Invasion of the Mind Snatchers

Perhaps as others, I’m still struggling to explain to myself the shocking results of the 2019 Presidential Elections in Ukraine. How could Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian and political nobody win three-quarters of Ukrainian electorate’s votes?

Searching high and low for an answer, I came across a persuasive observation by Oksana Zabuzhko, a noted contemporary Ukrainians writer, novelist and philosopher. But I’ll get to that at the end of this blogpost.

Except for the Lviv oblast, all others registered overwhelming support for Zelensky, who was regarded by some as a candidate whose support from Ukraine was tepid to say the most. He won the votes of people whose grandparents served in the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and earlier military formations against Russia, Nazi Germany and other invaders. He won among those whose ancestors were killed in the Russian-made famine. He won among people who witnessed the Revolution of Dignity. He won among those whose relatives were killed in today’s Russian war against Ukraine.

What lead to such a dreadful transformation?

Movie buffs may recall the 1956 sci-fi thriller called “Invasion of Body Snatchers,” which was about extraterrestrials that landed in a fictional California town. Alien plant spores fell from space and grew into large seed pods, each one capable of reproducing a duplicate replacement copy of each human. As each pod reached full development, it assimilated the physical characteristics, memories, and personalities of each sleeping person placed near it; however, these duplicates were devoid of all human emotion.

I’m not making light of the elections but I’m proposing that reality has suggested an invasion of mind snatchers.

As I had written, this successful transformation should not startle anyone who is familiar with the book “The Selling of the President, 1968,” which revealed the influence that image making can have on political campaigning. It showed that voters are bored with issues while being influenced with images that can alter their thinking.

Thanks to Ihor Kolomoisky, the gray cardinal and oligarch who reportedly transferred $5.5 billion from Ukraine via Cyprus, 41-year-old Zelensky was polished and shined and to his supporters he epitomized the new, younger generation of Ukraine that could lead the country out of its abyss. He was trained how to perform during a debate and what to say or not say during a political campaign.

And Ukrainian voters took this bait hook, line and sinker.

Their behavior reminds me of a biting observation by American author Orson Scott Card: “If pigs could vote, the man with the slop bucket would be elected swineherd every time, no matter how much slaughtering he did on the side.”

Throughout Ukrainian history and especially leading up to the elections, Russia’s cyber and psy-ops specialists sabotaged elections in Ukraine as they have been doing around the world. The techniques were both sophisticated and down to earth, complete with lies and fabrications.

For example, two websites reported that Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė, a staunch supporter and defender of Ukraine in its war with Russia, allegedly remarked that corruption, not Russia, is Ukraine’s greatest enemy. I inquired with Ukrainian diplomats and learned that the comment is not true and the websites are known for posting fabrications.

Ukrainian voters demonstrated that they weren’t able or didn’t want to recognize that they were targeted in this latest Russian brainwashing assault. Consequently, they voted against their own best interests, as well as the interests of people who need them most like their neighbors near and far.

And now for Oksana Zabuzhko’s analysis. She believes what happened wasn’t launched today but rather it is the consequence of a diabolical campaign initiated long ago by the Soviet KGB.

Zabuzhko wrote in her recent post: “By way of penetrating education and the mass media, Russian special services are conducting demoralization of the invaded country – this is the first stage of its seizing from the inside – this goal was cited by Bezmenov in the KGB handbook of the 1970s: “We should change the map of the world to such an extent whereby regardless of the mountains of information, you wouldn’t be able to make a smart decision in the interest of your own security and your country’s security” – this is exactly what happened in these elections.”

In other words, the minds of many Ukrainians were snatched and replaced while the bodies remained the same.

Not Indifferent Minority – 25%

And the winner is – Ukraine

As the partying ends on one side and PTDS subsides on the other, beyond politics and partisanship, and winners and losers, the biggest winner of the 2019 presidential elections campaign in Ukraine is – Ukraine.

If you’ve followed the campaign over the past couple of months, listened to the debates last Friday, and then watched the voting returns, you’d see that Ukraine – i.e. the Ukrainian people – have contributed to an enviously high degree of democratic development.

