American junta rejects all the values of " European choice, " with the possible exception of homosexuality. It actually deprived citizens of all democratic freedoms: the freedom of speech, assembly, elections. The citizens disagreeing with the official Nazi policies are subjected to repressions, beatings and murders[53]. The judicial and legal system became an instrument of political repression, and the army turned out to be an instrument of terror against civilians. The unconstitutional " extraordinary presidential elections in Ukraine" held on May 25, 2014, as well as the elections to the Verkhovna Rada that followed on October 26 with subsequent formation of the government, were nothing more than a political show, the only participants of which were actors appointed by the junta with a script written in advance. The real person in charge of Ukraine is the U.S. ambassador who actually appointed the president, the prime minister, and the deputies of the Verkhovna Rada. All candidates that were undesirable to the U.S. were either physically removed from the elections, or were flatly denied registration, or were forced to voluntarily give up their participation through blackmail and pressure. Not completely trusting their Ukrainian appointees, the U.S. secret services nominated to key positions in the Ukrainian government its direct agents, whom Poroshenko immediately granted citizenship. To confirm these obvious facts, more and more often mentioned in the European countries, tired of American embrace, one does not need any special intelligence data, or access to classified information sources. The U.S. leadership, in the person of Barack Obama and Secretary of State Kerry, quite bluntly declared several times in recent memory about its mediation, for which read direct participation, in the change of the Ukrainian regime[54] and subsequent events, including forcible imposition on the EU countries of sanctions against Russia[55].

As is clear from the rhetoric and actions of American politicians and officials, the Ukrainian conflict was originally arranged by the U.S. against Russia, its immediate actual goal being definitive separation of Ukraine from Russia. This is unequivocally stated in the U.S. law " Russian Aggression Prevention Act 2014." This act, which is amazing, among other things, in terms of international law and observance of legal culture in general, deserves selective citation. This document contains following provisions:

Section 102. The U.S. shall strengthen NATO’s capabilities to deter and, as needed, to rapidly and appropriately respond, including through the use of military force as necessary. All NATO member-states are called on to make substantial progress towards meeting the Alliance’s defense spending requirements. The U.S. shall encourage NATO member-states to work together to achieve energy independence.

Section 103. Expanded support for Poland and the Baltic states.

Title II, Section 201:

(9) to condemn the unjustified activities of agents of the Russian Federation in eastern Ukraine seeking to foment civil unrest and disturbance.

(10) to support the people of Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia in their desire to forge closer ties with Europe, including signing an Association Agreement with the European Union as a means to address endemic corruption, consolidate democracy, and achieve sustained prosperity;

(11) to enhance and extend United States security cooperation with, security assistance to, and military exercises conducted with, states in Europe and Eurasia, including NATO member countries, NATO aspirants, and appropriate Eastern Partnership countries;

(13) the continued participation of the Russian Federation in the Group of Eight (G – 8) states and its receipt of assistance from the World Bank Group should be conditioned on the Government of the Russian Federation respecting the territorial integrity of its neighbors and accepting and adhering to the norms and standards of free, democratic societies.

A key element of anti-Russian aggression in Ukraine is its subordination to EU jurisdiction by imposing on it the Association with the EU, which subordinates Ukraine to EU jurisdiction, depriving it of independence and legal opportunities for economic integration with Russia[56]. In 2013, a group of scientists of the Russian and Ukrainian academies of sciences, including the author of this book, together with all specialists and experts of Ukrainian ministries and departments interested in the true picture, analyzed the legal, economic and social consequences of the adoption of this agreement for Ukraine. They, along with warnings from other experts, urged the Ukrainian leadership to question the advisability of signing this agreement as the discriminatory one. Confronted with the unwillingness of the Ukrainian president and government to sign the EU Association Agreement that was fettering for Ukraine, the U.S. and its NATO allies perpetrated a gross interference in Ukraine’s internal affairs, organizing a coup d’é tat and forcibly appointing their puppet government. The U.S. has been pursuing this goal throughout the two decades that followed the USSR collapse, spending more than $5 billion on the cultivation of the anti-Russian political elite in Kiev, according to U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Nuland[57]. As envisioned by NATO strategists, Ukraine’s separation from Russia should be formalized through subordination of Ukraine to the EU in the form of an unequal Association, within the framework of which Kiev transfers to Brussels all Ukraine’s sovereign rights in regulating its foreign economic activity and pursuing foreign and defense policy. The refusal of Yanukovych to sign the EU Association Agreement was perceived by the U.S. as getting of the Ukrainian leadership out of hand, and beginning of an unacceptable process for the restoration of a united economic space with Russia. To keep Ukraine from joining the Customs Union with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan and returning to the path of European integration, a coup d’é tat was organized, immediately after which the EU leaders hastened to sign with the illegitimate Nazi junta an association agreement contradicting the Ukrainian Constitution.

