Nazism – Strategic Culture Foundation https://www.strategic-culture.org Strategic Culture Foundation provides a platform for exclusive analysis, research and policy comment on Eurasian and global affairs. We are covering political, economic, social and security issues worldwide. Sun, 10 Apr 2022 20:53:47 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.16 Milestones of Ukraine’s Transformation Towards a Far-Right Puppet-State https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/04/07/milestones-of-ukraine-transformation-towards-far-right-puppet-state/ Thu, 07 Apr 2022 16:52:58 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=802638 The extreme right-wing nature of the Kyiv regime is the result of a long-term political transformation and its origins date back to before the WWII.

While Russia’s special operation in Ukraine continued, Western media launched an intense disinformation campaign in parallel with this operation. In this context, the nature of the Ukrainian administration, the neo-Nazi forces fighting against the Donbass and the facts about the background are being destroyed.

Although Western countries and media, especially the USA, have expressed the opinion that Russia’s operation is the result of a kind of “expansionism”, the attacks that intensified after the Maidan coup in 2014 and the extreme right-wing nature of the Kyiv regime is the result of a long-term political transformation and its origins date back to before the Second World War.

The historical figures who gave the Ukrainian administration its far-right and anti-Soviet/anti-Russian character are today remembered as “national heroes” throughout the country. The biggest common point of these names is that they have an extreme right ideology.

Among the names that Ukrainian nationalists consider as historical references, Simon Petlyura draws attention.

It is estimated that 35 thousand to 50 thousand Jews were killed in the pogroms organized during the period of Petyura, who was the leader of the Ukrainian People’s Republic, which was declared unilaterally between 1917-1921.

Petlyura, who was killed by Sholom Schwartzbard, a Jewish anarchist whose family was murdered in Odessa, is among the names seen as “heroes” by the ruling elite and Nazi forces in Ukraine.

In Vinnitsa, Western Ukraine, a monument to Petlyura was unveiled in 2017, and Vinnitsa Region Executive Chairman Valeriy Korovy claimed that Petlyura was “a man who loved his country dearly and tried to be honest with his people, and the Soviets did their best to discredit him.”

In the same period, a bust of Petlyura, who signed one of the bloodiest pages in the history of Ukraine, was erected in Kiev and a plaque was made in his memory in Poltava.

While the anti-communist and anti-Soviet political positions of the Ukrainian rulers were manifested in the mass murders of both Jews and communists in Ukraine, the start of World War II led to the strongest periods of the far right movements in the country.

The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which was established to cooperate against the Nazi invaders, committed massacres not only in Ukraine, but also in Poland, Romania and Czechoslovakia.

One of the ideologues of the organization, Dmitriy Dontsov, was a “journalist” who translated Mussolini’s famous “Fascism Doctrine” and advocated “to stand together with Russia’s enemies, no matter who they are”.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the Ukrainian nationalists, who act with the same attitude today, are the continuation of Dontsov. Because, just like Petlyura, Dontsov is among the “unforgotten” national figures in Ukraine today.

The memorial plaque ’in honor of Dontsov’, which was installed in the Ukrainian Ukrinform National News Agency building in Kiev earlier this year, proves the ideological continuity between the current administration and the Ukrainian right

Historical leader of Ukrainian nationalists: Stepan Bandera

After the division of the Ukrainian Nationalists Organization, which was established to cooperate with the Nazis, the Ukrainian Stepan Bandera, who led one of the wings of the organization, started massacres against the Jews by the Nachtigal Battalion he founded.

It is estimated that Bandera and his organization carried out about 140 pogroms in which a total of 13 thousand to 35 thousand Jews were massacred in various regions, especially in Ternopil, as the Nazi army progressed.

However, Hitler’s dictatorship, which opposed Bandera and his organization’s plans to establish an “Independent Ukraine”, arrested Bandera, who declared independence in 1941, and his deputy Yaroslav Stetsko and dissolved the organization.

Bandera and Stetsko’s re-emergence on the stage of history took place with the establishment of the “Ukrainian Insurgent Army” (UPA) during the retreat of the Nazis against the Soviet army in the Battle of Stalingrad.

During the Nazi retreat, the UPA carried out attacks in which 90,000 Poles and thousands of Jews, as well as many communists, were murdered and tortured.

Despite being an open-id Nazi collaborator, Bandera continued to be used against the USSR by Western intelligence units, especially the USA, until he was killed by the KGB in Munich in 1959.

Bandera’s deputy, Yaroslav Stetsko, who would later become one of the founders of the World Anti-Communist Union, was personally welcomed by the 40th U.S. President Ronald Reagan at the White House in 1983 and received the praise of “Your struggle is our struggle”.

Ukraine’s reversal: the rise of the right-wing in the post-Soviet era

The neo-Nazi structures that took the stage in Ukraine after 1991 became stronger after the color revolution in 2004 and the Maidan coup in 2014 and took steps to make Ukraine a ram head of NATO’s strategy to contain Russia. Taking these steps meant the dominance of a criminal climate that aimed to create ’social unrest’ throughout the country and change the power in favor of the West. All these were developments within the scope of the post-Soviet Ukraine’s strategy of ’returning Europe’.

In parallel with these developments, Ukraine adopted the EU-Ukraine Declaration signed on 2 December 1991. Again, Ukraine became the first former Soviet republic to sign a partnership and cooperation agreement with the EU in the political, economic and cultural fields in 1994. This new route that Ukraine drew after the USSR was an important step in the opening of Ukraine to exploitation through international companies, especially underground resources.

What ignited the process leading up to the Maidan coup d’etat was that the Ukrainian government of the time suspended the association process with the EU on 21 November 2013.

Maidan coup

The destruction of the statue of Lenin in Kiev on December 8, 2013 in Ukraine was a symbolic sign that Ukraine would never be the same again. Although an ’anti-corruption’ scenario was written in the Western media regarding the protests, which started during the former president Yanukovych’s reign, those who led the protesters who took to the streets were none other than nationalist figures.

The ’Social-Nationalist Party’, which was founded in the country in 1991 and resembles Hitler’s ’National Socialist Party’, later took the name ’Svoboda’, which means ’Liberty’, ironically.

This party, which is one of the most important actors of the Maidan coup, took an active part in the actions in 2014 with the youth organization ’Ukrainian Patriot’.

Founded in Ukraine in 2002 and later transformed into the Azov Battalion, the nationalist organization named ’Trizub’ (also the name of the weekly magazine published by Petlyura) was imprisoned when he and his supporters blew up the statue of Lenin and was released after the Maydan coup and entered the parliament. Nazi Andrey Biletskiy has become one of the symbols that best reflects the character of the Maidan regime.

On the other hand, Praviy Sektor, which was founded by Dmitry Yarosh, one of the directors of the Trizub, became one of the leading neo-Nazi organizations during through Maidan coup. Another important feature of Yarosh was his appointment as the chief adviser to the Chief of the General Staff of Ukraine.

The biggest supporter of the Maidan coup in the international arena was the USA. Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs of the U.S. State Department, even handed cookies to Ukrainian activists as the protests continued.

Nuland, who was involved in determining who will be in the new administration that will be shaped after the coup, said that the U.S. spent 5 billion dollars for Ukraine in the last twenty years. Nuland’s swearing at the European Union in a phone call with the U.S. Ambassador to Kyiv, Geoffrey Pyatt, was an indication that the U.S. even wanted to disable the EU in the Ukraine coup.

Another important indicator of why the Maidan coup was so much supported by the USA was the appointment of Hunter Biden, the son of today’s U.S. President Joe Biden, to the board of directors of Bursima, the country’s largest energy company.