The election campaign was appropriately a political donnybrook between two diametrically opposed candidates: President Petro Poroshenko – representing freedom – and leading candidate Volodymyr Zelensky – representing renewed Russian domination. Regardless of what you thought of the debates, its format was an image of democratic sophistication right down to Poroshenko’s gesture of walking from his side of the Olympic Stadium’s end zone to join Zelensky on his side.

Finally, perhaps the crowning moment, while votes were still being counted but the damning results were quite visible on the wall, Poroshenko graciously conceded to Zelensky and called on the Ukrainian nation to unite for the good of Ukraine.

All countries in the region should learn well this democratic lesson.

Now to the outcome and the short-term future. Yes, Poroshenko was a misfortune and Zelensky was considered a catastrophe but the losing side that must now keep the hypothetical consequences from becoming a real catastrophe for Ukraine.

With three-quarters of the electorate supporting the untested, unknown non-Ukrainian speaking television comedian who referred to Ukraine as a porno star rather than the incumbent Poroshenko, the question arises how could Ukrainians resoundingly reject the latter in favor of the former?

Zelensky had the image of being the darling of Russian President Putin because he repeatedly stated that he could tolerate anyone but Poroshenko as president of Ukraine. Not surprising because Poroshenko has managed to stymie Moscow’s obvious and bloody intentions to re-subjugate Ukraine.

Poroshenko’s major global success was that he succeeded in mobilizing the free world in a noble anti-Russian crusade to save Ukraine while ironically Ukrainian voters apparently rejected that accomplishment. Poroshenko is an experienced Ukrainian politician who asked rhetorically Ukrainian voters: would you board a plane whose pilot is still learning how to fly? Seemingly they would.

Ukrainian voters themselves are faced with strong ingrained feelings of disdain, jealousy and vengeance which contributed to their support for Zelensky.

Perhaps this blinded them from seeing the full picture of Poroshenko’s noteworthy accomplishments for the good of Ukraine and the Ukrainian people and shielded them from Zelensky’s inadequacies.

Another reason often cited for Zelensky’s victory is that the people are fed up with corruption. Poroshenko, an affluent businessman and candy maker who is regarded as an oligarch by some, is seen as a politician who closed his eyes to corruption.

However, Ukraine, 28 years after declaring its independence from the USSR, which was fraught with corruption, has not yet shed that larcenous albatross. Consequently, Ukrainians are hypocritical about that crime. They are against corruption in Kyiv, the Presidential Administration, and parliament, but not in their backyards. Do not dare touch what they have acquired by petty corruption, they would scream when challenged. Some would say “What do you mean I can’t pay off a principal or rector so he or she admits my child or allows my son or daughter to graduate?” Ukrainians demand change elsewhere but won’t change for the better by themselves.

The Ukrainian voters’ behavior reminds me of a biting observation by American author Orson Scott Card: “If pigs could vote, the man with the slop bucket would be elected swineherd every time, no matter how much slaughtering he did on the side.”

Why weren’t Zelensky supporters mindful of the Russia’s ongoing war against their homeland? Why didn’t eastern Ukrainians remember Russia’s famine murders of their ancestors? Why did everyone forget the Revolution of Dignity and the Heavenly Hundred, and centuries-long independence struggles?

One reason is that Zelensky underwent a metamorphosis courtesy of his patron Ihor Kolomoisky, an oligarch himself who stole $5.5 billion from Ukraine by transferring funds via Cyprus. Zelensky even learned to speak Ukrainian and sing the Ukrainian national anthem along with his wife at the end of the debates.

This successful transformation should not startle anyone who is familiar with the book “The Selling of the President, 1968,” which revealed the influence that image making can have on political campaigning. It showed that voters are bored with issues while being influenced with images.

Thanks to Kolomoisky, 41-year-old Zelensky was polished and shined and to his supporters he epitomized the new, younger generation of Ukraine that could lead the country out of its abyss. He was trained how to perform during a debate and what to say or not say during a political campaign.

In the wake of Zelensky’s victory, two picturesque mottos surfaced to soothe the wounds of the losers. One was “25%,” which signifies the amount of voters that didn’t vote for Zelensky and the other was “Not Indifferent Minority.”