Thus, the second goal of U.S. aggression is to undermine the process of Eurasian integration, for which the participation of Ukraine is critically important. The U.S. regard this project, that has already taken shape of the Eurasian Economic Union, as the main threat to the implementation of its plans to colonize the " post-Soviet space." To stop the ability of Ukraine and other former Soviet Union republics to participate in this process, the U.S. and the EU have spent billions of dollars to create anti-Russian influence networks in them. Concurrently, relying on media controlled by American media tycoons, the U.S. is stirring up European officials against Russia in order to isolate the former USSR republics from the Eurasian integration process. The Eastern Partnership program created by the U.S. became a cloak for aggression against Russia in the post-Soviet space. This aggression is conducted by coercion of the post-Soviet states to association with the EU, within the framework of which they transfer their sovereign functions in the trade, economic, foreign and defense policy to the European Commission. Such colonization is legally enshrined by creating associations of these states with the EU, and ideologically, by inflaming Russophobia and mythology of the " European choice, " artificially opposed to Eurasian integration.

As the authors of the " Democratic" war conclude[58], the true and not particularly masked goals of the U.S. and its allies in the North Atlantic Treaty are collapse of the CIS, as well as of the member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), the members of which are Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan. Hence the obvious tasks of the " Eastern Partnership" along with other programs and projects that are organized with a thrust at Russian attempts to overcome the centrifugal trends after the USSR collapse and to establish effective integration cooperation in Eurasia, rallying around itself the CIS partners ideologically, politically and economically.

Without Ukraine, the Eurasian Economic Union remains but a continuation of the Russian economy, the GDP share of which exceeds 80%. At the same time, the degree of connectedness of the economies of the integrating countries, with the exception of Belarus, remains insignificant, as the share of mutual trade in the total foreign trade turnover of the member states amounted to 11.7% as of the end of 2014. The participation of Ukraine would have given the EEU a more complete character by closing many reproductive loops of machine building, chemico-metallurgical and fuel-power complex that had been created as a single whole within the framework of the national economic complex of the USSR. Even today, despite its destruction more than 20 years ago, Russian and Ukrainian enterprises continue their production and technological cooperation, retaining thousands of supply and processing chains[59].

The importance of the Ukrainian economy for Eurasian integration explains by the considerable efforts taken by the Russian leadership to involve Ukraine in the Common Economic Space, the treaty on the creation of which was signed and ratified by Russia as far back as in 2004. The Agreement on the Association of Ukraine with the EU, imposed by force, contradicts this treaty and makes it unfeasible, separating Ukraine not only from Russia, but also from the entire post-Soviet economic space. This goal of U.S. aggression has already been achieved at the cost of destroying the main sectors of the Ukrainian economy inextricably linked with the EEU markets.

Although the unlawful signing of the Agreement on the Association of Ukraine with the EU was officially proclaimed a success of European integration, in reality it creates many problems for the EU. First, in connection with the huge costs of financial assistance to Ukraine, led to bankruptcy by the " European choice." To prevent default Ukraine, for which the EU is held responsible now, requires at least 60 billion euros. In total, the program to restore and modernize Ukrainian economy, which is necessary to ensure its sustainable development, is estimated at more than 300 billion euros. Bringing of Ukrainian enterprises in line with EU standards, which under the Agreement on the Association should basically be done in two years, alone would require (according to estimates of the Ukrainian League of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs) about 180 billion euros over 10 years.

