Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

RFK Jr. enjoys conspiracy, you know that. This thread

https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/12r5rje/us_involvement_in_2014_revolutionco/

offers pros and cons, both sides on your note

""USAID overthrew the gov't of Ukraine in 2014" - started the Maidan Revolution -
overthrew elected gov't who wanted to keep Ukraine "neutral""

which i don't think on balance what we know is supported. Without
bothering to edit to make it easier to read, i read from the top to:


r/CredibleDefense
•
2 yr. ago
Kind_Rise6811
US involvement in 2014 revolution/co

[...]

das_war_ein_Befehl
•
2y ago
•

The “2014 was an American coup” argument kind of relies on a few tropes:

Ukrainians have no agency in their political process

Ukraine was pro-Russian and the Westward turn came out of nowhere

Forgetting that the Orange Revolution happened a decade prior

2014 makes a lot of sense when you realize Ukraine has not been particularly pro Russian and has been moving west for a long time.

You can’t really “cause” a popular revolution either. You can maybe accelerate things with some cash and support, but the shifts in society have to already exist
u/thenecrosoviet avatar
thenecrosoviet
•
10mo ago
•

Lol it was a coup and seizure of power by a cadre of pro western actors. They disbanded the government and acted unconstitutionally, purging pro russian MPs and ministers.

Funny how it's "democracy" when Ukrainian nazis storm the capital and take over the government but "insurrection" when a bunch of dipshit neo-teabagger Americans try it.

Also, how is Ukrainian democracy doing? How are those elections coming along?
Zealousideal_Rice478
•
9mo ago
•

A coup, a strange one if it was and it completely ignores Yanukovych's complicity in his own undoing. His surprise to his people was that he wasn't going to sign Vilnius after all. The protest was initially small, then his tactics of using Berkut sent things out of hand. Ukraine had not seen social violence on that scale in a while. Lastly, there was a deal put into place by Poland as stated above, both sides technically agreed despite continued protests and occupation by some of the maidan factions. They agreed to some early election if I remember correctly. Well, it didn't take that long. Yanukovych left soon after, unexpected to most. Rada stripped him of power due to dereliction of duty. Now there are a few things to consider. One this angered many of his constituencies in parts of Ukraine who were not expecting this kind of move and they began to protest at what was perceived as a power play by the Orange movement in Ukraine and backed by Western interests. Two, it is no secret or conspiracy that the US and Europe spent a lot of money, billions, to aid Ukrainian pro-West, pro-EU interests. We also have the Nuland phone call, which seems to indicate the Yanukovych had made plans to leave before signing this Polish arrangement. It all seems like a big mess oyf you really look at it.
u/Disastrous_Factor_18 avatar
Disastrous_Factor_18
•
2mo ago
•

The parliament was actually disbanded constitutionally. It wasn’t Nazis straight off the street straight from the protest that formed the government it was the already elected MPs.

It’s kind of telling how informative and well thought out the OP is and how the pro-Russian argument is “lol propaganda” with many incorrect statements.
u/das_war_ein_Befehl avatar
das_war_ein_Befehl
•
10mo ago
•

Blah blah Ukrainian nazis, you gotta come up with some new material. That’s the same shit RT was spewing 10 years ago and it wasn’t even good then.
u/InfelixTurnus avatar
InfelixTurnus
•
2y ago
•

My feeling is that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. In the same way- The US may have put the Ukrainian people in a position where Maidan seemed possible, probable to succeed, and put the idea in people's heads. But a popular revolution as large as Maidan was (at least in the later stages) wouldn't have sustained itself and achieved success in that way (without military force) without the Ukrainian people's decision that it seemed necessary and was legitimate.

As to whether Maidan and the consequences(or perhaps reaction, as consequences implies blame) were a good or even rational decision for the Ukrainian people is a separate conclusion. Some may believe that to provoke the gangster with a gun asking you for protection fees is foolish, others believe that unless you do you will be under their boot forever. That decision has positives and negatives on both sides and it seems Ukraine has chosen.
u/thenecrosoviet avatar
thenecrosoviet
•
10mo ago
•

"My feeling is how would one even concoct a seizure of power under the guise of a popular insurrection? And even if it WAS possible, surely the CIA would be the LAST to be capable of a coup, surely?!"
u/WetnessPensive avatar
WetnessPensive
•
2y ago
•

Worth remembering that Putin was himself HEAVILY involved with and meddling in Ukraine; he wanted a puppet state at worst, total control at best. As someone who often denounces the CIA when it meddles, I'm all for their "influence" in Ukraine.