Indeed, these maxims should rally that segment of the Ukrainian population into monitoring Zelensky’s every step. They don’t have to express support for him or join his administration or become his groupies, only scrutinize him and raise bloody hell if deviates from pro-Ukrainian policies or seeks to negotiate Ukraine out of the war with Russia thereby leaving occupied territories permanently occupied.

Will Zelensky curry favor in Moscow by flying there before the transition of power? Apparently, Moscow is waiting for him to come groveling. Viktor Medvedchuk, a prominent figure in Ukraine’s Russia-leaning opposition, observed that Zelensky could regain control over the separatist-controlled east of his country within months and get cheap gas and major investment from Russia if he repairs ties with Moscow. We don’t yet know how many silver pieces this will cost.

What will be the fate of Crimea and the Ukrainian POWs and other prisoners of conscience in Russian imprisonment?

Since his victory, Zelensky said he would favor the Ukrainian language, support Ukraine and fight corruption. He pledged to be a one-term president. He also thanked law enforcement officers “for their honest service” and Ukrainian soldiers “for guarding Ukraine.” He pledged that he would never deceive the Ukrainian people.

The Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group pointed out that Zelensky’s consistent lack of detail regarding what he stands for and what policies he will introduce was almost certainly meant to significantly broaden his electorate. At the outset Zelensky dangerously seems to want to change the attitudes of the people as he ignores reality including that Moscow launched and is financing what has become the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-19.

As for corruption, it’s curious what will be the visible and invisible roles of gray cardinal Kolomoisky? Will Zelensky be beholden to him? To be sure, Zelensky’s presidency will quickly implode if Kolomoisky and other oligarchs aren’t put behind bars.

For Zelensky, his showman’s life of leisure, parties and fun is over. To protect Ukraine against a revanche, the nation – in Ukraine and the diaspora – must keep up its pressure on him, scrutinize every action and slice and dice every statement.

In the meantime, back to reality. News reports state that Russia has moved another battalion group to the Ukrainian border while fighting has ramped up in Donbas. One military pundit has already predicted that a Zelensky victory will invite a full-fledged Russian invasion of all of Ukraine.

Ukraine’s Electoral Battle Cry 2019

Ukrainian voters faced a nerve-rattling wake-up call two weeks ago when Volodymyr Zelensky, a vaudevillian entertainer and political nobody, solidly outpaced President Petro Poroshenko for the lead in the 2019 presidential elections.

Since then, numerous post-mortems sliced and diced the results but didn’t conclusively answer the elusive question “why?”

Zelensky, 41, who doesn’t speak Ukrainian, built his popularity on a TV stage by ridiculing Ukraine frequently as a porn star while playing its president. He hasn’t offered any serious ideas about how to make life better for Ukrainians nor does he possess any redeeming qualities to be president and the commander in chief of a major European country. As a matter of fact, he is a repeated draft dodger. He and his team are busy trying to figure out what the president of a modern country really does. However, Zelensky does enjoy the patronage of the filthy rich Kharkiv-based oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, whose TV network broadcasts Zelensky’s spoofs.

Zelensky’s flippant attitude about the elections and presidency is best reflected by his absence from yesterday’s campaign debates. After goading Poroshenko into accepting the challenge, Zelensky turned out to be a no-show, leaving the President alone on stage talking to journalists, calling his opponent a virtual candidate and addressing cheering voters in the 70,000-seat Kyiv stadium. Poroshenko stood in front of an empty podium with the comedian’s name written on it and spent nearly an hour talking about his platform and answering questions from the media. Poroshenko seized on Zelensky’s absence to urge Ukrainians not to trust Ukraine’s future to an untested comic at a time of war.

Indeed, Poroshenko’s warnings about Zelensky ring loudly. How can a draft dodger and political neophyte lead Ukraine at a time of a bloody war with its greatest enemy Russia that has claimed thousands of lives? How can the nation trust the country’s defense, arsenal and soldiers to an untested, unknown entity?