The Western camp, led by the USA, used Ukraine against Russia during the Soviet revolution, during the Second World War, during the Cold War, and after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and did not even hesitate to organize a coup in the country for this purpose.

The necessity of reshaping Ukraine with the Maidan coup was a very important pillar of NATO’s historical strategy of “containing Russia”, which was established against the “Soviet threat” that contradicted the political agenda of the USA in the post-Soviet period.

The first actions of the nationalist government established after the Maidan coup were to try to erase the Soviet past of the country and to make moves against the Russians living in the country within the scope of this strategy.

The Ukrainian administration banned Russian from the public sphere, statues of Nazi collaborators, especially Bandera, were erected, his birthday announced a public holiday, Red Army veterans and members of Nazi collaborator organizations were considered equal, neo-Nazi organizations were officially affiliated with the Ukrainian army, Communist Party and socialist organizations were banned, Its members were killed, and intense attacks were launched against Russian civilians, especially in the Odessa massacre, in which more than 40 people were killed.

The Russians, mainly living in the east of the country, built anti-fascist units with Anti-Maidan actions to protect against these attacks, and the “Novorossiya Federal State” consisting of Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics was established.

Despite the Minsk protocol signed by the representatives of Ukraine, Russia, Donetsk, Lugansk and OSCE in order to achieve a ceasefire in the region, the Ukrainian forces continued their attacks on Donbass. Although this was one of the most important reasons for Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, it became one of the facts ignored by the Western media.

Especially starting from 2019, there has been a significant increase in the attacks of the Ukrainian army, which is armed by NATO countries, against Donbass, although it is not a NATO member. A large number of settlements under the administration of Donetsk and Lugansk were shot using weapons that were prohibited under the Minsk agreements. This was another important reason for the start of the Russian operation.

The fact that the vast majority of the attacks were carried out by the neo-Nazi forces affiliated with the Ukrainian administration is one of the most important factors in the Russian administration’s decision to “denazification”.

As the conflicts between Russian forces, Ukrainian troops and neo-Nazis continued within the scope of Russia’s ongoing operations, the information war initiated by the West in parallel with these conflicts was the scene of important sanctions against Russia, especially the Russian media.

While countless fake news are being circulated in this information war, the Western world is trying to portray the events as an invasion operation “suddenly started” by Russia, without showing the extreme right-wing nature of the regime it has built with its own hands and the human rights violations against civilians in the region.

]]>
How the Ukrainian Nationalist Movement Post-WWII was Bought and Paid for by the CIA https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/04/04/how-ukrainian-nationalist-movement-post-wwii-was-bought-and-paid-for-by-cia/ Mon, 04 Apr 2022 20:00:34 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=802556 The birth of Ukrainian Nationalism as it is celebrated today has its origins in the 20th century. However, there are a few important historical highlights that should be known beforehand.

In part 1 of this series Fact Checking the Fact Checkers, the question was posed “why does Ukraine seem to have so many Nazis nowadays?” In that paper we were led to the further question “is the United States and possibly NATO involved in the funding, training and political support of neo-Nazism in Ukraine and if so, for what purpose?” It was concluded that in order to answer such questions fully, we would have to look at the historical root of Ukrainian nationalism and its relationship with U.S. Intelligence and NATO post-WWII. It is here that we will resume.

The Historical Roots of Ukrainian Nationalism

The birth of Ukrainian Nationalism as it is celebrated today has its origins in the 20th century. However, there are a few important historical highlights that should be known beforehand.

Kievan Rus’ was a federation in Eastern-Northern Europe from the late 9th to the mid-13th century and was made up of a variety of peoples including East Slavic, Baltic and Finnic, and was ruled by the Rurik dynasty.

Above image: The principalities of the later Kievan Rus’ (after the death of Yaroslav I in 1054). Source Wikipedia.

Today’s Belarus, Russia and Ukraine all recognize the people of Kievan Rus’ as their cultural ancestors.

Kievan Rus’ would fall during the Mongol invasion of the 1240s, however, different branches of the Rurik dynasty would continue to rule parts of Rus’ under the Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia (modern-day Ukraine and Belarus), the Novgorod Republic (overlapping with modern-day Finland and Russia) and Vladimir-Suzdal (regarded as the cradle of the Great Russian language and nationality which evolved into the Grand Duchy of Moscow).

The Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia was under the vassalage of the Golden Horde during the 14th century, which was originally a Mongol and later Turkicized khanate originating as the northwestern section of the Mongol Empire.

After the poisoning of Yuri II Boleslav, King of Galicia-Volhynia in 1340, civil war ensued along with a power struggle for control over the region between Lithuania, Poland and its ally Hungary. Several wars would be fought from 1340-1392 known as the Galicia-Volhynia wars.

In 1349, the Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia was conquered and incorporated into Poland.

In 1569 the Union of Lublin took place, joining the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania forming the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth which ruled as a large and major power for over 200 years.

From 1648-1657 the Khmelnytsky Uprising, also known as the Cossack-Polish War took place in the eastern territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which led to the creation of a Cossack Hetmanate in Ukraine.

Under the command of Khmelnytsky, the Zaporozhian Cossacks, allied with the Crimean Tatars and local Ukrainian peasantry, fought against Polish domination and against the Commonwealth forces; which was followed by the massacre of Polish-Lithuanian townsfolk, the Roman Catholic clergy and the Jews.

Khmelnytsky to this day is a major heroic figure in the Ukrainian nationalist history.

By 1772, the once powerful Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had too far declined to further govern itself and went through three partitions, conducted by the Habsburg Monarchy, the Kingdom of Prussia and the Russian Empire.

From the first partition of Poland in 1772, the name “Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria” was granted to the Habsburg Monarchy (Austrian Empire, which later became the Austria-Hungarian Empire in 1867). Most of Volhynia would go to the Russian Empire in 1795.

Above image: Partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (often referred to just as Poland) in 1772, 1793 and 1795.

By 1914, Europe would be dragged into WWI. In March 1918, after two months of negotiations with the Central Powers (the German, Austria-Hungary, Bulgarian, and Ottoman Empire), the new Bolshevik government of Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk ceding claims on Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as the condition for peace (Note: the Bolshevik Revolution began in March 1917). WWI would officially end on November 11th, 1918.

As a result of the treaty, eleven nations became “independent” in eastern Europe and western Asia, Ukraine was among these nations. In reality, what this meant was that they were to become vassal states to Germany with political and economic dependencies. However, when Germany lost the war, the treaty was annulled.

With Germany out of the picture and the dissolution of both the Austria-Hungary and Russian Empire; Poland and Ukraine found themselves in a position to establish their independence.

During the Habsburg’s rule, due to their leniency toward national minorities, both Polish and Ukrainian nationalist movements developed, and both were interested in claiming the territory of Galicia for their own. Western Galicia at that point, with the ancient capital of Kraków had a majority Polish population, whereas eastern Galicia made up the heartland of the ancient Galicia-Volhynia and had a majority Ukrainian population.

The Polish-Ukrainian war was fought from November 1918 to July 1919 between the Second Polish Republic and the Ukrainian forces (consisting of the West Ukrainian People’s Republic and Ukrainian People’s Republic). Poland won and re-occupied Galicia.

The Polish-Soviet war would be fought between February 1919 and March 1921. This coincided with a series of conflicts known as the Ukrainian War of Independence (1917-1921) which fought to form a Ukrainian republic.

By 1922, Ukraine was divided between the Bolshevik Ukrainian SSR, Poland, Romania and Czechoslovakia. The Second Polish Republic reclaimed Lviv, along with Galicia and most of Volhynia, the rest of Volhynia became part of the Ukrainian SSR.

The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) was founded in 1929 in East Galicia (located in Poland at the time) and called for an independent and ethnically homogenous Ukraine.