Secondly, the freezing of Russian dollar and euro assets will result in an inability of some of their owners to service their obligations towards European banks (mainly), which will lead the latter into serious difficulties fraught with bankruptcy of some of them. Destabilizing of the European banking system will stimulate the outflow of capital in the U.S. to maintain the dollar pyramid of its debt obligations.

Thirdly, sanctions against Russia inflict damage on the trade and economic ties of the EU countries with Russia, not limited to the European food products import embargo. A forced exit of European companies from the Russian market, restrictions on the import of Russian energy carriers and raw materials, destruction of cooperative ties, freezing of joint projects will harm the economy of the EU in the long run in the amount of about a trillion euros, which will worsen its already poor condition and weaken its position in the competitive struggle against the U.S.

Fourthly, drawing of European countries into the war with Russia will strengthen their political dependence on the U.S., which will make it easier for the latter to solve the problem of imposing a free trade zone on the EU on conditions favorable to the U.S.

Fifthly, the niches left by European companies in the Russian market will be filled with domestic or Chinese products, which will mean a reduction in the comparative advantages and competitiveness of European producers.

Sixthly, the U.S. aggression against Russia imposes on the European NATO states the obligation to increase military spending, burdening their already deficit budgets.

Thus, the U.S. aggression in Ukraine pursues another goal – to weaken the EU, to worsen its security, and thereby to maximize its dependence on the U.S. This expands the space for operation of American corporations in Europe, and strengthens the U.S. position in negotiations with the EU regarding creation of a transatlantic free trade zone. The U.S. itself, unlike the European countries, has insignificant trade with Russia, and its markets are almost independent of Russian supplies. As in previous European wars, it would be the net winner. It is curious that while Russia’s trade with the EU fell by 12% after imposition of economic sanctions, its trade with the U.S., on the contrary, grew by 7% in 2014.

Another important objective of U.S. aggression in Ukraine is commonplace profiteering. It is worthwhile to point out the trophies already received by Western officials (and their affiliated corporations) who took an active part in arranging the coup d’é tat and the seizure of power in Ukraine by the Nazis, raising to power the criminal government under their control. Firstly, the appropriation of Ukrainian state assets:

· transfer of oil and gas industry assets of the oil under the control of Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Robert Hunter Biden, who became a member of the board of the Ukrainian oil and gas company Burisma Holdings in tandem with another organizer and activist of the EuroMaidan, former Polish President A. Kwaś niewski, who visited Ukraine during the bloody events as many as 27 times;

· mineral deposits, including shale gas deposits in Kharkov and Donetsk regions, as well as in Transcarpathia, transferred to the exclusive disposal of Shell and Chevron that are closely linked with the political leadership of NATO countries[60];

· culture and art values that disappeared after the plundering of Kiev museums by the gangs of militants orchestrated by the U.S. embassy[61];

· the remnants of the Ukrainian gold reserve taken out by the U.S. military transport aircraft " for safekeeping" [62].

Secondly, the seizure of Ukrainian markets for nuclear fuel, aircraft, equipment that are of importance to the U.S. corporations. In April of 2014, Ukraine extended the contract with the U.S. company Westinghouse, that had been frozen two years ago, which provides for the supply by 2020 of TVS-W fuel for three Soviet-designed nuclear power units. For this purpose, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, who was appointed by the U.S., had to fire the chairman of the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate E. Mykolaychuk, who responsibly and skillfully opposed the use of American fuel at Ukrainian nuclear power plants as threatening a large-scale ecological catastrophe not only for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe.

Thus, the war in Ukraine is also a business for the U.S. According to media reports, it has already covered all its expenses for the Maidan and Orange revolutions.

