White House Sells Ukraine down the Pipe

The White House saw the whites of Moscow’s eyes and it scurried away.

Despite assurances by key officials such as Secretary of State Antony Blinken that the United States does not favor construction of Nord Stream 2 pipeline and supports Ukraine’s position regarding the inherent danger posed by this project, the Biden Administration has suddenly switched sides and joined the dark side.

Was it the result of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s charm or Russian dictator Vladimir Putin’s intimidation? Regardless, it shows that the White House can’t be trusted as a serious partner of the former captive nations, all of which oppose the pipeline. It reaffirms in Putin’s mind that all it takes is a few well-placed words and threats to demonstrate his superiority.

According to Politico, the White House yesterday asked Ukraine not to make waves and remain quiet on the Russian pipeline that when completed could suck the independence, sovereignty and freedom out of Ukraine.

Betsy Woodruff Swan, Alexander Ward and Andrew Desiderio wrote on July 20: “In the midst of tense negotiations with Berlin over a controversial Russia-to-Germany pipeline, the Biden administration is asking a friendly country to stay quiet about its vociferous opposition. And Ukraine is not happy.

“U.S. officials have signaled that they’ve given up on stopping the project, known as the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and are now scrambling to contain the damage by striking a grand bargain with Germany.

At the same time, administration officials have quietly urged their Ukrainian counterparts to withhold criticism of a forthcoming agreement with Germany involving the pipeline, according to four people with knowledge of the conversations.

“The U.S. officials have indicated that going public with opposition to the forthcoming agreement could damage the Washington-Kyiv bilateral relationship, those sources said. The officials have also urged the Ukrainians not to discuss the U.S. and Germany’s potential plans with Congress. A senior administration official disputed this reporting, noting that the situation is more nuanced than that, but declined to share further details on U.S. officials’ talks with their Ukrainian counterparts.”

This outlandish request will go down in history as a political spoiler between two friendly nations—the United States and Ukraine, in which Washington, Kyiv’s strategic partner, chose to side with the war mongering enemy Russia.

Bowing to Merkel and Putin’s complaints, the White House decided to contain the damage, to make nice with Germany, and to coax Ukraine to stop badgering Washington and other free world democracies that support Kyiv about the dangers of the pipeline, with which Moscow will control the European Union with a twist of the spigot.

Furthermore, the White House warned – perhaps threatened – Kyiv that if it didn’t stop opposing the pipeline, it would damage Washington-Kyiv bilateral relationship. Once that form of undiplomatic rapport between two countries is set in stone, Washington could bully or bribe Kyiv into replacing its independence for a repeated stint in Moscow’s prison of nations.

While not denying this line of thinking, the White House suggested that it’s not like you think, it’s “more nuanced.” The White House simultaneously urged Ukraine not to discuss its change of heart with Congress.

That should immediately inspire the Ukrainian American community, which has been in the forefront of defending subjugated Ukraine’s interests for more than a century and now independent Ukraine’s welfare for three decades, to raise hell on Capitol Hill about President Biden’s duplicitous policy toward Ukraine. Just recall that Ukrainian Americans were upset with President Trump’s unfriendly policies toward Ukraine.

The Governments of Ukraine and Poland jointly strongly protested this decision in today’s statement: “The decision to build Nord Stream 2 made in 2015 mere months after Russia’s invasion and illegal annexation of Ukrainian territory, created security, credibility and political crisis in Europe.”

The two allies said “This decision has created political, military and energy threat for Ukraine and Central Europe, while increasing Russia's potential to destabilize the security situation in Europe, perpetuating divisions among NATO and European Union member states.”

“We call on the United States and Germany to adequately address the security crisis in our region, that Russia is the only beneficiary to. Ukraine and Poland will work together with their allies and partners to oppose NS2 until solutions are developed to address the security crisis created by NS2, to provide support to countries aspiring to membership in Western democratic institutions, and to reduce threats to peace and energy security,” concluded the statement by Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Dmytro Kuleba and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland Zbigniew Rau.

Numerous lawmakers support Ukraine’s position on Nord Stream 2, such as Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Bob Menendez of New Jersey. Ukrainian American voters should contact their congressmen and senators about this sad two-faced situation in the Oval Office and point out that the White House sought to muzzle Kyiv but Americans on Ukrainian descent are mounting a second front to correct this misguided decision and split the pipeline project once and for all.

The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America and other community groups have begun calling on their memberships to contact Congress.

“The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), the representative organization of nearly 2 million Americans of Ukrainian descent, agrees with the United States Congress, the White House and the US State Department in their estimation of Russia’s Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline: Nord Stream 2 is a geopolitical scheme designed to provide Putin’s Russia with additional malign influence on our European allies and partners…

“UCCA took President Joe Biden at his word when he described the Nord Stream 2 pipeline as ‘fundamentally bad deal for Europe’ specifically because, in his words, it would ‘lock in great reliance on Russia [which] will fundamentally destabilize Ukraine’…

“The United States should not only fully administer congressionally mandated sanctions against the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project, it should further sanction any of the subcontractors that work on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to ratchet up the pressure on Russia to finally leave Ukrainian territory. UCCA calls on President Biden to maintain the commitments made to our allies in Eastern Europe and continue America’s bipartisan record of support for Ukraine.”