From the beginning, the OUN had tensions between the young radical Galician students and the older military veteran leadership (who grew up in the more lenient Austria-Hungary Empire). The younger generation had only known oppression under the new Polish rule and underground warfare. As a result, the younger faction tended to be more impulsive, violent and ruthless.

During this period, Polish persecution of Ukrainians increased and many Ukrainians, especially the youth (who felt they had no future) lost faith in traditional legal approaches, in their elders and in western democracies who were seen as turning their backs on Ukraine.

The OUN assassinated Polish Interior Minister Bronislaw Pieracki in 1934. Among those tried and convicted in 1936 for Pieracki’s murder, were OUN’s Stefan Bandera and Mykola Lebed. Both escaped when the Germans invaded Poland in 1939.

Support for the OUN increased as Polish persecution of Ukrainians continued. By the beginning of WWII, the OUN was estimated to have 20,000 active members and many times that number in sympathizers in Galicia.

In 1940 the OUN would split into the OUN-M led by Andriy Melnyk, and OUN-B headed by Stefan Bandera which made up most of the membership in Galicia and consisted mainly of youth.

In August 1939, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany signed the non-aggression pact known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, dividing Poland. Eastern Galicia and Volhynia were reunified with Ukraine, under the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

In June 1941, when Nazi Germany invaded western Ukraine, there were many western Ukrainians who welcomed the invading Nazis as their “liberators.” It should be noted here that this was not a sentiment predominantly shared by the rest of Ukraine, who fought in or alongside the Russian Red Army against the invading Nazis.

Both the OUN-M and OUN-B would spend much of the war collaborating closely with the Germans. They had no issues with the Nazi ideology for they too believed that a solution was found in returning to a “pure race.” In the case of Ukraine, this pure race consisted of a somewhat romanticised concept of “ethnic Ukrainian,” based on the golden age of Kievan Rus’.

The OUN believed that the “pure ethnic Ukrainian race” were the only true descendants of the royal bloodline of the Rurik dynasty that ruled Kievan Rus’. And rather than looking at Belarusians and the Russians as their brothers and sisters who shared the same ancestry, the OUN viewed them more so as “ethnic impostors” so to speak of this pure bloodline.

This can be seen today with Ukrainian neo-Nazi groups attacking Ukrainian ethnic Russians for the past 8 years in Ukraine. An issue that is almost entirely ignored in the West. See part 1 of this series.

It was believed that if the purity of the bloodline were returned, greatness would once again be bestowed on Ukraine (which had never really existed as a fully independent region).

It was for this reason that the OUN and the SS Galician division believed that exterminating tens of thousands of Poles, Jews and any other non-ethnic Ukrainian was justified. The SS Galician division (which had an overlapping membership with the OUN) were notorious for their extreme cruelty, including acts of torture and mutilation on par with Japan’s Unit 731.

To give an idea of the level of support in western Ukraine at the time for a “pure Ukrainian race,” the SS Galician division recruited 80,000 Galician volunteers in one and a half months.

The trident symbol, known also as tryzub, is an important symbol for Ukrainians, since it comes from the days of Kievan Rus’ and its earliest use was during the rule of Vladimir/Volodmyr the Great, about 1,000 years ago.

However, it is also most unfortunately why the OUN chose the tryzub for both their emblems and flag, to signify their desire to return to those glory days, which was thought could only be achieved through ethnic cleansing.

The above OUN-B flag (also used by their paramilitary unit UPA) is known as the “Blood and Soil” flag. The “Blood and Soil” nationalist slogan originated in Nazi Germany to express its ideal of a racially defined national body (blood) united with a settlement area (soil).

It is also why Ukrainian neo-Nazi groups that formed from 1991 onward (after Ukraine’s independence from the USSR), more often than not, also use the tryzub.

Image above shows flags of neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine today. In the Azov flag shown above, there is a combination of the Wolfsangel and Black Sun, two symbols associated with the Wehrmacht and SS.

In 1998, the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG), at the behest of Congress, launched what became the largest congressionally mandated, single-subject declassification effort in history. As a result, more than 8.5 million pages of records have been opened to the public under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act (P.L. 105-246) and the Japanese Imperial Government Disclosure Act (P.L. 106-567). These records include operational files of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the CIA, the FBI and Army intelligence. IWG issued three reports to Congress between 1999 and 2007.

A research group was put together to compile and organise key elements of this massive newly declassified database, the result was the publication of “U.S. Intelligence and The Nazis” in 2005, and “Hitler’s Shadow Nazi War Criminals, U. S. Intelligence, and the Cold War” in 2011, both published by the National Archives, and which will be used as a key reference for the rest of this paper.

Richard Breitman writes in “U.S. Intelligence and The Nazis” (1):

“What must be the earliest history (or mini-history) of the extermination of the Jews in Lvov [Lviv] was prepared on June 5, 1945. The ten-page document pointed out that, as soon as German troops took Lvov, Ukrainians in the city denounced Jews who had cooperated with Soviet authorities during the period of Soviet occupation, 1939-1941. Those Jews were arrested, gathered near the municipal building, and beaten by the Germans and local inhabitants. Later, local inhabitants, especially from the villages nearby, ravaged the Jewish quarter and beat Jews who stood in the way of their robbery. Starting on July 1, a pogrom was organized; German police, soldiers, and local Ukrainians all took part. Many of those arrested were tortured and killed… More than twelve thousand Jews were killed in the first weeks of the German occupation of Lvov.” [emphasis added]

Norman J.W. Goda writes in “U.S. Intelligence and The Nazis” (2):

“In its work to destabilize the Polish state, the OUN’s ties with Germany extended back to 1921. These ties intensified under the Nazi regime as war with Poland drew near. Galicia was allotted to the Soviets under the August 1939 Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact, and the Germans welcomed anti-Polish Ukrainian activists into the German-occupied General Government. In 1940 and 1941, in preparation for what would become the eastern campaign, the Germans began to recruit Ukrainians, particularly from Bandera’s wing, as saboteurs, interpreters, and police, and trained them at a camp at Zakopane near Cracow [Kraków]. In the spring of 1941, the Wehrmacht also developed two Ukrainian battalions with the approval of the Banderists, one code named ‘Nightingale’ (Nachtigall) and the other code named ‘Roland’.”

What showcases the youth, and unfortunately ignorance, of the OUN-B, is that the “blood and soil” slogan originating with the Nazis, to which they chose for their own OUN-B flag, was also tied to the belief that the German people were to expand into Eastern Europe, conquering and enslaving the native Slavic and Baltic population via Generalplan Ost. Thus, these Ukrainian nationalists were never considered worthy of sharing in this vision of Nazi Germany but had been regarded as the ultimate slaves for the new German empire from the very beginning.

The OUN-B would learn this lesson the hard way. Eight days after Germany’s invasion of the USSR, on June 30th, 1941, OUN-B proclaimed the establishment of the Ukrainian State in the name of Bandera in Lviv and pledged loyalty to Hitler. In response, the OUN-B leaders and associates were arrested and imprisoned or killed outright by the Gestapo (approx. 1500 persons). The Germans had no intention of even allowing a semi-independent Ukraine to form. Stefan Bandera and his closest deputy Jaroslav Stetsko were initially kept under house arrest and then sent to Sachsenhausen concentration camp (a comparatively comfortable confinement to the other concentration camps).

Mykola Lebed was able to slip through the German police net and became the de facto leader of the OUN-B leadership, also known as the Banderists.

On July 16th, 1941, the Germans absorbed Galicia into the General Government. In October 1941, the German Security Police issued a wanted poster with Lebed’s photograph.