Finally, the fifth and main goal of the U.S. aggression in Ukraine is a blow to Russia aimed at overthrowing the existing government with its subsequent dismemberment and ultimate destruction as a sovereign state. The declaration by President Barack Obama that Russia is a threat to humanity is not a mere figure of speech, but a reflection of the U.S strategic geopolitical goal. This is evidenced not only by the statements of key players of the U.S. geopolitics, but above all, by their actions. Anti-Russian rhetoric of the Ukrainian Nazis, swept by the U.S. to power in Kiev, rapid militarization of Ukraine, as well as consolidation of the Ukrainian nation on an anti-Russian basis, leave no doubt that the ultimate goal of American aggression is Russia.

Ukraine is being made a springboard for an attack on Russian society. Militants, terrorists and propagandists trained by U.S. instructors will be sent to conduct subversive activities in Russia, while neo-Nazis, coached against everything Russian, will intensify provocations in order to draw Russia into the war with NATO. Forcing the controlled Ukrainian Nazi junta to wage a full-scale war in the Donbass, the U.S. is creating a new flashpoint area in the center of Europe. In order to provoke Russia for military actions against Ukraine, the American advisers impose on their Kiev proté gé s employment of the most brutal weapons against the population: blast fragmentation and phosphoric projectiles, cluster bombs, mines. Indeed, the more victims there are, the higher the expectation of Russian military intervention to protect the Russian population and the higher the risk of a new European war that the U.S. needs to maintain global domination amidst global structural changes caused by a change in technological and world economic paradigms.

These are the motives behind the driving forces of American aggression in Ukraine, which is actually occupied by the U.S. secret agencies and puppets. There is no doubt about its long-term and consistent nature. Surprising is the position of the European states that are trailing behind the U.S., provoking by their inaction the escalation of the conflict into a full-fledged war in the center of Europe. Who else but they should understand the danger of neo-Nazism not only in Ukraine, but also in the EU countries themselves? The avalanche of wars arranged by the U.S. in North Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans, and now in Ukraine threatens Europe in the first instance, the devastation of which during the two world wars of the last century enabled emergence of the U.S. " economic miracle." Today, as in the years of the Great Depression, the American oligarchy in solving its economic problems is staking on fascism, this time round, in the form of Ukrainian Nazism.

 

Eurofascism in Ukraine

The events taking place in Ukraine are channelized by the evil spirit of Nazism and fascism, which seemed to have disappeared long ago after the Second World War. Almost 70 years later, it again is " out of the bottle, " frightening not only by quite recognizable symbols and rhetoric of Hitlerite henchmen, but also by the obsessive Drang nach Osten. This bottle containing the genie of war was again opened by the Anglo-Saxons: just as 77 years ago in Munich they gave Hitler their blessing to fight against the USSR, today in Kiev they assiduously stir up the Ukrainian Nazis for the war with Russia. This brings up the question, why the participants of this new warmongering are European leaders, whose historical memory seems to completely have failed them?

To answer this question, it is necessary to give correct definitions to the ongoing events. To do this, it is necessary to highlight their key components based on facts. The facts have already been mentioned: Yanukovych refused to sign the Agreement on the Association with the EU that was being imposed on Ukraine, after which the U.S. and its NATO allies physically ousted him from power, arranging a violent coup d’é tat in Kiev and bringing to power an illegitimate, albeit fully controlled government. The fact that the purpose of this crime was involvement of Ukraine in the association with the EU is evidenced by the sudden signing of this agreement with its puppets a month after they seized power. Heads of European states, under supervision of the EU commissioners, signed with the criminals who organized the Nazi coup d’é tat the political part of this Agreement, according to which Ukraine undertakes to follow the foreign and defense policy of the EU, and to participate in settlement of regional civil and armed conflicts as directed by the EU.

The point of the Agreement on the Association with the EU for Ukraine is to transfer to Brussels sovereign functions of trade regulation, foreign economic activity, technical regulation, veterinary, sanitary and phytosanitary control, as well as to open the market for European goods. This almost thousand-page document sets out the EU directives which Ukraine undertakes to implement. Each section stipulates that Ukrainian legislation should be unilaterally brought into line with the requirements of Brussels. At the same time, Ukrainian obligations to implement EU directives apply not only to the current regulations, but also to the future ones, in the development of which Ukraine will not have any part.