We urge Congress to prohibit the White House from embarrassing itself, demonstrating weakness in the face of Moscow’s pressure and Germany’s egocentricity, and losing Ukraine on its watch.

Captive Nations Week 2021 – At Least White House Recognized It

Vintage Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations poster designating captive nations.

A World War II-era Ukrainian poster depicting the Soviet prison of nations and the motto: Freedom for Nations! Freedom for the Person.

In the midst of a changing world with new sources of regional and global threats, uneven condemnations of aggressors like Russia as it pursues its seven-year war against Ukraine, and rumors that the White House was considering revising the six-decade-old Captive Nations Week Proclamation, President Biden fortunately today issued the declaration that included references to Ukraine, Crimea and Belarus.

Despite the lack of serious attention to so-called remnants of the Cold War, the annual Captive Nations Week Proclamations based on Public Law 86-90 are important reminders of the ongoing danger posed by old and new totalitarian communist regimes and notably their creator Moscow in all of its political colorations. Russian leaders opposed this proclamation and overtly or quietly had asked successive Administrations to abandon them. None did, though President Richard Nixon, in the midst of his peaceful coexistence policy, delayed issuing the 1971 proclamation that ultimately was devoid of the words Communist, Soviet and Russia.

The third week of July was traditionally filled with similar proclamations issued by governors and mayors as well as civic commemorations in large and small communities.

President Biden did issue the statement but it was unwise of him to even consider downplaying its historic title with “Free and Open Societies Week.” The original version was meant to highlight the subjugation of countries behind the iron curtain by Moscow, such as Ukraine, the Baltic States, Poland, etc. In time the term iron curtain was expanded with the bamboo curtain, pertaining to Chinese oppression in Asia, and the sugar curtain relating to Cuban tyranny in the Southern Hemisphere, respectively.

Even though many captive nations, like those in Eastern Europe, have liberated themselves, they still face daily perils from Moscow. Russia’s war against Ukraine is seven years old as it simultaneously bullies and intimidates other near and distant countries – even the United States.

President Biden observed in the 2021 iteration: “Though much has changed in the world since President Eisenhower issued the first Captive Nations Proclamation in 1959, its call for liberty and opportunity still ring true.  During Captive Nations Week, we recommit ourselves to those principles which form the foundation of our Nation, and to amplify the voices of courageous individuals around the world who are striving to advance the principles of human rights, justice, and the rule of law.”

Biden took notice of existing oppression in Belarus, China, Burma, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, where “voices are crying out for liberty.” He also noted “the Crimean Tatars, ethnic Ukrainians, and other ethnic and religious minorities who suffer repression for opposing Russia’s illegal occupation of Crimea.”

“We are committed to ensuring that all those who are oppressed across the globe — including people with disabilities, women and girls, members of the LGBTQI+ community, indigenous populations, and racial and ethnic minorities — are heard, respected, and protected.

“During Captive Nations Week, we recommit ourselves to the timeless, vital work of advancing freedom and justice for all,” the President wrote.

“Together with our allies and partners, we must continue to strengthen democratic institutions, defend independent civil society and media freedom, promote free and fair elections, protect human rights online, insist on accountability for those who commit abuses and foster cultures of corruption, and push back against authoritarianism around the world.”

For a historical perspective about the Captive Nations Week Proclamation, I’d like to quote from an article by Lee Edwards, chairman and co-founder of the Victims of Communism Foundation, that appeared in the Summer 2020 edition of The Ukrainian Quarterly:

“One man more than any other was responsible for the proclamation and the week – Prof. Lev E. Dobriansky of Georgetown University, longtime president of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America. Born in November 1918 in New York City of Ukrainian immigrant parents, Dr. Dobriansky attended New York University where he earned a Ph.D. in economics. He taught at Georgetown from 1948 until 1987 during which he founded and directed the Institute on Comparative Economic and Political Systems. He also served as U.S. ambassador to the Bahamas from 1982-86 when the islands were in the front lines in the battle against illegal drug traffic.