The Germans transferred administrative and senior auxiliary police positions in western Ukraine to Melnyk’s group, OUN-M. (3) German security police formations were ordered to arrest and kill Bandera loyalists in western Ukraine for fear that they would rise against German rule, though this order was eventually revoked.

The following year Lebed would become the leader of the underground terror wing, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which continued in function until 1956.

Image to the left: Stefan Bandera. Image to the right: Mykola Lebed

Eastern Ukrainians later claimed that Mykola Lebed as leader of the OUN-B, took over the UPA by assassinating the original Ukrainian leaders. (4)

The OUN counted among its enemies those that had denied Ukrainian independence (including Poles and Soviets), those in the Ukraine who had failed to assimilate (Jews) and at times when it suited them the Germans. They also regarded the Jews as the primary support and “spreaders” of Bolshevism.

Breitman and Goda write (5):

“When the war turned against the Germans in early 1943, leaders of Bandera’s group believed that the Soviets and Germans would exhaust each other, leaving an independent Ukraine as in 1918. Lebed proposed in April to ‘cleanse the entire revolutionary territory of the Polish population,’ so that a resurgent Polish state would not claim the region as in 1918. Ukrainians serving as auxiliary policemen for the Germans now joined the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA)… On a single day, July 11th, 1943, the UPA attacked some 80 localities killing… 10,000 Poles…The Banderists and UPA also resumed cooperation with the Germans.” [emphasis added]

This was all done under the command of Mykola Lebed.

By 1943, aware that their situation was becoming increasingly insecure, the OUN tried to re-centralise their forces. However, infighting occurred between the OUN-B against the OUN-M and the UPA unit of Taras Bulba-Borovets (of the exiled Ukrainian People’s Republic) who in a letter accused the OUN-B of among other things: banditry, of wanting to establish a one-party state, and of fighting not for the people but in order to rule the people.

In their struggle for dominance in Volhynia, the Banderists (OUN-B) would kill tens of thousands of Ukrainians for any link to the networks of Bulba-Borovets or Melnyk (OUN-M). (6)

By September 1944 German Army officers in northern Ukraine told their superiors in Foreign Armies East that the UPA was a “natural ally of Germany” and “a valuable aid for the German High Command,” and Himmler himself authorized intensified contacts with UPA. (7)

Norman J.W. Goda writes (8):

“Though UPA propaganda emphasized that organization’s independence from the Germans, the UPA also ordered some young Ukrainians to volunteer for the Ukrainian SS Division “Galicia,” and the rest to fight by guerilla methods. Lebed still hoped for recognition from the Germans.” [emphasis added]

The SS Galicia Division existed from April 1943 to April 15th, 1945. Germany surrendered on May 7th, 1945.

In September 1944, the Germans released Bandera and Stetsko from Sachsenhausen.

The Ukrainian Nationalist Movement Post-WWII: Bought and Paid for by the CIA and served à la Lebed

“[Lebed] is a well known sadist and collaborator of the Germans” (9)

– 1947 Report by The U.S. Army’s Counterintelligence Corps (CIC)

In July 1944 Mykola Lebed helped form the Supreme Ukrainian Liberation Council (UHVR), which would claim to represent the Ukrainian nation and served as an underground government in the Carpathian mountains, in opposition to the Ukrainian SSR. The dominant political party in UHVR was the Bandera group and the UPA, which from that point on served as the army of UHVR and continued to fight the Soviets until 1956.

A feud erupted in 1947 between Bandera and Stetsko on one side for an independent Ukraine under a single party led by Bandera himself vs. Lebed and Father Ivan Hrynioch (chief of the UHVR Political Section) who were against Bandera being head of state.

At an August 1948 Congress of the OUN Foreign Section, Bandera (who still controlled 80% of the UHVR) expelled the Hrynioch-Lebed group. He claimed exclusive authority on the Ukrainian national movement and continued terror tactics against anti-Banderist Ukrainian leaders in Western Europe and maneuvered for control of Ukrainian émigré organizations. (10) However, Lebed who had become close with the Americans at that point was recognized, along with Hrynioch as the official UHVR representation abroad.

With the war lost, Lebed adopted a strategy similar to that of Reinhard Gehlen – he contacted the Allies after escaping Rome in 1945 with a trove of names and contacts of anti-Soviets located in western Ukraine and in displaced persons camps in Germany. This made him attractive to the U.S. Army’s Counterintelligence Corps (CIC) despite their above admission in their 1947 report.

In late 1947, Lebed who it was feared would be assassinated by the Soviets in Rome, was smuggled along with his family by the CIC to Munich, Germany in December 1947 for his safety.

Norman J.W. Goda writes (11):

“By late 1947, Lebed had thoroughly sanitized his prewar and wartime activities for American consumption. In his own rendition, he had been a victim of the Poles, the Soviets, and the Germans – he would carry the Gestapo “wanted” poster for the rest of his life to prove his anti-Nazi credentials…He also published a 126-page booklet on the UPA, which chronicled the heroic struggle of Ukrainians against both Nazis and Bolsheviks, while calling for an independent, greater Ukraine that would represent the human ideals of free speech and free faith. The UPA, according to the booklet, never collaborated with the Nazis, nor is there any mention of the slaughter of Galician Jews or Poles in the book. The CIC considered the booklet to be the ‘complete background on the subject.’ The CIC overlooked the fact that under its own watch an OUN Congress held in September 1947 had split, thanks to Lebed’s criticism of the creeping democratization of the OUN. This was overlooked by the CIA which began using Lebed extensively in 1948…In June 1949…the CIA smuggled him [Lebed] into the United States with his wife and daughter under the legal cover of the Displaced Persons Act.” [emphasis added]

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) began investigating Lebed and in March 1950 reported to Washington that numerous Ukrainian informants spoke of Lebed’s leading role among the “Bandera terrorists” and that during the war the Bandersists were trained and armed by the Gestapo and responsible for “wholesale murders of Ukrainians, Poles and Jewish [sic]…In all these actions, Lebed was one of the most important leaders.” (12)

In 1951, top INS officials informed the CIA of its findings along with the comment that Lebed would likely face deportation. The CIA responded on October 3, 1951, that all of the charges were false and that the Gestapo “wanted” poster of Lebed proved that he “fought with equal zeal against the Nazis and Bolsheviks.” (13)

INS officials as a result suspended the investigation on Lebed.

In February 1952, the CIA pressed the INS to grant Lebed re-entry papers so that he could leave and re-enter the United States at will. Argyle Mackey, Commissioner of the INS, refused to grant this.

On May 5, 1952, Allen Dulles, then Assistant Director of the CIA wrote a letter to Mackey stating (14):

“In connection with future Agency operations of the first importance, it is urgently necessary that subject [Lebed] be able to travel in Western Europe. Before [he] undertakes such travel, however, this Agency must…assure his re-entry into the United States without investigation or incident which would attract undue attentions to his activities.”

Above image is the original document of the Dulles letter to Mackey on behalf of Mykola Lebed.

What was in West Germany? General Reinhard Gehlen, former chief of the Wehrmacht Foreign Armies East military intelligence, who had been conveniently allowed to re-enter West Germany to establish his Gehlen Organisation which would later form the Bundesnachrichtendienst (Federal Intelligence Service of West Germany) in 1956 .

Dulles also wanted Lebed’s legal status changed to that of “permanent resident,” under Section 8 of the CIA Act of 1949. The INS never investigated further after Dulles’ letter and Lebed became a naturalized U.S. citizen in March 1957.

Bandera would also be stationed in West Germany with his family after the war, where he remained the leader of the OUN-B and worked with several anti-communist organizations as well as with British Intelligence. (15) At this point Bandera had become too much of a liability and there were multiple attempts, by both the Americans and British starting in 1953, to get Bandera to step down and for Lebed to represent “the entire Ukrainian liberation movement in the homeland.” Bandera refused and went rogue.