Simply put, after signing the Agreement, Ukraine becomes a colony of the EU blindly fulfilling all the requirements of its new " mother country." This includes the requirements that the Ukrainian industry is not able to meet, which is detrimental to the economy of Ukraine. It fully opens its market for European goods, which results in import growth amounting to $4 billion and ousting of uncompetitive Ukrainian industry.

 

 

 

 

In the photos: The future Queen of Britain raises her hand in the Nazi salute, the European leaders conspire in Munich with Hitler, goading him into the world war,

 the EU leaders demonstrate their support of Poroshenko, the leader of the neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine – for a century, Nazism remains the main tool of the U.S. geopolitics.

It must reach European standards, for which 150 billion euros are needed to modernize the economy, while there are no sources of such funding[63].

The calculations made by Ukrainian and Russian economists show that after signing the Agreement, Ukraine should expected worsening of the already deficit balances of trade and payments and, subsequently, a default[64]. In so doing, the EU benefits from expansion of the market for its goods and acquisition of depreciated Ukrainian assets. The American corporations get shale gas deposits, which they want to supplement with pipeline infrastructure and the market of fuel elements for nuclear power plants. The main goal, as was shown above, is geopolitical: after signing the Agreement Ukraine is no longer able to become a party to the Customs Union with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. To achieve this goal, the U.S. and EU resorted to aggression against Ukraine, arranging an armed seizure of power by their stooges. Accusing Russia of annexing the Crimea, they seized the whole of Ukraine by establishing the power of the junta under their control. Its task is to deprive Ukraine of its sovereignty and subordinate it to the EU by signing the Agreement on the Association.

In fact, the events that happened mean the forcible subordination of Ukraine to the European Union, in other words, the occupation by the EU. EU leaders who obsessively insist on law-abiding and rule-of-law state principles, violate all legal standards signing the illegitimate agreement with illegitimate representatives of Ukraine. Yanukovych was deposed because he refused to sign it. However, his refusal is explained not only by substantive considerations, but also by the fact that he did not have the legal right to do so, since this agreement contradicts the Ukrainian constitution, the text of which does not provide for transfer of the sovereign rights of the state to some other party[65].

The Constitution of Ukraine stipulates that in order to sign an international agreement that contradicts it, it is first necessary to change the Constitution itself. This requirement was ignored by the junta that seized power with unconstitutional methods. This implies that the U.S. and the EU arranged the overthrow of the legitimate government of Ukraine to deprive it of political independence. As a next step, they imposed on Ukraine through political puppets brought by them into power the injurious Association Agreement that transfers the Ukrainian territory under the EU jurisdiction and deprives it of legal independence and national sovereignty. Whereas, unlike the occupation of Ukraine in 1941, the current Eurooccupation takes place for the time being without a direct invasion of foreign troops, the functions of which are performed by consultants, advisers, instructors, mercenaries and money from NATO countries, its forced nature is beyond doubt. Just like the fascists in 1941-1944 deprived the population of Ukraine that they occupied of all their civil rights, the current junta with the U.S. and EU behind it regard the opponents of European integration as criminals, indiscriminately accusing them of separatism and terrorism, tossing them in jail and simply shooting them by hands of Ukrainian Nazi militants.

The use of Nazis and religious fanatics to undermine political stability in various regions of the world is a favorite method of the U.S. secret services that they are practicing against Russia in the Baltics, the Caucasus, Central Asia, and now in Ukraine. Forcible Ukrainization of the country with propagation of the Western Ukrainian nationalist cult in an environment dominated by the Russian population inevitably leads to a civil war that is actually going on not only in the Donbass, but in all cities of Ukraine. The neo-fascist nature of the Ukrainian regime is dressed up by the efforts of Eurocracy in the garb of the " European choice" of the people. But the fact is that this choice has been made for the people of Ukraine by the U.S. secret services and European officials.