Poroshenko is not a perfect president and he has his flaws. But 28 years after Ukraine proclaimed its independence from the Russian empire, there is ample, undeniable evidence that the country is moving in the direction as an independent, prosperous, democratic and inclusive society. He is respected in the United States, Canada and throughout Europe and the free world.

So why was Poroshenko denied his just victory? Some voters said they favored Zelensky’s youthfulness compared with Poroshenko. Others were fulfilling the bidding of oligarchs and the Kremlin. As Putin had said, he could tolerate any president of Ukraine except Poroshenko, the commander in chief who has stymied the Russian war machine. Still others were imbued with vengeance because his or her life hadn’t improved.

Voter fabrication can’t be blamed for the outcome because election observers attested that the voting was without manipulation. However, Russia didn’t allow the process to proceed without interference. Its cyber and psy-ops specialists attempted to sabotage the elections in Ukraine as they are doing around the world. The techniques were both sophisticated and down to earth, complete with lies. Two websites reported that Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė, a staunch supporter and defender of Ukraine in its war with Russia, allegedly remarked that corruption, not Russia, is Ukraine’s greatest enemy. I inquired with Ukrainian diplomats and learned that the comment is not true and the websites are known for posting fabrications.

Corruption is still plaguing Ukraine at all levels of life and little has been done to root it out. However, the complaints about this are dishonest and duplicitous. Corruption doesn’t merely exist at the highest echelons of government, the parliament and corporations. It exists everywhere in Ukraine. Many good, god-fearing Ukrainians still harbor larcenous manners from their soviet past. They should first abandon corruption on personal levels and commit to electing later this year a Verkhovna Rada that is pro-Ukraine and dedicated to eliminating graft and corruption.

Hopefully Ukrainian voters will be able to recognize that they have been targeted and can be brainwashed. Consequently, they can vote against their own best interests, as well as the interests of people who need them most like their neighbors near and far.

Meanwhile, next Sunday, Ukrainians will be making a fateful decision between two singularly vital concepts – not two candidates – similar to their choice in the referendum of December 1, 1991. Twenty-eight years ago more than 90% of Ukrainians voted for independence. Have their lives taken such a significant turn for the worse that Ukrainians would reject independence today? Have they forgotten the strides they made to break the bonds of Russian subjugation and chart their own independent lives? Have they forgotten that Ukrainian servicemen and women as well as civilians are dying in battle with Russian invaders in the eastern oblasts?

Today, the choice is the same as it was in 1991. It’s not Poroshenko or Zelensky.

To paraphrase James Carville’s successful battle cry for Bill Clinton:

It’s independence, stupid!

In voting booths in Ukraine, New York City, across the free world, Ukrainian voters should put aside deep-rooted feelings of retribution, jealousy, spitefulness and punishment and focus on one thought and one thought only. Who has demonstrated that he can maintain Ukraine on its nationally beneficial course to becoming a prosperous, democratic, free European country?

The answer is Petro Poroshenko.

From Ukraine’s Battle Trenches to NATO HQ –

Olena Bilozerska Brings Message of Liberation

Olena Bilozerska, a well-known Kyiv-based journalist and blogger in her late 30s, who is now a Ukrainian volunteer soldier fighting for her native land in the eastern oblasts of Ukraine, took a temporary leave from the war zone to travel with five comrades-in-arms, one of whom is in a wheelchair, to NATO Headquarters in Brussels with a personal message about her country’s war with Russia.

Speaking to the military leaders of the free world, Bilozerska, who in another life could have been a successful businesswoman but today decided to place herself in harm’s way in defense of her nation, emphasized that the West’s goal for Ukraine is not Ukraine’s nor her goal.

“We, Ukrainians, are fighting not for ‘peace at any costs,’ not for ‘cessation of fire,’ but for the liberation and return of our land,” she declared.

Consequently, the Minsk process is a misleading undertaking meant to satisfy gullible Western leaders about what is really happening in the Donbas region of Ukraine and the desired outcome. Russia is violating the accords while killing Ukrainian soldiers and civilians.

Bilozerska explained that Ukraine is again fighting for its independence, its life and future, against a recidivist country that means to subjugate and ultimately eradicate the Ukrainian nation from the face of the earth.