It is said that Bandera was assassinated in 1959 by a KGB agent in Munich, however, one cannot help but note that it was excellent timing and extremely beneficial for the Americans that Bandera was taken out when he was, considering what they had planned for Ukraine’s future…

Among the declassified records are that of Hoover’s FBI, who had a small trove of captured German General Staff documents from 1943 and 1944, which revealed German appreciation of the UPA’s work while mentioning Lebed by name. (16) It appears this was never shared with any agency or institution, other than the CIA, despite requests from the INS during their investigation of Lebed.

Interestingly, Goda writes (17):

“The full extent of his [Lebed’s] activities as ‘Foreign Minister’ [of the UHVR] may never become known, but FBI surveillance of him gives some idea. Partly, Lebed lectured at prestigious universities such as Yale on such topics as biological warfare used by the Soviet government in the Ukraine.” [emphasis added]

The following is an indication as to what Dulles may have been referring to as the urgent need for Lebed’s re-entry into Western Europe.

Breitman and Goda write (18):

“By 1947 some 250,000 Ukrainians were living…in Germany, Austria, and Italy, many of them OUN activists or sympathizers. After 1947 UPA fighters began crossing into the U.S. zone, having reached the border on foot through Czechoslovakia.”

However, Lebed was not only urgently needed in Europe, but also within the United States. Once in the United States, Lebed was selected as the CIA’s chief contact/advisor for AERODYNAMIC.

Breitman and Goda write (19):

“AERODYNAMIC’s first phase involved infiltration into Ukraine and then exfiltration of CIA-trained Ukrainian agents. By January 1950 the CIA’s arm for the collection of secret intelligence (Office of Special Operations, OSO) and its arm for covert operations (Office of Policy Coordination, OPC) participated [author’s note: the Allen Dulles rogue faction of the CIA]…Washington was especially pleased with the high level of UPA training in the Ukraine and its potential for further guerilla actions, and with ‘the extraordinary news that…active resistance to the Soviet regime was spreading steadily eastward, out of the former Polish, Greek Catholic provinces… [However] By 1954 Lebed’s group lost all contact with UHVR. By that time the Soviets subdued both the UHVR and UPA, and the CIA ended the aggressive phase of AERODYNAMIC.

Beginning in 1953 AERODYNAMIC began to operate through a Ukrainian study group under Lebed’s leadership in New York under CIA auspices, which collected Ukrainian literature and history and produced Ukrainian nationalist newspapers, bulletins, radio programming, and books for distribution in the Ukraine. In 1956 this group was formally incorporated as the non-profit Prolog Research and Publishing Association. It allowed the CIA to funnel funds as ostensible private donations without taxable footprints. To avoid nosey New York State authorities, the CIA turned Prolog into a for-profit enterprise called Prolog Research Corporation, which ostensibly received private contracts. Under Hrinioch [Hrynioch], Prolog maintained a Munich office named the Ukrainische Geseelschaft fur Auslandsstudein, EV. Most publications were created here.

Prolog recruited and paid Ukrainian émigré writers who were generally unaware that they worked in a CIA-controlled operation. Only the six top members of the ZP/UHVR were witting agents. Beginning in 1955, leaflets were dropped over Ukraine by air[,] and radio broadcasts titled Nova Ukraina were aired in Athens for Ukrainian consumption. These activities gave way to systematic mailing campaigns to Ukraine through Ukrainian contacts in Poland and émigré contacts in Argentina, Australia, Canada, Spain, Sweden, and elsewhere. The newspaper Suchasna Ukrainia (Ukraine Today), information bulletins, a Ukrainian language journal for intellectuals called Suchasnist (The Present), and other publications were sent to libraries, cultural institutions, administrative offices and private individuals in Ukraine. These activities encouraged Ukrainian nationalism…” [emphasis added]

The CIA bought and paid for a brand of Ukrainian Nationalism à la Lebed. One of the most horrifying butchers of OUN/UPA was given reign to shape the hearts and minds of the Ukrainian people around their nationalist identity, an identity as defined by the OUN. It is also shaped historical and cultural interpretation such as to further romanticise the concept of the great Ukrainian race of Volodomyr the Great, encouraging a further sense of superiority and further divide between themselves and Belarussians and Russians.

One CIA analyst judged that, “some form of nationalist feeling continues to exist [in the Ukraine] and…there is an obligation to support it as a cold war weapon.” (20)

Breitman and Goda continue:

“…Prolog [also] influenced [the next] Ukrainian generation…Prolog had become in the words of one senior CIA official, the sole ‘vehicle for CIA’s operations directed at the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and [its] forty million Ukrainian citizens.

Lebed overtly distanced himself and the Ukrainian nationalist movement from the overt anti-Semitism of his Banderist days…More to protect the name of Ukrainian nationalism, he publicly condemned the ‘provocative libel’ and ‘slanderous statements’ against Jews, adding in a particularly forgetful note that, ‘the Ukrainian people…are opposed to all and any preaching of hatred for other people.’…Former Banderists…now attacked the Soviets for anti-Semitism rather than with it.

Lebed retired in 1975 but remained an adviser and consultant to Prolog and the ZP/UHVR…In the 1980s AERODYNAMIC’s name was changed to QRDYNAMIC and in the 1980s PDDYNAMIC and then QRPLUMB. In 1977 President Carter’s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski helped to expand the program owing to what he called its ‘impressive dividends’ and the ‘impact on specific audiences in the target area.’ In the 1980s Prolog expanded its operation to reach other Soviet nationalities, and in a supreme irony, these included dissident Soviet Jews. With the USSR teetering on the brink of collapse in 1990, QRPLUMB was terminated with a final payout of $1.75 million. Prolog would continue its activities, but it was on its own financially.

In June 1985 the General Accounting Office mentioned Lebed’s name in a public report on Nazis and collaborators who settled in the United States with help from U.S. intelligence agencies. The Office of Special Investigations (OSI) in the Department of Justice began investigating Lebed that year. The CIA worried that public scrutiny of Lebed would compromise QRPLUMB and that failure to protect Lebed would trigger outrage in the Ukrainian émigré community. It thus shielded Lebed by denying any connection between Lebed and the Nazis and by arguing that he was a Ukrainian freedom fighter. The truth, of course, was more complicated. As late as 1991 the CIA tried to dissuade OSI from approaching the German, Polish, and Soviet governments for war-related records related to the OUN. OSI eventually gave up the case, unable to procure definitive documents on Lebed.” [emphasis added]

Mykola Lebed died in 1998 under the protection of the CIA in New Jersey at the age of 89. His papers are located at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University.

And there you have it, the true story of the Ukrainian Nationalist Movement in its form today, bought and paid for by the CIA. Thus, it is no coincidence that the OUN ideology is inextricable from the western Ukrainian nationalist identity today, nor that several neo-Nazi groups have formed since 1991 (since Ukraine’s independence from the USSR) who all view the OUN and Stepan Bandera as the Father of their movement.

[Shortly to follow, Part 3 will discuss NATO and the Gehlen Organization and how this ties into the Ukrainian Nationalist Movement and neo-Nazism in Ukraine today.]