“Professor Dobriansky came into political prominence in 1959 when he persuaded Congress and the Eisenhower administration to adopt the Captive Nations Proclamation, which he personally drafted. The Proclamation was a litany of anti-Soviet pro-freedom paragraphs:

“ ‘Whereas since 1918 the imperialistic and aggressive policies of Russian communism have resulted in the creation of a vast empire which poses a dire threat to the security of the United States and of all the free peoples of the world;

“ ‘Whereas the imperialistic policies of Communist Russia have led, through direct and indirect aggression, to the subjugation of the national independence of Poland, Hungary, Lithuania, Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Latvia, Estonia, White Ruthenia, Rumania, East Germany, Bulgaria, mainland China, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, North Korea, Albania, Idel-Ural, Tibet, Cossackia, Turkestan, North Viet-Nam, and others…

“ ‘Whereas these submerged nations look to the United States as the citadel of human freedom, for leadership in bringing about their liberation and freedom and in restoring to them the enjoyment of their Christian, Jewish, Moslem, Buddhist or other religious freedoms and of their individual liberties…

Whereas the desire for liberty and independence by the overwhelming majority of the people of these submerged nations is a powerful deterrent to war and one of the best hopes for a just and lasting peace;

Whereas it is fitting that we clearly manifest to such peoples through an appropriate and official means the historic fact that the people of the United States share with them their aspirations for the recovery of their freedom and independence…’ ”

Ambassador Dobriansky wrote about the proclamation’s significance in his article, “The Captive Nations Week Resolution Then and Now”:

“Originated as S.J. Resolution 111, passed on July 17, 1959, and signed into Public Law 86-90, the law has remained in force to the present day precisely because of its realistic, conceptual framework and outlook. With ease and real conformation, its dominant concepts relate to these upsurging events. They are: ‘national independence,’ ‘the democratic process,’ ‘inter-dependency of peoples and nations,’ ‘imperialistic and aggressive policies of Russian communism,’ ‘a vast empire,’ ‘threat to the security of the United States and of all the free peoples of the world,’ ‘religious freedoms,’ ‘individual liberties,’ ‘powerful deterrent to war and one of the best hopes for a just and lasting peace.’ Then and now – even more so now and in the future – these concepts have been fully applicable, notwithstanding current hopes and notions about the end of the Cold War, the fading of military threat from the Soviet Russian empire, and secure, sovereign national freedom in Central Europe.”

Undeniably, the Captive Nations Week Proclamation belongs to the category of American documents that should be observed throughout the ages.

The 2021 proclamation can be found on the White House website:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/07/16/a-proclamation-on-captive-nations-week-2021/

Last Time Putin Spoke of Unity a War Broke Out

When Vladimir Putin speaks of unity between the Ukrainian and Russian peoples, Kyiv, Washington and the free world should listen carefully because his words should be understood as a warning, threat or prophecy.

The last time the Russian dictator addressed this topic, Moscow launched a war against Ukraine seven months later, a war that it is still waging today. The Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-21 has claimed more than 11,000 civilian and military lives. A war that he denies.

I wrote in the July 2013 edition of The Torn Curtain 1991 that Putin took advantage of that year’s observance of the 1025th anniversary of the Christianity of Kyivan-Rus by visiting Ukraine and driving his point about the need for its re-unification with Russia.

Amid a host of religious, predominantly Orthodox spiritual leaders, gathered in Kyiv, Putin on Saturday, July 27, 2013, urged Ukraine to join forces with its former colonial overlord, saying Russians and Ukrainians were “one people.” Putin said the two Orthodox neighbors should further integrate economically.

“Intense competition is going on now in global markets, for global markets,” Putin said. “Only by joining forces can we be competitive and win in this rather tough competitive fight. We have every reason to believe that we can and must do it.”

“All of us are spiritual successors of what happened here 1025 years ago. And in this sense we are certainly one people,” he added.

Putin hasn’t changed his and Moscow’s aspiration for reunification – nay, re-subjugation of Ukraine, returning it to its multinational prison of nations.

Now in a rambling 7,000-word Ukrainian and Russian-language essay, published on the Kremlin’s website on Monday, July 12, Putin repeated his outlandish, baseless claim that Ukrainians and Russians are one people while warning the readers that the Kyiv government would “destroy their country” by moving it closer to the West. And in the word “destroy” lies the crux of his missive to Ukrainians and the world through which Moscow hopes to scare the country and its advocates into submission. Since February 2014, immediately after the conclusion of the Winter Olympics that year, Russia has once more been destroying Ukraine and its people.

With Kyiv’s sovereign fortunes dramatically changing for the better, after all it is closer to gaining accession to NATO and European structures and it enjoys political and military support in free world capitals, Putin certainly feels threatened by the possibility of losing Ukraine forever. For him, as well as the Soviet Russian commissars and tsars, Ukraine is the valued lynchpin that holds the empire together. As others have said, the loss of all of the former captive nations does not have the same impact on the evil empire as does the loss of Ukraine.

Putin and all Moscow leaders will go to war, as they have, to retain Ukraine within its barbed-wire fence. They have threatened, cajoled, fabricated and lied to do so and this mendacious article is no different.

Whether he has knowledge of Russian or Ukrainian histories is immaterial because Putin makes up the facts along the way. This behavior is very strange considering that anybody could just Google names and places to discover the truth and see his lies.