The Eastern Partnership project, initiated by Poland and Sweden with the support of the U.S. and Britain and aimed at separating the former Soviet republics located in Europe and the Caucasus from Russia, continues the long tradition of our European " partners." As far back as in 1926, organization Prometheus was created in Paris, the members of which were " representatives" (appointed by secret services of European states) of Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, the Don Cossacks, Karelia, the Komi, the Crimea, the North Caucasus, the Kuban, Turkestan and even specially invented Idel-Ural and Ingria. The " scientific and ideological" basis was provided by the Eastern Institute in Warsaw[66] and the Research Institute of Eastern Europe (Instytut Naukowo-Badawczy Europy Wschodniej) in Wilno (now Vilnius)[67].

An interesting fact is that on August 31, 1937, the Polish General Staff issued Directive No. 2304/2/37, which stated that the ultimate goal of Polish politics is " the destruction of all Russia, " with one of the effective instruments to achieve it being incitement of separatism in the Caucasus, Ukraine and Central Asia, using, in particular, military intelligence[68]. As the authors of the quoted work indicate, the idea of " fencing off" Russia, and the USSR as a whole, received a logical continuation in the future. In 1942-43, the British government was developing plans to create under Western supervision various federations of small states in Central, South-Eastern and Northern Europe in order to form a " sanitary cordon" against the USSR. The Prime Minister of Great Britain W. Churchill called for fencing off Soviet Russia from Western Europe with a cordon of " states frantically hating Bolshevism." [69] Half a century later, the same policy is substantiated by the influential American political scientist Z. Brzezinski who refers to the countries participating in the " sanitary cordon" as " buffer states." [70]

The policy of expansion toward the east, pursued by the U.S. and the Eurocracy, does not fit into the model of harmonious coexistence and more resembles the habitual violent Drang nach Osten. Since the 1990s, the EU-centric model of Greater Europe has begun to dominate Western political science.

It is no coincidence that the term " Greater Europe" is becoming been replaced in scientific publications by " Wider Europe" (etymologically closer to an extended Europe, assuming existence of a certain nucleus). The upper hand in scientific and socio-political discussions was taken by the traditional imperial Eurocentrism of the West. Greater Europe is increasingly mentioned in conjunction with the EU Neighborhood Policy, which encompassed not only Eastern Europe, but also the Southern Mediterranean and part of the Middle East[71]. Within this logic, Russia has already ceased to be an integral part of Europe, proving to be an obstacle for integration of its former parts, including Ukraine, into the EU-centric Greater Europe.

There are none of the former USSR republics, in which the Eastern Partnership program has resulted in a conflict-free democratic legal solution. Belarus has already made its choice, having created the Union State with Russia. The same applies to Kazakhstan, which established the Customs Union together with Russia and Belarus. Armenia and Kyrgyzstan decided to join it, despite the pressure of the West accompanied by a rude interference in their internal affairs with provocation of riots. Gagauzia refused to perceive Russophobia as the basis of Moldovan politics, holding a referendum in favor of an alliance with Russia and participation in Eurasian integration, questioning thereby the legitimacy of the European choice made by Chiş ină u. This choice is consistently rejected by Transnistria, which the EU regards as part of Moldova. This did not prevent the European politicians from signing an Association Agreement with the EU-controlled Moldovan government, provoking thereby the ultimate breakup of the country. In violation of the European democracy standards, under the pressure of the European integrators the Moldovan Central Election Commission removed from the elections the leading political party focused on Moldova’s joining the EEU.

Georgia, the only republic that took a relatively legitimate decision to establish an association with the EU, paid for the European choice of its leadership with economic catastrophe and a part of the territory populated by citizens refusing to live under Eurooccupation. The same scenario, involving loss of a part of the territory populated by citizens who do not accept the European choice of their leadership, as well as immersion in the economic and humanitarian catastrophe, is being imposed on Ukraine today.