My hunch is that the scale of US "intelligence" involvement in Ukraine is likely to never be fully known. Some people think it's overstated, others think it is understated. Mark Ames and the Financial Times have done stories on this, though, and what little we know so far is that USAID and Western foundations were funding opposition groups and NGOs in the lead up to the Maidan protests (and like the CIA's Operation Red Sox, we know neo-fascists played a front-center role in overthrowing the country’s president).

And then there's the influence of Ukraine’s pro-western neoliberals. Political figures like Oleh Rybachuk, for example, long a favorite of the State Department, DC neocons, EU, NATO and right-hand man to Yushchenko. It wasn't a coincidence that his “New Citizen” NGO campaign played a big role in getting the Maiden protests up and running, and that New Citizen was part of an interlocking network of western-funded NGOs and campaigns - “Center UA”, “Chesno,” and “Stop Censorship” etc etc — none of which were "home grown".

As Allen Weinstein said of the National Endowment for Democracy in a WaPo article: "A lot of what we do today in the open was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA."

This tactic of funding "pro-democracy" and "anti-corruption" NGOs in a country targeted for regime change is a pretty standard practice for the US foreign policy over the last few decades (for example, the U.S. Agency for International Development spends millions in places like Georgia, Serbia and Ukraine to fund pro-democratic organizations, which then fund things like student activists and so on).

Putin calls all this a "coup", but in the corridors of US power, they use a more sanitized language: democratic assistance, democracy promotion, civil society support, fostering freedom etc. Whatever you call it, though, the aim is to instigate political change.

On top of all this, you then had the U.S. Agency for International Development, the National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, the Solidarity Center, the Eurasia Foundation, etc etc, all providing grants and technical and tactical assistance to Ukrainians during this period. The European Union, individual European countries, and the International Renaissance Foundation, did the same. The US embassy in Kyiv was also running "tech camps" for local activists in the years leading up to the "revolution". They specialized in asymmetric warfare, trying to see how tech could be used to usurp governments, and using digital tactics to create disruptions in society, or providing phone wiping apps and other bits of gear like this.

Of course Putin and Russia were doing the same and much worse (Viktor Yanukovych was their puppet, and they likely tried to assassinate Yushchenko). So I personally find it hard to fault the US' approach in this instance. They've done some nefarious meddling in the past, but their actions in Ukraine always struck me as being as noble as this kind of shady stuff can be. At least that's my gut reaction. It'll probably be decades before more stuff leaks out.
u/Kind_Rise6811 avatar
Kind_Rise6811
•
2y ago
•

Thanks for the summary and information on the NED and those other NGOs, so to conclude what you said, the US were involved in funding the Ukrainian activist groups prior to the Euromaiden protest starting, so essentially they started the Euromaiden protests,and i guess its up to interpretation/your own opinion as to whether the US played a role in directly chosing the new government. Also im curious, do you think the US were responsible for the revolution of dignity? As it doesnt make sense for the US to do that after having already made Yanucovych sign a deal with the opposition to bring elections forward by 3 months.
[deleted]
•
2y ago
• Edited 2y ago •

the US were involved in funding the Ukrainian activist groups prior to the Euromaiden protest starting, so essentially they started the Euromaiden protests

No, just funding something is not "essentially starting the protests". Any more than, say, Germany giving gas money to Russia (who later started an invasion of Ukraine) means Germany essentially started the war. People and organizations get money from all sorts of sources; many of the same NGOs likely got regular Ukrainian state funding for their activities as well (they were supported by e.g. cultural/educational related government funds and vouchers), so following this reasoning Yanukovych also overthrew himself.

So really, you'd need to show a clear concerted effort for the funding to have this effect, and that USA was not just a drop in the ocean of contributors to the civil society. Just the existence of funding doesn't mean responsibility for every specific action.
u/Kind_Rise6811 avatar
Kind_Rise6811
•
2y ago
•

Ok thanks for clearing that up
u/Anti_Imperialist7898 avatar
Anti_Imperialist7898
•
2y ago
• Edited 2y ago •

Consensus should be that there were heavy involvement from both US and Russia.

At the same time, there were and are many people in Ukraine who wants to be part of EU and stand with US.

While I'm too lazy to actually look up and get accurate information, but I once saw a really good post about how Ukraine before the war where also heavily economically divided (the Western part having lots of trade with EU while the eastern part less so, and the eastern part having lots of trade with Russia), which likely also had an effect on the division (western part more heavily in favor of joining EU vs the Eastern part, who economically very well might not enjoy as much, or in fact suffer, due to for example economic competition etc.).

Apart from that, a probably rather unpopular opinion, but I would say after 2014 the US influence has been really massive (I remember reading another post with examples of high ranking Ukrainian officials being former US citizens), and at some points can be argued to be a 'puppet state' of the US.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/12r5rje/us_involvement_in_2014_revolutionco/