“To better understand the present and look to the future, we must turn to history,” he wrote cynically. History according to Putin bears no resemblance to what actually transpired in the previous 1,000 years. For instance, Kyiv-Rus, with its capital in Kyiv, predates Moscow by a couple of hundred years. Kniaz Volodymyr the Great accepted Christianity in 988 from Constantinople and established the Trident as his state symbol, which exists today as Ukraine’s national emblem. Kyiv-Rus and its rulers formed the last bastion of hope against invasions by Asiatic hordes just like Ukraine today defends Europe from onslaughts by Moscow. Kyiv’s native son, Andriy Boholubsky, did abandon his realm only to return to sack, pillage and burn Kyiv-Rus.

“Mazepa, who betrayed everyone in a row, Petliura, who paid for Polish patronage with Ukrainian lands, and Bandera, who collaborated with the Nazis, are included in the rank of national heroes. They do everything to erase from the memory of the younger generations the names of true patriots and winners, of whom Ukraine has always been proud,” Putin wrote about three significant Ukrainian heroes, all of whom sought to defend Ukraine against Russian subjugation in different ages. Indeed, their image and mission continue to exist in the hearts and souls of all Ukrainians and inspire their dreams.

As for collaborating with the Nazis, let’s not overlook the fact that Vyacheslav Molotov, first deputy premier of the USSR, concluded a non-aggression pact with Joachim von Ribbentrop, minister of foreign affairs of Nazi Germany, creating allies. This paved the way for the slaughter of Ukrainian civilians by both enemies of humanity throughout World War II.

“For Ukrainians who fought in the Red Army, in guerrilla units, the great patriotic war was exactly the Patriotic War, because they defended their home, their great common homeland,” Putin continued.

Indeed, some confused Ukrainians did fight in the ranks of the enemy but their mission was to enslave Ukraine for Moscow. The Red Army murdered tens of thousands of Ukrainians as it retreated ahead of the invading Nazi Army. In the outskirts Kyiv, the Red Army killed and buried in a common grave some 200,000 Ukrainians. Putin also failed to mention Moscow’s murder by starvation of 7 million Ukrainian men, women and children as well as the execution of thousands of Ukraine intellectuals, writers and artists in Solovky.

Ukrainians’ quest to free themselves of Moscow’s deadly clutches – or as President Poroshenko succinctly proclaimed “Away from Moscow” – included the dissident movement of the sixties, seventies and eighties that also resulted in Siberian exile for many of the participants. Opposition to Russia existed throughout the centuries, right up to the Revolution of Dignity in 2014 that included 2 million Ukrainians of all regions of the country, religions, professions and age groups.

Putin tried to assure Ukrainians of his best intentions by writing “Russia is open to dialogue with Ukraine and is ready to discuss the most difficult issues.” Actually, Russia’s dialogue with Ukraine always comes at the end of a bayonet and as for discussing the most difficult issues, well, truthfully he denies their existence.

“I am convinced that Ukraine’s true sovereignty is possible only in partnership with Russia. Our spiritual, human, civilizational ties have been formed over the centuries, go back to the same origins, hardened by common trials, achievements and victories. Our kinship is passed down from generation to generation. It is in the hearts, in the memory of the people who live in modern Russia and Ukraine, in the blood ties that unite millions of our families. Together we have always been and will be countless stronger and more successful. After all, we are one nation,” he concluded.

Obviously, to all Ukrainians, those in the war-torn Eastern region, those in Kyiv, in temporarily occupied Crimea, the Western oblasts as well as their supporters in the free world, Putin’s blasphemous plea sounds like the spider summoning the fly. History and blood have shown that Ukraine’s association with Russia is detrimental to the health of the nation as well as the lives of the people.

There are no bonds and same origins between Ukraine and Russia. Putin is doing peacefully and militarily what he can to conquer, subjugate and colonize Ukraine. And speaking of a wall between countries, the border between Ukraine and Russia deserves one with a sign that reads “Keep Out!”

Lublin Triangle – Cornerstone of Regional Peace & Security

The value of collective security against an identifiable threat or enemy cannot be underestimated. However, not much has been written in the American mainstream media about the Lublin Triangle, which is reason enough to write about this vital alliance of former captive nations of Russian aggression. An updated Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations.

It’s a topic that I have broached on numerous occasions, grasping words, sentences and speeches articulated by Ukrainian and East European leaders and molding them into a realistic contemporary concept.

I wrote about this from a variety of angles including building such a bloc among non-governmental organizations of their respective countries affiliated at the United Nations. At the time I suggested that their civil society representatives and the appropriate member-states’ permanent missions form such a coalition along the lines of the much-discussed UN Sustainable Development Goals. The 17 principles and 140-plus subtexts discuss more than just environmental issues. Human rights, which are violated by Moscow within its borders and in the so-called “near abroad,” are included in the goals.

I had also cited an interview with Pavlo Klimkin, when he was minister of foreign affairs of Ukraine, who advocated the creation of such a far-reaching bloc. Outraged by the Russian invasion of his homeland, Klimkin suggested soon after President Petro Poroshenko’s visit to Canada and the United States the creation of a Coalition of Freedom to defend democracy and Western values in a troubled world.