The coercion of Ukraine to association with the EU is founded on Russophobia as a reaction of the wounded Ukrainian public consciousness to the Crimean decision on reunification with Russia. Since most Ukrainians still do not separate themselves from Russia, they are forced to perceive this episode as the aggression of Russia that annexed part of their territory. It was precisely this threat that Brzezinski spoke of when he talked about the Finlandization of Ukraine in order to anesthetize the consciousness of the Russian political elite in the course of the U.S. operation to cut Ukraine off from historical Russia[72]. Under this anesthesia, a sense of guilt is being imputed to Russian public opinion for the mythical oppression of the Ukrainian people, while the latter is indoctrinated with hatred for Russia, with which it allegedly fought for Malorossiya and Novorossiya[73]. Only a superficial observer would regard the Russophobic hysteria permeating currently the Ukrainian media as a spontaneous reaction to the Crimean drama. In fact, before our very eyes, the Ukrainian version of Eurofascism is being formed as the main instrument of inciting war against Russia.

Unfortunately, " we learn from history that we do not learn from history." This is a misfortune for Europe, which has repeatedly put to test a model of power based on a symbiosis of Nazis and big capital. It was this symbiosis that originated Hitler, who was supported by big German bourgeoisie, tempted during the Great Depression by the opportunity to make money from state orders and militarization of the economy screened by national socialist rhetoric. This concerned not only German, but also European and American bourgeoisie. Corporations from practically all the countries of Europe and the U.S. cooperated with the Hitler regime.

Perhaps not all the European leaders that took part in the Munich Agreement understood that after the torchlight processions, Auschwitz furnaces would appear, and tens of millions of people would perish in the fire of the world war. Now the same thing is happening in Kiev, only instead of " Heil Hitler! " there they shout " Glory to the heroes! " To those " heroes" whose total " heroism" consisted in burning defenseless Belarusian women and old people in Khatyn, in the massacres of Polish peasants in Volhynia, in the shooting of Jews in Babi Yar... At the same time, the Ukrainian oligarchy, including Ihor Kolomoyskyi, the head of the United Jewish Community of Ukraine, the president of the European Jewish Union(EJU), an Israeli citizen, is funding anti-Semites and Nazis of the " Right Sector, " who represent the strong-arm basis of the current Ukrainian power. The Maidan sponsors seem to have forgotten that in a symbiosis of the Nazis and the big bourgeoisie, the latter ultimately have either to become Nazis or to leave the country. This is already happening in Ukraine, where the remaining oligarchs compete with the Fü hrers of the Right Sector activists in Russophobic rhetoric, as well as in appropriating the assets of their former partners who fled the " independent" Ukraine.

European politicians, applauding the manic calls of the Kiev Fü hrers to fight the Russian " occupation" to the last Moskal, clearly underestimate the dangers of Ukrainian Nazis who regard themselves in earnest as " the superior race, " considering all the others, including their sponsoring entrepreneurs, to be " subhumans" to whom one cold apply all forms of violence. There is no doubt that if the neo-Banderites are not stopped by force, then the Nazi regime in Kiev will develop and expand, transforming the Ukrainian society ever deeper. Doubts also remain about the " European choice" of Ukraine, which is increasingly smacking of the " Aryan" spirit of eighty years ago. The conductors of this choice and the strike force of the Maidan are outspoken neo-Nazis, who position themselves as ideological heirs of Hitler’s collaborators and use fascist symbols. They are profoundly alien to modern European values, proclaimed by the European politicians who strolled among the maidanned neo-Nazis.

Of course, modern fascism in Europe is very different from its German, Italian or Spanish versions of the last century. Joining the EU, the European national states have in fact become a thing of the past. The Eurocracy has been nominated for the role of the leading political force in Europe, which easily suppresses the attempts of national states to restore their sovereignty at least to some extent. It is backed by the same big transnational capital as the political class of the U.S. It was this capital that contributed to the " peaceful" unification of Europe and owns a monopoly on the issue of money, information and " pan-European" laws. It was with its support that Eurocracy invariably emerged victorious in all conflicts with national states of the last decade, imposing its technical governments and its policies on European nations. The latter is characterized by consistent denial of all national traditions, beginning with Christian morality rules and ending with Hungarian kolbá sz.