The author can be reached at cynthiachung.substack.com 

(1) Richard Breitman, Norman J.W. Goda et al. (2005) U.S. Intelligence and The Nazis. National Archives & Cambridge University Press: pg. 65
(2) Ibid. pg. 249
(3) Richard Breitman and Norman J.W. Goda. (2011) Hitler’s Shadow Nazi War Criminals, U. S. Intelligence, and the Cold War. National Archives: pg. 74
(4) Ibid. pg. 74
(5) Richard Breitman and Norman J.W. Goda. (2011) Hitler’s Shadow Nazi War Criminals, U. S. Intelligence, and the Cold War. National Archives: pg. 75-76
(6) Timothy Snyder. (2004) The Reconstruction of Nations. New Haven: Yale University Press: pg. 164
(7) Richard Breitman, Norman J.W. Goda et al. (2005) U.S. Intelligence and The Nazis. National Archives & Cambridge University Press: pg. 250
(8) Ibid pg. 250
(9) Ibid pg. 251
(10) Richard Breitman and Norman J.W. Goda. (2011) Hitler’s Shadow Nazi War Criminals, U. S. Intelligence, and the Cold War. National Archives: pg. 78
(11) Richard Breitman, Norman J.W. Goda et al. (2005) U.S. Intelligence and The Nazis. National Archives & Cambridge University Press: pg. 251
(12) Ibid. pg. 252
(13) Ibid. pg. 252
(14) Ibid. pg. 253
(15) Richard Breitman and Norman J.W. Goda. (2011) Hitler’s Shadow Nazi War Criminals, U. S. Intelligence, and the Cold War. National Archives: pg. 81
(16) Richard Breitman, Norman J.W. Goda et al. (2005) U.S. Intelligence and The Nazis. National Archives & Cambridge University Press: pg. 254
(17) Ibid. pg 254
(18) Richard Breitman and Norman J.W. Goda. (2011) Hitler’s Shadow Nazi War Criminals, U. S. Intelligence, and the Cold War. National Archives: pg. 76
(19) Ibid. pg 87
(20) Ibid. pg. 89

]]>
New Revelations Shed Light on Nazi Roots of House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/04/02/new-revelations-shed-light-on-nazi-roots-of-house-of-saxe-coburg-gotha/ Sat, 02 Apr 2022 20:55:05 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=802510 There are certain royal closets which can no longer contain the voluminous skeletons that certain powerful forces have wished be stuffed forever out of sight

Amidst the storm of Orwellian misinformation shaping our current world, up has become down, white has become black and good has become evil.

Despite the fact that the evils of Nazism were defeated primarily by the sacrifices made by the Russians during WWII, it has increasingly become popular to assert the fallacy that the great war’s true villain was Stalin. And despite the fact that unreconstructed Nazis were absorbed into the Cold War Five Eyes-led intelligence machine giving rise to 2nd and 3rd generation Nazis in Ukraine today, we are repeatedly told that Ukraine is a temple of liberty and beacon of democracy upon whose territory we should risk lighting the world on nuclear fire to defend.

It is thus a breath of fresh air when uncomfortable truths are capable of breaking through the drunken illusion of Orwellian newspeak which has contaminated the current zeitgeist. One such truth to come to light has been the mainstream media’s recognition that the disastrous Hunter Biden laptop and all of its scandalous contents were always genuine. These revelations have forced Americans to confront the fact that the current U.S. President directly benefited by the systems of graft and corruption which he oversaw while viceroy of a Nazi-infested Ukraine during Obama’s reign.

Channel 4’s Nazi King Exposed

Another explosive revelation which has sent shockwaves through the western zeitgeist in recent days was featured in a documentary which aired on Britain’s Channel 4 called ‘Edward VIII: Britain’s Traitor King’.

This film, based upon a soon-to-be released book by historian Andrew Lownie, uses recently declassified reports from the Royal Archives to tell the story of Britain’s Nazi King Edward VIII who not only desired a Nazi victory in WWII, but actively worked towards said goal from the moment he was forced to abdicate the throne in 1936 (allegedly to marry an American divorcée Wallis Simpson) throughout the darkest days of the war itself.

As this documentary proves, teaching his young niece Elizabeth II how to do a proper ‘sieg heil’ wasn’t his only dance with Nazism.

While in exile in Portugal where the royal hob knobbed with Germany’s elite, the documentary cites diplomatic cables sent by Edward to German officials demanding that the Nazis relentlessly bomb England into submission in 1940 encouraging the deaths of millions of innocent civilians. The film also cites a little-known speech where Edward called for Britain’s surrender to the Nazis in 1939 which the BBC refused to air. Even after being sent to the Bahamas by imperial officials who had decided it more expedient to put down their Frankenstein monster than continue with their earlier plans for a fascist New World Order, the Nazi would-be king had cabled Hitler’s officials indicating his willingness to return to Europe when needed and retake his rightful seat on the throne as an Aryan king.

Beyond the Film: More Nazi Roots of the Windsors

Beyond the case of Edward VIII, there are many other embarrassing Nazi connections to the house of Windsor (formerly Saxe-Coburg-Gotha) which the film failed to mention, some of which implicate the late Prince Consort Philip Mountbatten (aka: Duke of Edinburgh) directly.

All of the Duke of Edinburgh’s three sisters were married to Nazi princes, and the husband of one of them (Sophie) became a Waffen SS officer with the rank of Oberführer (senior leader).

Philip’s sister Sophie’s husband, Prince Christopher of Hesse-Cassel, was chief of the Forschungsamt (Directorate of Scientific Research), a special intelligence operation run by Hermann Göring, and he was also Standartenführer (colonel) of the SS on Heinrich Himmler’s personal staff. Philip’s four brothers-in-law, with whom he lived, all became high-ranking officials in the Nazi Party.

Philip himself maintained the family tradition, first having been educated under a Nazi curriculum centered on eugenics in the 1930s, and then going on to found the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) with fellow one-time Nazi Party member Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a lifelong eugenicist and Bilderberg Group founder, in 1961. Philip and Bernhard were joined by Sir Julian Huxley (then president of the Eugenics Society of Britain) as WWF co-founder. In an August 1988 interview with Deutsche Press Agentur, Prince Philip proclaimed his desire to return in the next life as a deadly virus to help “solve overpopulation”.

On this virulent concept of population reduction, it is worth reviewing the life’s work and words of one prominent vice-President of the WWF from 1978-1981 named Maurice Strong who served directly under Prince Philip (then acting WWF President). According to Justin Trudeau, Strong had co-founded the World Economic Forum alongside Klaus Schwab in 1971, chaired the UN Conference on Population of 1972 and its 1992 sequel in Rio de Janeiro while juggling a wide array of hats from World Bank President, Earth Charter author, UN Environmental Protection Agency founder and architect of Agenda 21 (recently renamed Agenda 2030).

In a May 1990 interview with WEST magazine, Strong discussed a meeting at Davos and mused: “What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is ‘no’. The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Prince Philip exuded similarly cold misanthropic “musings” as he contemplated the human zoo asserting:

“You cannot keep a bigger flock of sheep than you are capable of feeding. In other words conservation may involve culling in order to keep a balance between the relative numbers in each species within any particular habitat. I realize this is a very touchy subject, but the fact remains that mankind is part of the living world. Every new acre brought into cultivation means another acre denied to wild species.”

The Disturbing Case of Prince Charles

Although Philip died in 2021, his son and heir to the throne has taken his father’s mission of reducing the world population to heart, through his leadership of various conservationist organizations, and as patron of the now defunct Liverpool Care Pathway, which was revealed to have euthanized over 60,000 British citizens per year, without their consent, between 2001 and 2013.

During its 18 year reign, the LCP had pressured hundreds of healthcare providers to put millions of sick and elderly (and expensive) patients onto “End of Life” lists without their consent resulting in forced dehydration and morphine drips to accelerate deaths despite the fact that life-saving treatments were still available.

In June 2020, Prince Charles co-founded the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset Initiative along with his colleague Klaus Schwab in order to take advantage of the “existential two-fold crisis” of climate change and a pandemic to radically remodify global behavior and economic systems. Beyond the pretty words used by Davos billionaires to rally humanity to save the planet, the fact is that those “green” Build Back Better reforms which adhere to sustainable energy, carbon emission cuts and food reforms as witnessed in the EU Farm to Fork agenda would result in a scale of death that even the likes of a Hitler might blush.