“It is about security for everyone,” Klimkin had said during an exclusive Fox News interview on the eve of the 71^st UN General Assembly in 2016. “If someone in this interchangeable and intertwined world cannot feel secure, how can US citizens here feel secure?”

Klimkin explained that Ukraine is confronting – and still is – a threat any nation can face, adding “we need a network of security.” His Coalition of Freedom would consist of “countries which are committed to freedom, to democratic values, where we are not talking about spheres of influence, but the values and real interests of democratic countries.” Indeed, his theme fits today’s dangerous global agenda, especially that faced by the former captive nations.

Most of the free world is obviously caught between the rock and the hard place as it ponders how to support the Eastern European countries that have liberated themselves from Moscow’s prison of nations while not aggravating Moscow. Many of the x-captive nations have been accepted into the European Union and NATO except for one very noticeable exception – Ukraine. That’s where Moscow has drawn its immovable red line in the sand, proclaiming to all that regardless of what Kyiv and the free world think about Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty, that national real estate belongs to Russia.

The x-captive nations that have endured and survived Russian subjugation and recognize Moscow as the real threat to global and regional peace and security are cognizant of the fact that their newfound independence can be overrun by Russian tanks at any moment. Therefore they are grateful to participate in any security bloc, especially one that consists of its own kind.

Thus the Lublin Triangle which consists of Ukraine, Lithuania and Poland: triangle – the strongest shape in nature.

With an eye to defense and security, the three countries created a special brigade that would the defend their independence and interests from any belligerent action by Russia meant to reestablish its domination of Ukraine, the Baltic States, the remainder of Eastern Europe and beyond. Three x-captive nations, Ukraine, Lithuania and Poland, have transformed this worthy idea into practice with the mobilization of the “Hetman Konstantyn Ostrohskiy” Lithuanian-Polish-Ukrainian Brigade (LITPOLUKR) – https://litpolukrbrig.wp.mil.pl/en/. Recent history, not only ancient, has shown that Russia invading the captive nations is not as farfetched a notion as some may claim because in the past more than seven years Moscow proved its overt mission is to rebuild the Russian empire and establish tight control of the nations in its region.

On July 28, 2020, this dream came true. In the Polish city of Lublin, where the tripartite brigade is stationed, the foreign ministers of Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine met and signed a document acknowledging the importance of such a nascent formation. The three countries officials’ acknowledged the ongoing Russian war against Ukraine and the military occupation of Crimea.

This document is by far the most important political document concluded in the post-World War II era since the creation of NATO. It recognizes the ongoing threat that Russia poses to global and regional peace, security and development. It also declares that three captive nations – Ukraine, Lithuania and Poland – acknowledge their common histories and fate and the need to stand shoulder to shoulder in their defense against Moscow’s belligerence.

The Lublin Triangle, if properly developed, expanded with additional x-captive nations, and supported by the free world, has the potential of becoming an historic alliance that will bring peace to the region and world by curbing Russia’s aggression and imperialism.

On July 7 of this year, the foreign ministers of Ukraine, Lithuania and Poland expanded their mission by signing a Declaration of Joint European Heritage and Common Values on the occasion of 230th anniversary of the Constitution of May 3, 1791 and Mutual Pledge of October 20, 1791, in which they underscored their common European democratic heritage and declared “that our common European historical legacy still binds our nations together in the united Europe and causes us to feel a sense of mutual bond and solidarity.”

The spirit and language of the declaration signals not only their belief in their historical democratic foundation but also their understanding that threats to their existence and accordingly European democratic principles still exist.

“At the same time, we believe that strengthening our cooperation requires even more intensive contacts between our societies, including youth, entrepreneurs, journalists, scientists and other opinion-making elites of our countries. We will strive for our countries to adopt appropriate solutions to facilitate such cooperation,” the three national officials stated.

“We strongly believe that Ukraine, as a European state, has the right to full membership in the structures of the European Union and in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and as Lithuania and Poland, we declare our intention to provide all possible support for the implementation of this goal, including supporting Ukraine's reform agenda and cooperation with the Three Seas Initiative, which functions within the EU.”

Acknowledging the national tribulation in Belarus, the signatories said they await a change of venue in Minsk that would allow the nation to integrate into European structures, which they pledged they’d help support.

Noting the perilous state of affairs in Europe, which is in the throes of a latest war launched by Russia against Ukraine, the signers emphasized that in order to preserve peace in Europe it is necessary for the international community to enforce and strengthen international law and denounce those countries and regimes that commit illegal annexations and occupation of sovereign territories of others.

“Therefore we condemn the Russian aggression against Ukraine, ongoing since 2014, which led to temporary occupation by Russia of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, and certain Ukrainian territories in the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts, as well as restrictions on the freedom of navigation in the Black Sea area adjacent to temporarily occupied Crimea,” they wrote.

Proclaiming their support for the latest Crimean Platform, the cosigners said “We declare that we do not recognize and will not recognize the annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation, which constitutes a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and the usages established among civilized peoples. We also condemn the Russian Federation's tactic of diplomatic blackmail and threats of using force as an instrument of foreign policy and for shaping relations with its neighbors.”

