“Experience is always always needed in every sphere of activity for judging rightly, understanding intelligently the means and methods by which goals can be attained, and for seeing which of them harmonizes with which” – Aristotle.
From chocolate magnate to Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko’s trip to Ukrainian presidency was easy on one qualification only: “Name recognition!” Democracy was supposed to be the field where the best and the virtuous politician was elected to office, but name recognition has brought many nerds to high political office like George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. When Ronald Reagan addressed the British Parliament, many parliamentarians walked out because they “didn’t want to listen to an ‘Utter Ignoramus,” as they said. George W. Bush received a “standing ovation” by the U.S. Congress for declaring war on Iraq. It turned out to be a disaster for the U.S.
Petro Poroshenko also received a “standing ovation” by the Ukrainian parliament after his inauguration as president, but he has landed himself in the middle of a disastrous civil war -not of his own making- between Western and Eastern Ukrainians. A chocolate maker by profession, an oligarch by social class where oligarchs are typically regarded as thieves or exploiters of their countries wealth by mischief and political connections, Poroshenko has catapulted himself to the presidency by promising to fix all Ukrainian problems without spending a cent of his own $ billions! If anything, he would probably become richer by courting the European governments and expand his business in Europe with his expanded presidential clout now.
Poroshenko lacks any political acumen, but the West that created the Ukrainian chaos by pushing the Ukrainian protests which resulted in the current civil war in Ukraine, is filling in his blanks. Along with that guidance come U.S. teams of CIA and U.S. military advisors and contractors, as well as a magnified Western media campaign against Russia to compliment the Western sanctions. Standing with his left foot on the West’s backing, Poroshenko is promising to use his right foot to kick Russia out of Crimea, and to eliminate the Pro-Russian Ukrainians in the East whom he called terrorists and criminals – unless they lay down their guns and beg for his mercy. As a lure, he promises not to prosecute them. They rejected his offer, and they certainly won’t drop their guns and accept to live in a country whose government has branded them “terrorists and criminals” while it is coddling the pro-Nazi “Svoboda” and “Right Sector” political parties as the Ukrainian saviors! Ukraine has slid as a result into a civil war where the “Who is Who,” and “Who is with Whom” has created gaps between ethnic groups and splits in its social and traditional fabric that are not easy to patch.
Poroshenko, however, sounded overly optimistic in his inaugural speech, and vowed to return Ukraine back to the unity of the Yanukovich years – including Crimea. Crimea, however, was donated to Ukraine by Nikita Khrushchev in 1953 as an internal apportionment of USSR land to Ukraine – then a Soviet state- not as a portable gift that any pro-Nazi Ukrainian politician can turn into a military launching part for Russia’s enemies. Russia lost 20 million people on WWII, and understandably guards its back! That is why it grabbed Crimea – before pro-Western Ukrainians had taken over and leased its ports to the U.S. navy. Crimea has now become the “Boulder” of the mythical Sisyphus that fell on the bottom of the Russian cave. Can Poroshenko dispel the fable, outperform Sisyphus and take it back as he has vowed? History tells us otherwise. U.S. president James Polk used a similar turmoil at the U.S.-Mexico border in 1948 to annex a large Mexican territory which was later divide into the states of California, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Colorado and Wyoming. Annexations by big military powers are irreversible. If anyone doubts, they should ask the Tibetans.
What happened in Ukraine was a tragedy driven by European politicians who joined the anti-Yanukovich protests and pushed Ukrainian politicians to either “cut-off” with Russia and join us, or stay out of Europe. This “Be with us, or be with Russia – but not with both, created the Ukrainian chaos. Both former German Chancellors Helmut Kohl and Gerhard Schroder have sided with Russia and Vladimir Putin, and placed the responsibility for the civil war in Ukraine squarely on Germany’s and Europe’s push to strip Ukraine from any Russian influence! Now, the current German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who speaks fluid Russian, talks with Vladimir Putin frequently trying to undo the damage, while Barack Obama acknowledged that Russia has legitimate interests in Ukraine.
Putin has the key to the Ukrainian crisis, but the West’s demand that he drops support for the Eastern Ukrainians in return for Western sanctions relief would be a treason to Russian citizens who comprise a balanced counterweight to the pro-Nazi Western Ukrainians. A federated Ukraine is the only option for a permanent solution, as it would deprive the central government in Kiev the power to make unilateral decisions without the consent of the states. Nobody wins, but nobody loses either. It is the “Half-of-the-Loaf” each theory! And it is better than burning it altogether!
Nikos Retsos, retired professor