The Nazi pedigree of the royal family and its loyal managers raises the question: Why has their continuation of Nazi eugenics doctrine in the form of the euthanasia and zero-growth movements not become more widely known? What type of world do we live in, that such startling facts could not be general knowledge?

The Privy Council System

I hope it is becoming increasingly clear that the British Empire and its aspirations for population control never ended with the cancellation of the Hitler project in 1945.

I hope it is also becoming clear that this empire was never the nation of Great Britain, its Parliament, or its people.

The true Empire has always been a financial oligarchy which is used by a vast network of power structures to advance the interests of the aristocracy of Europe; The current epicenter of power is the Anglo-Dutch monarchies (otherwise known as the Founts of All Honours). It is this power that controls the Bilderberg Group, its junior appendage the World Economic Forum, and steers American policy through the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (the American version of Chatham House) dubbed by Hillary Clinton as “the mothership”.

Chatham House is another name for the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA) begun in 1919 by the leading Milnerites of the Round Table Movement who created the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in order to promote eugenics and world government under the League of Nations. The American branch was given its name to avoid allusions to the British terminology due to American mistrust of British intrigue. The Canadian and Australian Branches were begun in 1928 and run most typically by Oxford-trained agents since then. In the case of the USA, current CFR President Richard Haass graduated from Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar in 1978.

It was to leading Chatham House member Lord Lothian in 1937 that Hitler laid out his concept for the Anglo-German New World Order saying: “Germany, England, France, Italy, America and Scandinavia… should arrive at some agreement whereby they would prevent their nationals from assisting in the industrializing of countries such as China, and India. It is suicidal to promote the establishment in the agricultural countries of Asia of manufacturing industries.” (1)

Any number of technocrats pushing a “Build Back Better for the World” scheme or “Global Green New Deal” could have said the same thing.

Today, the Canadian Institute for International Affairs has been renamed the Canadian International Council (CIC). The CIC is Chaired by Oxford-trained regime change specialist Ben Rowswell who worked closely with Privy Councillor Chrystia Freeland in attempting to overthrow the government of Maduro in favor of WEF-puppet Juan Guaido which continues to this day.

A key pillar in the control over colonies of Anglo-Dutch influence remains the Privy Council system, which is centered in Britain, but has secondary branches in select Commonwealth countries. It is under the Privy Council’s influence that lower-level operatives are instituted in the form of deputy ministers, the Treasury Board, Select Committees, and other appointed officials in the Civil Service. Other key nodes in the public and private sector manage the interests of the Crown. All cabinet members of government are made Privy Councillors and all Privy Councillors are sworn to an oath of secrecy and allegiance to the Queen including oaths to keep secret those things spoken of in privy council meetings. (2)

Strange things for paragons of the “free and democratic rules-based order”.

As Channel 4’s documentary on the Nazi King should remind us, there are certain royal closets which can no longer contain the voluminous skeletons that certain powerful forces have wished be stuffed forever out of sight. Western civilization’s failure to reject Orwellian newspeak and other inversions of truth has resulted in an existential tension which will be resolved one way or the other. If that means the anti-human legacy of Hitler, Prince Philip, Edward VIII and other royal Nazis past and present push humanity into a new Dark Age or whether we break from our slumber and seek a new more dignified destiny remains to be seen.

Notes

(1) Transcription in Sir James R.M. Butler, Lord Lothian, Macmillan and Co., London, 1960, pp. 332)

(2) Since it is hard for normal people to wrap their minds around the fact that such a medieval institution such as this still exists in the modern world, here is a selection of the Oath of Allegiance that all privy councillors must take upon entering that office: “I, [name], do solemnly and sincerely swear that I shall be a true and faithful servant to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, as a member of Her Majesty’s Privy Council for Canada. I will in all things to be treated, debated and resolved in Privy Council, faithfully, honestly and truly declare my mind and my opinion. I shall keep secret all matters committed and revealed to me in this capacity, or that shall be secretly treated of in Council. Generally, in all things I shall do as a faithful and true servant ought to do for Her Majesty.”

]]>
British Bullshit Corporation Whitewashes Ukrainian Nazis https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/30/british-bullshit-corporation-whitewashes-ukrainian-nazis/ Wed, 30 Mar 2022 16:24:07 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=799971 The Orwellian reality of the Beeb should make it the world’s “most busted” propaganda outlet, Finian Cunningham writes.

There is no Nazi presence in Ukraine, the Azov Battalion are merely excellent fighters, and Russian claims of denazifying the regime are cynical falsifications to justify aggression, according to the BBC.

In a sneaking way, one has to admire the aplomb of the British Broadcasting Corporation which promotes itself as one of the world’s “most trusted” news brands. While it smears and sneers at Russian news media as “state-owned” and “Kremlin propaganda machines”, the BBC is itself 100 percent state-owned and totally aligned with British government and NATO propaganda aims. That propaganda includes distortion and fabrication presented with the arrogant assertion of being independent news information.

Propaganda, old chap, is something that the Russians do. But not the British Bullshit Corporation. Oh no, heaven forbid, we’re British after all… fair play, objective, cricket, stiff-upper-lip, London Calling, fight them on the beaches, and so on, all the self-admiring epithets of a self-declared benign empire.

And so in a recent broadcast, the BBC’s ever-so smug Ros Atkins had the brass neck to assure viewers that there were no Nazis in Ukraine. He said it was a myth concocted by the Kremlin as a pretext for its military intervention in Ukraine. Atkins downplayed the Azov Battalion as having some far-right members who were negligible. He also claimed that the Azov Battalion was formed to defend Ukraine from Russia’s aggression that began in 2014. The BBC’s distortion of the 2014 coup in Kiev is astounding.

The BBC’s barefaced denial of Azov and others Nazi regiments in the Ukrainian military stands in jarring contrast to the well-documented facts. Images of torchlit processions honoring Stepan Bandera and others Ukrainian SS collaborators, images of Nazi flags, Nazi salutes, and Nazi insignia are abundant. Azov leaders like Andrey Biletsky and Olena Semenyaka openly pay homage to the Third Reich.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky may be Jewish and purportedly have relatives who died in the Holocaust. But he is owned by the Nazi brigades. His PR value as a Jewish face for the regime is a big asset (thanks CIA, MI6!). But it doesn’t change the fact that the Ukrainian military is a fascist force that waged a terror war against the Russian-speaking people of Southeast Ukraine for eight years since 2014 – killing 14,000 – until it was stopped by Russia’s intervention on February 24.

No wonder the BBC is covering for Azov when the British Ministry of Defense is training and arming their fighters, along with other NATO states.

In the same BBC broadcast, Atkins told viewers that the Russian army had bombed the Mariupol maternity hospital and the Mariupol theater resulting in civilian deaths. No evidence, no images of dead bodies. Just assumption of trust us, because, after all, “this is the BBC”.

Here the corporation goes from denial about the Azov and Nazis to actually promoting their propaganda lies. That’s because the BBC is employing and relying on Ukrainian journalists who are affiliated with far-right politics.

Civilians fleeing from Mariupol have testified to independent news organizations that the Azov fighters detonated both the hospital and the theater in a false-flag operation designed to smear Russia and to bolster NATO support for the Ukrainian regime.

What the BBC is doing here is echoed by U.S. media like CNN, NBC, and others. It is also a replay of how they reported on Syria where they accused the Syrian army and Russian allies of bombing civilians. The reality was that towns and cities like Aleppo were being held under siege by Western-backed mercenaries and their propagandists in the White Helmets who carried out false-flag atrocities. The BBC would tell viewers that the Syrian army and Russia were killing civilians when in reality the civilians were being liberated from a reign of terror. The same is happening with the Azov and other Nazis in Ukraine whom the BBC, CNN, etc., are whitewashing and promoting.