The document was signed by Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Dmytro Kuleba, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania Gabrielius Landsbergis and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland Zbigniew Rau.

This powerful and comprehensive declaration of the Lublin Triangle addresses the members’ common vision of the past, their shared democratic values, today’s problem of autocracy in potential member Belarus, and the lasting threat exhibited by Moscow.

The constructive spirit of this effort, alliance and document should be actively endorsed by countries on both sides of the Atlantic.

Interestingly, Ukraine, the United States, Poland and Lithuania will hold a large military exercise in the western part of Ukraine later in July, the Ukrainian military said, which will constitute the second round of war games involving Kyiv and foreign partners in a month. The drill, dubbed Three Swords-2021, which appear in the logo of the Lublin Brigade will involve more 1,200 servicemen and more than 200 combat vehicles and will last July 17-30 at Yavoriv training ground in Lviv region. “Three Swords-2021 create favorable conditions for the development and effective coordination of units of partner states, in order to improve the quality and increase the level of combat capabilities,” the military said in a statement.

If the West doesn’t support the x-captive nations, they have the right to do so themselves.

Putin’s Lies for the Naïve

Vladimir Putin has again dove into the pages of history in order to rewrite what happened, offer new spins, and present Russia in the best light possible as a peacemaker and team builder rather than the imperial, cruel aggressor that it has always been.

In an article in the German weekly Die Zeit that appeared on June 22, 2021, titled “Being Open, Despite the Past,” Putin bemoans the Nazi invasion of USSR eight decades ago, which led to what Stalin and others in The Kremlin referred to as The Great Patriotic War and the death of tens of millions of Soviet people (sic). He fosters Soviet fake historiography of lumping all casualties under the rubric of Soviet rather than by nationality. Nevertheless, the Russian führer indicated his willingness to forgive and forget as he today seeks Russia’s acceptance as an equal partner of European development.

Putin writes: “Despite attempts to rewrite the pages of the past that are being made today, the truth is that Soviet soldiers came to Germany not to take revenge on the Germans, but with a noble and great mission of liberation. We hold sacred the memory of the heroes who fought against Nazism. We remember with gratitude our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition, participants in the Resistance movement, and German anti-fascists who brought our common victory closer.”

The so-called Russian liberators were known for their butchery and rape of German women. Their noble and great mission of liberation was, in fact, to seize and subjugate foreign countries, imprison and execute the national freedom fighters and temporary national governments, install their gauleiters and rule with impunity until the USSR – Soviet Russia or the Evil Empire – finally collapsed in 1991.

Sadly, none of this would have come to pass if the allied leaders hadn’t agreed to surrender Eastern Europe to the invading Red Army. In May 1945, in the final days of World War II, western Czecho-Slovakia was liberated by U.S. forces under General Patton. While many American commanders and troops were eager to head east and liberate the capital city of Prague, they were ordered to stay put in Konstantinovy Lazne. President Harry Truman, General Dwight Eisenhower and Prime Minister Winston Churchill were keen to avoid conflict with Stalin, who saw Eastern Europe as the spoils of war after defeating the Nazis and a way to easily expand its empire. Patton was ordered to halt his advance west of Prague. In the end, most of Czecho-Slovakia was occupied by the Red Army, sealing its fate as a Russian captive nation.

A couple of years later Churchill voiced his mea culpa and mourned that fateful decision by declaring that an iron curtain had descended across Europe, with Russian subjugated nations to the east and the democratic free world to the west.

Putin consciously overlooked mentioning that the invading Nazi Army was until June 22, 1941, an allied military force due to the historic political alignment of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia in the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement. Putin couldn’t merely remind the magazine’s readers – and his own people – that Russia and Stalin had found it prudent and expedient to become allies with the Nazis in order to conquer and divide. Ironically, both were equal perpetrators of crimes against humanity though of different colors. The pact also opened the door to bloody Russian recriminations against members of the Ukrainian nationalist underground – the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists – and others who fought and advocated for Ukrainian independence.

Putin wrote that the peoples of Europe were able to overcome alienation that was brought upon them by the war and restore mutual trust and respect. He said Russia had hoped that the end of the Cold War, which came with the collapse of the USSR – would be a common victory for Europe in creating a “single continent.” Again Putin neglects to admit that Moscow’s intent throughout its ignoble history has been to create by aggression or assimilation a single continent or single empire that spanned the globe.

“It is exactly with this logic in mind – the logic of building a Greater Europe united by common values and interests – that Russia has sought to develop its relations with the Europeans. Both Russia and the EU have done a lot on this path,” he wrote.

The Russian dictator failed to inform the readers that the European nations that had been liberated from Nazi oppression only to fall under Russian bondage rejected the concept of a single continent. They were happy to live in their own independent countries. Soon after Berlin’s capitulation, Moscow’s captive nations undertook another war of liberation. Poland, East Germany, Hungary and Czecho-Slovakia famously stood up to Russian dominance. With Nazi Germany defeated, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) continued its war of liberation against Moscow until the early 1960s. Even the intellectual, human rights Helsinki movement was a liberation campaign against Russia and russification.

No, there’s wasn’t a European quest for a single continent except in the minds of The Kremlin’s leadership.

It is not surprising then that once liberation came in 1990-91 the former captive nations of Russian subjugation clamored to join the European Union and NATO. For them these structures are the only bastion against another Russian invasion and they can ensure regional and global peace and security. Fortunately, most of them have been accepted while Ukraine is still on the waiting list due to the free world’s unsubstantiated fear of Russian retribution.

Putin continued fabricating facts by accusing the United States of instigating the Revolution of Dignity in 2014 that signaled to the world that some seven decades after the end of World War II the Ukrainian nation still refuses to accept Moscow’s dictatorship. The people – by some estimates more than 2 million from around the country and even the CIA doesn’t have that much power to mobilize that large of a civilian army – decided to strike a final blow against Russian repression, rid itself of Moscow’s gauleiter and truly embark on an independent and sovereign future.

And again, true to its behavior, Moscow couldn’t allow valuable Ukraine to escape its claws so a couple of weeks after the conclusion of the Winter Olympics in 2014 it invaded, seized and occupied Crimea. Then that spring it invaded the eastern Ukrainian oblasts of Luhansk and Donetsk, where it has been waging a bloody war ever since.

No, Mr. Putin, you and Moscow aren’t seeking a single, peaceful, harmonious continent in Europe. You are seeking to spread your empire, the so-called Holy Russian Empire with its two-headed eagle, under the guise of coherence, equitable cooperation, partnership, inclusive development.

Also, the Nazi invasion that Putin cites first tore through Western Ukraine and triggered the Red Army to invade from the east, bringing with it its comparable version of blood and death. June 22 also marks the 80^th anniversary of the Red Army’s murder of 24,000 Ukrainians that it had incarcerated in prisons of Western Ukraine.

Eight days later, on June 30, 1941, the leadership of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists proclaimed the restoration of independent Ukrainian statehood.

Ukraine and the other former captive nations just can’t let bygones be bygones until reparations are made.

‘Hymn of Hate’ from Yesteryear’s Trenches

The other day I watched a very interesting movie that’s based on a true story that dates back to World War One. It not only describes the day-to-day drudgery of a soldier’s life in battle a century ago, but it brings to light what the troops did to pass the time between battles. As they say, war is a long stretch of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror.

The 2013 movie is “The Wipers Times,” a story about the British 12th Battalion, known as The Sherwood Foresters, fighting against the Kaiser’s army in Belgium, in the heavily shelled town of Ypres. During a patrol, Captain Fred Roberts and Lieutenant Jack Pearson and their troops found in a warehouse a piece of damaged machinery that changed their lives. Amid the clamorous chatter among the troops, only one soldier, a sergeant, admitted he knew what it was. Since he was a printer in civilian life before the war, he quickly identified the machine to be a printing press. A small one. He said he was confident that he could make it workable but why? What will we do with it?

With a mind to filling in downtime for the soldiers, Roberts and Pearson came up with the idea of printing a periodical to express their battlefront points of view. Thus The Wipers Times. Wipers was how the Tommies pronounced Ypres.

The Wipers Times became a popular though controversial trench periodical that was published by British soldiers fighting in Ypres during the First World War. From their trenches, they produced a poignant satirical newsletter that captured what was happening and reflected their spirit, hopes, joy, grief and frustration through prose, poetry and limericks.

Comparable satirical magazines throughout history have been Charlie Hebdo, Punch, Perets, Mad, Spy, The Onion, National Lampoon, The Harvard Lampoon and others.

Parodying their lives, battles, enemies and officers in words, stories and stanzas, the editors of The Wipers Times quickly became beloved by the troops and the bane of the officers, much like the storyline of “Good Morning, Vietnam” some five decades later. One senior officer who understood its battlefield value observed in response to a colleague that morale would be better served if the publication were not banned.

But the purpose of this article isn’t to relive the War to End all Wars with its glorious battles but rather to highlight one particular episode in the lives of The Sherwood Foresters and a melody sung by the enemy, the Germans.

One rainy night, Roberts and Pearson with their soldiers were reinforcing the muddy walls of their trenches. Artillery shells were bursting all around them, when suddenly through the explosions they heard the strains of the enemy singing a German-language battle song. That simply tells you how close both sides were to each other.

None of the British soldiers as well as Captain Roberts understood the words of the song but Lieutenant Pearson did. As the German’s sang, Pearson translated word for word what became known as the “Hymn of Hate.”

Its salient refrain states:

“An oath for our sons and their sons to take.
Come, hear the word, repeat the word,
Throughout the Fatherland make it heard.
We will never forego our hate,
We have all but a single hate,
We love as one, we hate as one,
We have one foe and one alone —

ENGLAND!”

Indeed, two opposing sides, two nations harbor feelings of hatred to each other older than the war. Something from time immemorial must have instigated this detestation. And it continues until today. For example, the Scots boast that they have two favorite teams in the UEFA championships: obviously the Scots and any team playing against England.

Ukrainians have a similar rejoinder based on their national experiences at the hands of Russians.

Consequently, there are ancient ditties that transcend trenches and time and survive until today.

Yes, this animosity could be left in antiquity. This could end if the Russians would seek forgiveness for their crimes against Ukrainians. To paraphrase Willian Wallace’s point of seven centuries ago: “Lower your flags and march straight back to England, stopping at every home you pass by to beg forgiveness for a hundred years of theft, rape, and murder. Do that and your men shall live.”

What if Germans Said Hitler was most ‘Outstanding’ Person of all Times?

The mere thought of that happening pierces the body with electrical shocks. The global response to such a declaration would bring all other discussions to a sudden halt.

Hitler and outstanding are mutually exclusive. They could not be considered or happen simultaneously. Murdering 7 million Jews and millions of others, including Ukrainians, would unequivocally send his soul directly to hell without any chance of exoneration.

Well, the Germans didn’t express that outlandish opinion but the Russians did about their bloody leader Stalin.

According to the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, citing the Levada Center, Russians would not be discomfited to name as one of the “ten most outstanding figures of all times and nations” the murderous dictator Stalin.

Both institutions point out that while nobody received an absolute majority, Stalin was very clearly ahead, being named by 39% of the respondents. This is not surprising given The Kremlin’s increasing rehabilitation of Stalin since Vladimir Putin first came to power and increasingly repressive measures to muffle Stalin’s crimes and those of the Soviet regime.

It was pointed out that the Levada Center has been taking these polls since 1989 as part of its study of the so-called Soviet person.  In general, the results make for very disturbing reading, the two groups noted. In 1989, Vladimir Lenin was named by 71%; Peter I by 38% and Stalin by a mere 12% - less than the 17% who named Mikhail Gorbachev. The latter had disappeared altogether by 1994. By 2021, Lenin was behind Stalin (on 30%) and Peter I was named by a mere 19%.  Essentially no liberal personalities since the collapse of the USSR even get a mention, while Andrei Sakharov (who died in December 1989) went from no mention in 1989 to 17% in 1994 and only 7% in 2021, the centenary of his birth.  Although respondents are asked to name people “of all times and nations,” there were relatively few non-Russian / non-Soviet figures even in 1989, and only three in 2021 (Albert Einstein, Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler). The fact that Hitler is mentioned probably suggests that many respondents were searching for prominent figures, without this necessarily having the positive connotations that the word ‘outstanding’ normally has in both Russian and English, the Levada Center explained.

Levada Centre Director Lev Gudkov points out that the people named are essentially from the pantheon of typical Soviet name-symbols, beginning with Lenin and Stalin. Although the collective memory of others is fading, new names are not emerging.  Each such survey in the past has had around 300 names mentioned, however there was no noticeable consensus on other figures. Gudkov also notes that since 2008, the general number of names mentioned has fallen by 1.6 times.

“This is possibly a result of escalating censorship and the foisting of ‘traditional values,’ which are in fact of little importance for the public. It is, however, possible that this is also a reaction of the primitivization of mass consciousness, which is typical of all authoritarian regimes, and the stifling of immanent mechanisms of innovation,” he said.

In May 2020, following controversy over frescos for the new Russian Defense Ministry Cathedral depicting, among others, Stalin, Deputy Defense Minister Andrei Kartapolov asked rhetorically what they had to be ashamed of.  Stalin, he boasted, was a man who “took upon himself all the burden of the war, made the most important decisions.  Yes, and in general reinstated religion. Why should we be ashamed of him?  Because some people from abroad tell us to?  We will decide ourselves who to honor, who to portray on frescos.”

Surprisingly, a Levada Centre poll of young people published in June 2020 found that 41% knew little or nothing about Stalin’s repression (and murder of millions). But they knew of his alleged greatness. More than 70% of Russians have a positive attitude about Stalin’s role in their country’s history, with just over half the population saying that they view a dictator responsible for the death of millions “with respect.”

In March 2019, the Levada Centre reported a record level of approval for Stalin.  While the number of those who spoke of ‘admiration’ for Stalin had remained stable at 4%, there had been a huge increase (from 27% in 2001 to 41% in 2019) in the numbers who ‘respected’ Stalin. 

For the record, Stalin was personally responsible for the murder by starvation of 7 million Ukrainian men, women and children, the murders in the Bykivnia forest, the murder of 22,000 Polish officers in Katyn, the execution of thousands at Sandarmokh, the mass execution of 9,000-11,000 people in the Ukrainian town of Vinnytsia in 1937-38, and so on and so forth.

Stalin is outstanding in terms of the amount of blood of innocent people that he shed.