The Ukrainian soldier accentuated that despite Russian propaganda to the contrary, Ukraine was invaded by Russia and is now forced to fight a war against its military machine. She pointed out: “In 2016 I took part in a reconnaissance mission near Mariupol, where we captured the military map made by a Russian officer, and on this map the positions, forces and facilities of our enemy were designated, including those officially belonging to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

“It was written there clearly: Russian Armed Forces.”

She passionately told Western leaders not to force Ukraine to accept a faux peace with Russia because ultimately it will fail as others have failed in the past. Russia’s mission is to dominate Ukraine and assimilate it into its prison of nations.

“I want to tell you: Dear, dear foreign friends! Please do not help us to seek agreement with Russia. Any agreement with that country is hopelessly futile and counterproductive.
“Only the tough line of the whole free world towards Russia, a wide complex of military, economic and diplomatic measures is capable to stop it,” she eloquently said.

Bilozerska warned the free world that all forms of commerce, “every barrel of oil, every cubic meter of gas purchased from Russia” is transformed into missiles, shells and bullets which kill Ukrainians today and may be used against other innocent nations and people tomorrow.

“And, as a matter of fact, not only tomorrow. We all remember 300 innocent people of the flight which were killed by the Russian missile, the attempt of coup d’état in Montenegro (organized by Russia) to prevent that country from joining NATO, the actions of Russian assassins in the Great Britain, and so on and so forth,” she elaborated about just a few recent examples of Russian crimes against humanity.

Looking toward the future, Bilozerska said Russia’s war against Ukraine is not merely a Ukrainian problem, it is such for the entire free world.

She did not beg NATO to do Ukraine’s fighting for it. Quite the opposite, she said: “We’re fighting for you.”

Indeed. The Armed Forces of Ukraine, Ukrainian soldiers and Bilozerska and her fellow male and female soldiers are the only ones in the world that have real battlefield experience fighting Russian soldiers. Undoubtedly a unique and valuable skill.

“We, Ukrainians, defend the whole free world from Russia,” she pointed out. Looking around the world today, at Russia’s extensive military and non-military interventions, that’s not a far-fetched observation.

While she didn’t request that free world soldiers fight for Ukraine, Bilozerska did specify that the Ukrainian army needed its support in the forms of weapons, ammunitions and anti-Russian sanctions.

Ukraine’s armed forces have come a long way since the days when the traitor Viktor Vanukovych destroyed every element of Ukraine’s defense and security structures, but Ukraine still needs help to subdue Russian invaders.

“Do it now, and future generations of Europeans will be forever thankful to you,” she implored.

God speed, Olena. May the Ukrainian Army be victorious against Russia.

Statistical Look at the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-19

The world looks at the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-19 as if it’s a made-for-television movie about war and peace. Or a video game.

Perhaps world leaders and international organizations are sick and tired or afraid of delving deeper into the causes and effects of Russia’s invasion and war against Ukraine. They naively believe that negotiations, sanctions and the so-called Minsk process can force Russia to withdraw its murderous soldiers from Ukraine.

The Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-19 is real and its bloody trail can be seen across eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas.

Ambassador Volodymyr Yelchenko, permanent representative of Ukraine to the United Nations, in a statement to the UN Security Council meeting on Ukraine on February 13, provided a succinct chronological and numerical presentation of the coldblooded statistics of Russia’s unprovoked aggression against Ukraine.

As Yelchenko said, “So here we go.”