Universal asexual and unprincipled Europoliticians hardly resemble the demonized Fü hrers of the Third Reich. The only thing have in common is a maniacal certainty about their own rightness and a willingness to forcibly reduce people to submission. Although the forms of this reduction have become much softer with modern Euro-Nazis, the methodology remains rigid. It does not tolerate any dissent and allows the use of force to the extent of physical extermination of those who disagree with the policy of Brussels. Maybe the tens of thousands killed in the struggle to spread " European values" in Yugoslavia, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine are not as impressive as the millions of victims of the Nazi invaders in the Second World War. But who has ever counted the indirect human losses from propagation of homosexuality and drug addiction, ruin of national production, cultural degradation? Entire European nations with centuries of history are disappearing in the crucible of " European integration" today.

In Italian, fascio means " union, " " unification." In the modern sense, this is an integration without preserving the identity of integrated objects: persons, social groups, countries. The current Eurofascists seek to destroy not only the national economic and cultural differences, but also the individual diversity of people, including age-sex differentiation. At the same time, the aggressiveness with which the Eurofascists are fighting to expand their space, resembles at times the paranoia of the Hitlerites concerned about the conquest of the expansion space for the Aryan " Ü bermensch." Suffice it to recall the hysterics of European politicians on the Maidan and in the Ukrainian media. They justified any crimes of " European integration supporters, " indiscriminately blaming those who disagreed with the European choice of Ukraine in full accordance with the precepts of Goebbels: the more monstrous the lie, the more it looks like the truth.

Since the main driver of Eurointegration is the Eurocracy that serves interests not of its own nations, but of TNCs, the U.S. politicians strongly support the expansion of the EU and NATO to the East, viewing these structures as the most important supporting framework of their global empire. The military and political might of the United States is an order of magnitude greater than that of the European Union, and Americans are used to almost complete domination of Europe. The U.S. is exercising its dominance through supranational institutions that have steamrolled over the national member states of the EU, deprived of their sovereignty in the economic, financial, foreign and defense policies. These states are compelled to obey the directives of the European Commission adopted with an eye to the U.S.

In other words, the EU can be characterized as a bureaucratic empire that formats its economic space in the interests of American-European capital under U.S. control. Like any empire, it seeks expansion, the instrument of which is to draw the neighboring countries into association with the EU transferring their sovereignty to the European Commission. To coerce these countries into becoming a colony of the EU, the cultivation of fear of an external threat is used, the source of which according to the global media is an " aggressive and barbaric" Russia.

Under this pretext, immediately after the collapse of the USSR, the EU and NATO took control of the Eastern European countries and organized a war in the Balkans to conquer Yugoslavia. Their next victim were the Baltic republics, forced to join by Russophobic Nazis. Then Eurofascism swept over Georgia, in which the Nazis led by the U.S. unleashed a civil war. Nowadays, the Georgian experience is being used by Eurofascists in Ukraine to coerce this state into association with the EU as a controlled territory and a springboard for further attacks on Russia. At the same time, none of the newly joining countries achieved the declared goals of social and economic development. The European choice resulted for them in a degradation of the economy, a brain drain and a drop in the standard of living.

In view of the foregoing, the catastrophe that is going on in Ukraine can actually be defined as the aggression by the U.S. and its NATO allies against Russia. This is a modern version of Eurofascism, differing from its previous incarnation of the Second World War in the use of " soft" force with resort to military operations only in case of paramount necessity, and also in the use of Nazism as a complementary rather than total ideology. At the same time, the defining property of Eurofascism remains, that is, the differentiation of citizens into superior (adhering to the European choice) and inferior ones, who should not have the right to express their opinion by word or action, to whom the " universal" rights and freedoms allegedly do not apply, and against whom one is allowed to commit any crime unpunished, including deprivation of liberty, health and life itself. The fascist methodology of mass consciousness brainwashing is also preserved, consisting in incitement of hatred towards the enemy, with Russia and its president being foisted off as such, in propaganda of national exclusiveness, oppression of other-minded persons, compulsory education of children and young people in the Nazi spirit. And, as before, Eurofascists lead both Ukraine and Europe to certain demise.

 

 

Ukrainian Nazism

⇐ Предыдущая12345678910Следующая ⇒

Поделиться: