|
Internet Statement 2014-30
Ukraine - How to approach the problems? Maria Weiß 09/10/2014 Again and again it is striking, if you read what nonsense some bourgeois writers have in mind. Indeed, even it is mentioned that Tymoshenko and Yatsenyuk - interesting combination by the way - supposedly attack the ceasefire in the Ukraine. Yatsenyuk, the smartass, even remarks that Putin wants to destroy the Ukraine, and restore the Soviet Union. This is utter nonsense, he cannot do so, even if he would pretend to be able, because the substance is completely different. Also the following: This is simply not true, what was written in an article in the newspaper "Die Welt": a federalization is not at all categorically rejected by the Ukrainian government. That's not true. There are rather guys like Yatsenyuk who refuse. However, it is promptly put into the mouth of the government as a whole. The Ukrainian government must put the rights within bounds, better yet, be separated entirely from them. This is a strategic necessity. Even Putin's certain aspirations, by appearance building on the former Soviet Union, to restore the geo-strategic extension, they cannot hide the fact that the inner substance, in general, in no way corresponds with the latter, at least in view of the origin of the Soviet Union, the revolutionary origin, the Leninist if you want to say so, but actually it represents the exact opposite. This is assiduously overlooked by the bourgeois politicians in the West, and they babble something thus in the way that Putin wants to restore the Soviet Union. This he cannot do, because then first there would have to take place a new revolution, and Putin would certainly not be enjoyed by that. What Putin represents is bourgeois nationalism, at best, coupled with a very considerable portion of Great Russian chauvinism and pseudo-religious Illusion-making, by courting of the Orthodox Church in Russia. This conglomerate has absolutely nothing in common with the revolutionary Soviet Union of Lenin, and to a certain extent with that of Stalin, nothing at all or at best very little, because it is itself a product of Breschnew's revisionist style, craving for superpower, at any rate by the way he was culturally affected, because he grew up in this period. But of course, anti-Communist propaganda of certain bourgeois circles in the West is cheap, so it blurs the differences and throws everything into one pot. The Ukrainian government should merely be recommend: You must cope with the rundown mob in your country, that populates certain rightist groups there and pretends to represent nationalism! Connections with such forces always backfire, as the lessons of history show, not at least those in our own country. A "warrior at the head of the state"? In fact could be said: Why not? But it is important, what for he (or she) is a warrior, what he fights for. This is crucial. And with social emancipation and progress in your country these right-wing forces have absolutely nothing in mind, who have banded together there under fascist slogans. Their war is always a war against the people, against the majority. And insofar, of course, something like this is good for nothing at the head of the state, but they should rather go to jail. Also a mixture of progress and reaction, that is, of left and right, as it is attempted currently in the Ukraine on the part of some official representatives, is something which likewise always will backfire. On the contrary you must get rid of the reactionary forces, the rightist and eternally backward looking destructive forces in society, but you should not integrate them. On the contrary, one should try to build a united front with all people who are interested in the progress of society. However, the connection with the rights is just the clamp, the imperialism of every kind attempts to maintain in order to be able to dominate the whole country, no matter which side, no matter which direction it comes from.
Another chapter.It is very significant that it is not wanted to be known who bears the blame for the the crash of MH17, and the investigators even may not think about disclosing that at present. This raises the suspicion, for example, that just those right-wing forces in Ukraine are involved, what simultaneously opens up the possibility for certain other international forces, that they can thus also blackmail, under the hand, the current government of Ukraine , and at the same time the whole country. And, of course, this opportunity they will not let it out of hand so quickly. So it would be a matter that this should be uncovered within the country itself. Were there really conclusive evidence that East-Ukrainian separatists are the culprit for the crash of MH17, then those above mentioned international forces would not be afraid to disclose it, the sooner the better. For example, when you hear the right-wing extremists Ljatschko shout, or rather, when we read that the USA should intervene, please, necessarily, and that the country should be incorporated into NATO as soon as possible, then you know what is going on. For this procedure, these circumstances and at all the fact of the crime of MH17 and the 298 Dutch and other passengers, they have long since basically served their gruesome "purpose", so that it is not so important for the originator when it comes out. The main thing is that it does not come out now. One must tell the Ukrainian government: either you have a concept, and then you can also work to implement it and to deal with the opposition against it, or you just don't have one, then you rather should leave it from the start. One thing is clear: the current game, which is driven there by a variety of forces, both domestic and foreign, being played on the heads of the masses, to the detriment of the masses, this is no longer acceptable. It would be time there that finally a government emerges that is capable of taking action, capable of bringing about change in the country and implements measures that really allow something like progress. Of which up to now cannot be any question. Instead, a game is driven, that is perishable and has done very much destruction, that is understood by no one any longer. As soon as the EU threatened with sanctions, Putin goes back to reverse course and lets his separatists make a stink again. What kind of game is this? This is not acceptable at all. Also the game that the United States play with Europe, together with its allies Britain and to some extent the Scandinavian countries, or even along with the Baltic states or Poland, it is unacceptable. It is obvious what it serves for. It serves to improve the strategic position of the United States imperialists worldwide against such states that are rebellious against them, or also against states that rival with them such as China and others against which they want to build a coalition of intimidation. That is what is emerging for some time in the present situation. The Europeans are just match ball in it. Also the open accomplices, the Baltic States, will be surprised yet. With stupidity one can not come forward in politics . India, the so-called Indian subcontinent, is an emerging country with a population that comprises nearly one and a half billion people, now almost the most populous country in the world. The new government seems determined to develop the country and has already initiated various measures in this regard, and that especially does not fit the United States and other powers into their conceptions. For the latter, firstly, it is strategically unfavorable, although there are on the other side differences between in India and China, which are to some extent for historical reasons, of which they will of course try to take advantage. But it is also unfavorable if it comes to Russia, because here there could be a coalition, which stands to reason from a historical tradition. Therefore, they are trying to push into it and to fuel some contradictions against Islam, which are traditional in India in various regions, by means of Islamist terror controlled by them. One can here already well ask whether India is perhaps chosen to be a second Syria, but chances are pretty bad for that. European governments could once do take notice of such contradictions. But no, they do not want to see it, they feel as equals with the United States within NATO - an absurdity that has never existed. One should already be aware of what comes out for them there. Maximally Great Britain was and is equal as long as it is still "great". Will it become Britain when finally the Scots are out there, this may change slightly. There are already approaches that the financial heavy weight can then be be shifted to Ireland, if it should actually come to this separation. However, the United States and others should note that Mrs. Merkel has not for no reason on her desk a sculpture of Catherine the Great. A really clever politician always takes into account in his calculation which material interests his opponent has. The American imperialists, however, speculate to be themselves the "laughing third party" here, in some way. They say to themselves: we can let the contradictions become more acute, we will then cream off the benefit afterwards. They tell themselves: if the Europeans first times get no more gas from Russia, they will be all the more inclined to conclude a free trade agreement with us.
|