•February the 20th. This is the day when back in 2014 Russia started its invasion in Crimea. We’ll have a General Assembly debate on this date, but maybe someone will come up with an idea of having a discussion in the Security Council as well. It is better to be prepared, just in case;

•March the 16th. The date of holding the infamous so-called referendum in Crimea. The GA on March 27, 2014, adopted resolution 68/262 asserting that this so-called referendum has no validity and cannot form the basis for any alteration of the status of Crimea. By the way, the Russian side is consistently pushing the narrative of a peaceful nature of events in Crimea. Just one episode from 2014 for your reflection: on March 18, Ukrainian warrant officer Serhiy Kokurin, a native of Crimea, was shot by two bullets in the heart during the Russian special forces assault at the Ukrainian cartographic station near Simferopol. He was the first Ukrainian soldier killed by Russia in this war;

•June the 14th. Over the Luhansk airport the Russian forces shot down a Ukrainian transport aircraft killing 40 Ukrainian paratroopers and 9 crew members;

•July the 17th. The downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17. Another terrorist attack by Russia. All 298 people onboard were killed;

•August the 23rd-24th. Four battalion-tactical groups of the Russian armed forces invade the territory of Ukraine;

•September the 5th. Signing of the Minsk Protocol, which together with the Minsk Memorandum constitutes the core of the Minsk agreements, implemented by the Package of Measures. For the record, on the Russian side the document was signed by Ambassador of the Russian Federation to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov;

•October the 22nd. At a meeting of the OSCE Permanent Council, Russia blocked the adoption of the decision to extend the mandate of the OSCE Observer Mission at the Russian Checkpoints Gukovo and Donetsk to the entire uncontrolled part of the Ukrainian-Russian border. By the way, paragraph 4 of the aforementioned Minsk Protocol reads as follows, and I quote: Ensure permanent monitoring on the Ukrainian-Russian State border and verification by OSCE, along with the establishment of a security area in the border regions of Ukraine and the Russian Federation;

•November the 2nd. Illegal elections were held in the occupied areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. It was yet another violation of the Minsk Protocol, paragraph 9: Ensure the holding of early local elections in accordance with the Law of Ukraine on the interim status of local self-government in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions (Law on Special Status). Worse, the recent holding, in late 2018, by the Russian occupation administration of another illegal so-called “elections” in the occupied areas added insult to injury: it was a clear and deliberate provocation to undermine the Minsk agreements;

•November the 25th. Another significant development, this time in 2018, when the Russian navy attacked Ukraine’s two armored boats Nikopol and Berdyansk and a tugboat Yani Kapu;

•January the 13th. In early 2015, the Russian forces shelled a checkpoint near the town of Volnovakha. 12 civilians were killed and 18 more were wounded. Later the same month, on January the 24th, the Russian forces randomly shelled the outskirts of Mariupol, killing 31 civilians.

• From 2015 on, Russia 18 times (I repeat, 18 times) has effectively sabotaged implementation of ceasefire agreements. During this period, there were over 54,000 cases of ceasefire violations. In almost 6,000 cases, the Russian forces used weapon systems prohibited by the Minsk Agreements.

A few more statistics presented by Ambassador Yelchenko:

• As of the beginning of this February, the Russian armed formations in Donbas have in their possession 496 main battle tanks (this is comparable to the arsenals of such countries as Germany, France, Indonesia), 938 armored combat vehicles (similar to Peru and Kuwait), 128 multiple launch rocket system (somewhat less than Indonesia), 776 artillery systems, including self-propelled ones (again, comparable to the numbers in such former Council members as Kazakhstan or Ethiopia).

• The armed force of 35,000 in the occupied Donbas is supported by over 2,100 Russian regular military, mostly in the key command and control positions.

• The total number of the Russian offensive strike group personnel along the Russian-Ukrainian border (including the groups adjacent to the occupied territories of Donbas and Crimea) is 87,750 military.

From Crimea, to eastern Ukraine and now to the Sea of Azov, Russia has been killing Ukrainian civilians and soldiers while chiseling away Ukrainian territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence for more than five years.

Is the free world prepared to tolerate this crime against global institutions, law and order, and peace and security without an end in sight? No one had to convince the free world to mobilize a powerful military machine to defeat Nazi Germany after it invaded Poland, France, Italy and others.

UNGA again Condemns Russian Invasion,

Occupation of Crimea; But Expulsion is Better

For the record, the United Nations again condemned Russia for invading and occupying the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea and demanded that Moscow withdraw its troops.

While it is important for global consumption and historical archives that the UN General Assembly took this step, Russia will most likely not abide by its demands. Moscow has disregarded previous resolutions that denounced its illegal activities that targeted Ukraine or other countries and it will do so again.

However, what is significant now is that the vote on Monday evening, December 17, demonstrated that Russian supporters are dwindling while the world is watching and listening to Ukraine.

According to a tally by the Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations, Russia until recently enjoyed the regular support of 26 countries. This week only 18 countries sided with Moscow in voting against this resolution. Russia and its global influence are withering.

Kremlin lackeys include: Armenia, Belarus, Bolivia, Burundi, Cambodia, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Laos, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Serbia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Uzbekistan, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

Sixty-six countries voted in favor of the resolution initiated by Ukraine that calls for Russia to end its occupation and militarization of Crimea. The resolution, titled “Problem of the Militarization of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol, Ukraine, as well as Parts of the Black and Azov,” insists that Russia withdraw its armed forces from Crimea and cease the occupation of Ukrainian territories.

The UN emphasizes that “the presence of Russian troops in Crimea is contrary to the national sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine and undermines the security and stability of neighboring countries and the European region.” There have been numerous reports that Russia is installing high-tech rockets and modernizing its military installations on Crimea.

The resolution expresses serious concern over the growing militarization of Crimea by Russia, which threatens the Black Sea region as well as the Mediterranean. With Russia expanding its invasion of Ukraine with a third front in the Sea of Azov, countries along the coast of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean should be concerned by Russia’s expanding belligerence.

The resolution calls on Russia to “refrain from impeding the lawful exercise of navigational rights and freedoms in the Black Sea, the Sea of Azov, and the Kerch Strait.” It expresses concern over Russia’s “ongoing actions in parts of the Black Sea surrounding Crimea and the Sea of Azov, including their militarization, which pose further threats to Ukraine and undermine the stability of the broader region.”

The UN declares its “utmost concern about the dangerous increase in tensions and the unjustified use of force” by Russia against Ukraine, including against three vessels of the naval forces of Ukraine on November 25 in the Black Sea, and calls on the Kremlin to release the vessels and their crews, and equipment unconditionally and without delay.

The resolution condemns Russia’s construction and opening of the Kerch Strait Bridge between Russia and temporarily occupied Crimea, and condemns the increasing military presence of Russia in parts of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.

Even though Russia will not abide by the UN General Assembly’s decision regarding Crimea, it was not a waste of time and effort to call for the vote. The UN officially repeated reaffirming that it deplores Russia’s international transgressions and insists on its withdrawal from the Ukrainian peninsula is a noteworthy development.

Furthermore, citizens of free world countries are now positioned to take advantage of this document in addressing Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine in the chambers of their national governments and legislatures. This is no longer a matter of Ukraine or the Ukrainian diaspora seeking justice against Russian crimes but it is a global concern. United Nations decisions still carry weight in government offices.

What can civilians do at this point? A stroll down memory lane reveals that 80 decades ago, on December 14, 1939, Moscow was expelled from the League of Nations following its treaty with Nazi Germany and its invasion of neighboring Finland. An updated campaign, launched in the halls of the Senate and Congress and other national legislatures will raise awareness about Russia’s criminal recidivism as well as the voices for punitive measures beyond mere resolutions.

Consequently, expel Russia from the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the World Trade Organization, the World Tourism Organization and other alliances because of its aggression against Ukraine.

US Senate Unanimously Adopts Resolution

Condemning Russian Aggression vs. Ukraine

The US Senate unanimously condemned Russia’s recent one-sided, blatant attack on Ukrainian vessels in the Kerch Strait and called for the immediate release of all incarcerated Ukrainian sailors.

Senators Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chris Murphy (D-CT), the chairman and ranking member, respectively, of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation, introduced the resolution, which was adopted on November 29, according to the Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS).

Undoubtedly, this statement, endorsed by all 100 members of the UN Senate, should send a unambiguous signal to Putin and his Kremlin junta that the United States is aware of all Russian crimes against Ukraine and stands with Ukraine and, by association, with all former Russian captive nations that are striving to defend and preserve their independence and sovereignty against Moscow’s aggression.

In his accompanying remarks, Johnson pointed out that the West must tell Russian President Vladimir Putin that the west “will not stand for this sort of provocation.”

