Brussels will force the Dutch to accept their failed Ukraine policy

61% of the Dutch voters rejected the Ukraine association treaty in a referendum this year. 31% of the population showed up, which is a far larger number than of those who turned up at Maidan to protest. For the second time the Dutch population cast its vote in a referendum, for the second time the outcome will be nullified in the name of European Democracy.

European leaders have celebrated the Maidan revolution as the attempt of Ukrainian people to join the family of liberal democracies of Western Europe. It couldn’t be further from the truth. In the official version presented in the West, Maidan protests were spontaneously sparked off when the pro-Russian Yanukovich government renounced to ratify an association agreement with the European Union.

Yet in November 2013, before the Maidan movement even started, Oleg Tsarov, member of the Ukrainian parliament, had reported in a parliamentary session on the recruitment of activists organized by the US embassy in Kiev for unknown purposes¹⁾“MUST WATCH: Nov 2013 (pre-Maidan!): Ukraine Deputy has proof of USA staging civil war in Ukraine”, Youtube.

The US embassy in Kiev, via its representative Victoria Nuland, would later become a primary actor in pressuring for a regime change and the formation of a pro-West government in the first months of 2014. For clarity, Victoria Nuland is the third in charge of the US foreign policy, second only President Obama and John Kerry, who had been busy negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran.

Within the same crisis, Victoria Nuland herself would become famous for her “Fuck the EU” statement, demonstrating the contempt with which European vassals, pardon, partners are held in Washington DC. According to Nuland herself, letting the European Union deal with a crisis, which on paper was indeed about an association agreement with the European Union, was a waste of time. Much better to get the UN involved²⁾Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call, BBC 2014-02-07. Two years later, the European leadership has long forgotten about this and has let Nuland dictate a trade war between the European Union and Russia, for the sake of giving Ukraine the future it deserves.

We often read European leaders calling for a unified European foreign policy, which is what the position of the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs should be all about, yet the best the EU and particular countries can do is to take orders from someone that openly disrespects them.

Enough of the weakness of the EU in foreign relations, let’s discard hypocrisy. The new “pro-EU” government included the leaders of the Maidan revolution:

• Prime Minister Arsenyi Yatseniuk, handpicked by Nuland herself in that famous call;
• Oleksandr Turchynov of the Fatherland Party;
• Oleh Tyahnibok of the Svoboda Party.

In 2012 the European Parliament described Svoboda as “racist, anti-semitic and xenophobic,” all of which “goes against the EU principles and values”³⁾The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the situation in Ukraine, European Parliament 2016-12-13.
Here’s where the hypocrisy starts; the European leadership sometimes with a reason, sometimes without, often criticizes parties that call for a reduction in immigration; yet all of a sudden, if it means annexing Ukraine to the European Union in the long term, they are willing to turn a blind eye to such phenomena and work with a party that has been repeatedly denounced⁴⁾World Jewish Congress calls Svoboda a neo-Nazi party, Ukrinform 2013-05-14, also by the European Parliament, not just as “far-right”, but plain Hitler-worshipping Nazis.
The end justifies the means. “Nazis are good if they work for us” is the new motto of the European Union for Ukraine.

It goes without saying that Tyahnibok was Nuland’s strict collaborator for the regime change, as was Svoboda and the other two “neo-Nazi” groups: the militarist Azov battalion, which has been carrying out a mass recruiting campaign since the Maidan revolution⁵⁾Ukraine’s nationalist Azov Battalion recruits compete on assault course, Ukraine Today 2015-8-14, and the Right Sector.

Violent elements belonging to these groups were fundamental to the revolution. Peaceful protests would not have succeeded in ousting the corrupt, yet democratically elected Yanukovich. With Svoboda and the Right Sector instigating violence, a reaction by the police was obviously a matter of time, so that later Western politicians and media could spin the story of the cruel dictator repressing a peaceful revolution in a bloodbath. This was further exacerbated when over 100 protesters were sniped and killed thus corroborating the above mentioned thesis.

A year later, the BBC would interview one of the snipers on condition of anonymity; he claimed he had been instructed to shoot by the Euromaidan leadership⁶⁾The untold story of the Maidan massacre, BBC 2015-02-12.

More hypocrisy: it is fine to kill people, as long as we can shift the blame on the politicians we want to remove and justify their overthrow.
Finally, the last justification often brought to the table is that “Yanukovich was a corrupt leader”. He probably was, but is the current, pro-EU leadership any better? Let’s leave the “Nazis” aside for a minute and look at the rest; since the Maidan revolution, the collapse of Ukrainian economy has enforced additional changes in the composition of the Ukrainian government. Among them, an overnight naturalization of the American Natalie Jaresko, so that she could be appointed to the Ukrainian Ministry of Finance, as if respecting the sovereignty of the country mattered anymore at this point.

Further and more recent revelations have uncovered a hidden wealth amassed by the current Prime Minister, Volodymyr Groysman, in terms of luxury watches and cash, the Head of the Fiscal State Service, Roman Nasirov, in terms of jewelry, more watches, fur coats; the Minister of Justice, Pavlo Petrenko, keeps a large amount of dollars in cash; associates of pro-West President Petro Poroshenko, Bohdan and Yaroslav Dubnevych, have holdings of $26 million dollars each, also cash only. Meanwhile, the government imposes various rounds of austerity, coordinated by the IMF after their enormous success in rebooting Western Europe’s economies, on the Ukrainian people.

Conclusion

Despite their ambitions, the leadership of the European Union has given up their values; the European Union has additionally collaborated with a government including groups they branded as Nazi groups. It has supported the replacement of a corrupt leader with an equally corrupt one. It has turned a blind eye to the murders of people, as long as it served a purpose.

What should have been a matter between the European Union, Ukraine and Russia at best has seen Europe surrender its leadership to Washington, proving that the contempt shown by US officials for Europeans is probably well deserved. It has blindly followed the orders from the US to start a trade war, despite the fact that this would hurt the already anemic European economies. And now that so much is sacrificed, the Dutch seem to have derailed the whole project. It is of no surprise that European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker urged the Dutch voters today (9 January) not to oppose the EU association agreement with Ukraine, saying such a move “could open the doors to a continental crisis”⁷⁾Juncker warns Dutch voters over major consequence of Ukraine referendum, EurActiv 2016-01-09. The Europeans may hold as many referenda as they like, as long as the result is in line with Brussels’ wishes.

The current European leadership is morally bankrupt and not capable of bringing prosperity and justice, the original goal of European integration.