“I am pleased the Senate spoke with one voice to reaffirm our support for the Ukrainian people, the Ukrainian government and Ukraine’s territorial integrity and make it clear that Russia’s aggression cannot be tolerated,” Johnson said.

Other senators offered the following observations:

“Today, the Senate took action and sent a clear message to Putin that his government’s aggression against Ukraine in the Sea of Azov will not be tolerated. We strongly condemn any military action taken by Russia to unilaterally rewrite international rules,” said Senator Murphy.

“The United States should stand firmly alongside Ukraine in the face of this most recent Russian aggression,” said Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio). “Russia’s unprovoked action against Ukraine is a violation of international law and it highlights the urgent need to bolster Ukraine’s ability to defend its sovereign borders. I’m pleased that this resolution acknowledges my amendment to the FY 2018 NDAA authorizing naval security assistance to Ukraine. As Sunday’s events showed, the Black Sea and Sea of Azov have become hotspots in this conflict and increased naval assistance as well as international condemnation is appropriate and necessary.”

“Through cyberattacks, propaganda, military intimidation, and outright invasion, Russia continues to attack Ukrainian sovereignty and international standards. By escalating the tension in the region, Russia’s campaign of aggression in Eastern Europe blazes on. Such blatantly hostile acts must be universally condemned. I’m proud to join my colleagues from both sides of the aisle on this resolution reaffirming that the United States Senate stands arm and arm with our friends in Ukraine,” Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) said. “President Trump should forcefully tell Putin on the sidelines of the G20 summit to stop continued meddling in American and western democracies and that the U.S. will not stand idly by while Russia bullies Ukraine in the Azov Sea.”

“This resolution reaffirms the US. Senate’s steadfast commitment to defending Ukraine and the transatlantic community against escalating Russian aggression,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH). “The Kremlin’s latest assault wasn’t just an attack on Ukraine – it was a signal to the entire world that Russia’s assaults threaten our collective security and global stability. This behavior cannot go unanswered. I’ll continue to urge Congress, as well as our transatlantic allies, to prioritize response measures that hold the Kremlin accountable for its rogue actions. As Ukraine navigates this perilous time, I urge Ukrainian lawmakers to continue to maintain the higher ground they’ve always held in the battle against Russia’s aggression.”

There are two salient remarks made by the lawmakers. Murphy accented that Russian attacks against Ukraine will not be tolerated and, in the words of Shaheen, Russia’s assaults are a threat against our collective security and global stability.”

Mighty powerful words. However, for them to be effective, there must be an obvious threat incorporated into them. What will happen if Russia persists in assaulting, attaching and invading Ukraine? What kind of impediments will the US and the free world throw in the path of oncoming Russian tanks? What credible steps will Washington undertake to repel Russian aggression?

Right now, the only military force that is protecting “our” collective security and global stability are Ukrainian soldiers. Free world’s applause and cheers will not be sufficient to ensure their combat readiness.

Support from Georgian Association

The Georgian Association in the USA “strongly condemns” Russia’s assault against Ukrainian vessels.

In a statement released on December 4, the association also said:

“The attack and seizure of three Ukrainian naval vessels and crew members, some of whom were injured, is the latest incident in Russia’s incursion on its neighbors and a violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity.  While Russia’s motives in this latest action and next steps may be unclear, Russia continues to ignore international norms of behavior as it attempts to unlawfully increase its presence in the eastern European region by whatever means it deems necessary.  Their aggressiveness is a threat to all freedom loving people.  The Georgian Association stands with the citizens of Ukraine in reaffirming support of its independence.”

RIP

Lyudmila Alexeyeva, a Russian human rights leader and dissident, who challenged Soviet & Russian regimes for decades, has died at 91. My friend, Borys Potapenko and I had the privilege of visiting her in her temporary home in Queens, NY, in mid-1970s. We discussed with her the broad human rights movement in the Soviet empire with an obvious focus on events in Ukraine. The late Alexeyeva observed that when the Moscow human rights group was just beginning to form, Ukraine already had powerful campaign in place.