Ask yourself: why does the BBC no longer report from Syria? What about all those hysterical claims of war crimes against civilians when the Syrian army and Russia were liberating towns and cities? Why hasn’t the BBC followed up to interview Syrian civilians to find out how they feel about being liberated? The same BBC “journalists” are too busy spinning the next propaganda war for the British government and NATO in Ukraine.

This year marks the centennial anniversary of the “Beeb” as it is affectionately known. It was founded by the British government as a propaganda service. Earlier names included the British Empire Service. Up until recently, members of staff were vetted by MI5, the British state intelligence service. They no doubt still are, only now even more hush-hush covertly. By law, every British household must buy a TV license (£159 per year) to support the financing of the BBC. Failure to do so results in criminal prosecution and even jail.

The Orwellian reality of the Beeb should make it the world’s “most busted” propaganda outlet. But then again that’s what is so Orwellian about the BBC. It still retains a wholesome image for many people around the world. Even when the whitewashing of Nazis in Ukraine is its latest star turn.

]]>
Make Nazism Great Again https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/24/make-nazism-great-again/ Thu, 24 Mar 2022 15:42:42 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=797463 The supreme target is regime change in Russia, Ukraine is just a pawn in the game – or worse, mere cannon fodder.

All eyes are on Mariupol. As of Wednesday night, over 70% of residential areas were under control of Donetsk and Russian forces, while Russian Marines, Donetsk’s 107th batallion and Chechen Spetsnaz, led by the charismatic Adam Delimkhanov, had entered the Azov-Stal plant – the HQ of the neo-Nazi Azov batallion.

Azov was sent a last ultimatum: surrender until midnight – or else, as in a take no prisoners highway to hell.

That implies a major game-changer in the Ukrainian battlefield; Mariupol is finally about to be thoroughly denazified – as the Azov contingent long entrenched in the city and using civilians as human shields were their most hardened fighting force.

Meanwhile, echoes from the Empire of Lies all but gave the whole game away. There’s no intention whatsoever in Washington to facilitate a peace plan in Ukraine – and that explains Comedian Zelensky’s non-stop stalling tactics. The supreme target is regime change in Russia, and for that Totalen Krieg against Russia and all things Russian is warranted. Ukraine is just a pawn in the game – or worse, mere cannon fodder.

This also means that the 14,000 deaths in Donbass for the past 8 years should be directly attributed to the Exceptionalists. As for Ukrainian neo-Nazis of all stripes, they are as expendable as “moderate rebels” in Syria, be they al-Qaeda or Daesh-linked. Those that may eventually survive can always join the budding CIA-sponsored Neo-Nazi Inc. – the tawdry remix of the 1980s Jihad Inc. in Afghanistan. They will be properly “Kalibrated”.

A quick neo-Nazi recap

By now only the brain dead across NATOstan – and there are hordes – are not aware of Maidan in 2014. Yet few know that it was then Ukrainian Minister of Interior Arsen Avakov, a former governor of Kharkov, who gave the green light for a 12,000 paramilitary outfit to materialize out of Sect 82 soccer hooligans who supported Dynamo Kiev. That was the birth of the Azov batallion, in May 2014, led by Andriy Biletsky, a.k.a. the White Fuhrer, and former leader of the neo-nazi gang Patriots of Ukraine.

Together with NATO stay-behind agent Dmitro Yarosh, Biletsky founded Pravy Sektor, financed by Ukrainian mafia godfather and Jewish billionaire Ihor Kolomoysky (later the benefactor of the meta-conversion of Zelensky from mediocre comedian to mediocre President.)

Pravy Sektor happened to be rabidly anti-EU – tell that to Ursula von der Lugen – and politically obsessed with linking Central Europe and the Baltics in a new, tawdry Intermarium. Crucially, Pravy Sektor and other nazi gangs were duly trained by NATO instructors.

Biletsky and Yarosh are of course disciples of notorious WWII-era Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, for whom pure Ukrainians are proto-Germanic or Scandinavian, and Slavs are untermenschen.

Azov ended up absorbing nearly all neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine and were dispatched to fight against Donbass – with their acolytes making more money than regular soldiers. Biletsky and another neo-Nazi leader, Oleh Petrenko, were elected to the Rada. The White Führer stood on his own. Petrenko decided to support then President Poroshenko. Soon the Azov battalion was incorporated as the Azov Regiment to the Ukrainian National Guard.

They went on a foreign mercenary recruiting drive – with people coming from Western Europe, Scandinavia and even South America.

That was strictly forbidden by the Minsk Agreements guaranteed by France and Germany (and now de facto defunct). Azov set up training camps for teenagers and soon reached 10,000 members. Erik “Blackwater” Prince, in 2020, struck a deal with the Ukrainian military that would enable his renamed outfit, Academi, to supervise Azov.

It was none other than sinister Maidan cookie distributor Vicky “F**k the EU” Nuland who suggested to Zelensky – both of them, by the way, Ukrainian Jews – to appoint avowed Nazi Yarosh as an adviser to the Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Gen Valerii Zaluzhnyi. The target: organize a blitzkrieg on Donbass and Crimea – the same blitzkrieg that SVR, Russian foreign intel, concluded would be launched on February 22, thus propelling the launch of Operation Z.

All of the above, in fact just a quick recap, shows that in Ukraine there’s no difference whatsoever between white neo-Nazis and brown-colored al-Qaeda/ISIS/Daesh, as much as neo-Nazis are just as “Christian” as takfiri Salafi-jihadis are “Muslim”.

When Putin denounced a “bunch of neo-Nazis” in power in Kiev, the Comedian replied that it was impossible because he was Jewish. Nonsense. Zelensky and his patron Kolomoysky, for all practical purposes, are Zio-Nazis.

Even as branches of the United States government admitted to neo-Nazis entrenched in the Kiev apparatus, the Exceptionalist machine made the daily shelling of Donbass for 8 years simply disappear. These thousands of civilian victims never existed.

U.S. mainstream media even ventured the odd piece or report on Azov and Aidar neo-Nazis. But then a neo-Orwellian narrative was set in stone: there are no Nazis in Ukraine. CIA offshoot NED even started deleting records about training members of Aidar. Recently a crappy news network duly promoted a video of a NATO-trained and weaponized Azov commander – complete with Nazi iconography.

Why “denazification” makes sense

The Banderastan ideology harks back to when this part of Ukraine was in fact controlled by the Austro-Hungarian empire, the Russian empire and Poland. Stepan Bandera was born in Austro-Hungary in 1909, near Ivano-Frankovsk, in the – then autonomous – Kingdom of Galicia.

WWI dismembered European empires into frequently non-viable small entities. In western Ukraine – an imperial intersection – that inevitably led to the proliferation of extremely intolerant ideologies.

Banderastan ideologues profited from the Nazi arrival in 1941 to try to proclaim an independent territory. But Berlin not only blocked it but sent them to concentration camps. In 1944 though the Nazis changed tactics: they liberated the Banderanistas and manipulated them into anti-Russian hate, thus creating a destabilization force in the Ukrainian USSR.

So Nazism is not exactly the same as Banderastan fanatics: they are in fact competing ideologies. What happened since Maidan is that the CIA kept a laser focus on inciting Russian hatred by whatever fringe groups it could instrumentalize. So Ukraine is not a case of
“white nationalism” – to put it mildly – but of anti-Russian Ukrainian nationalism, for all practical purposes manifested via Nazi-style salutes and Nazi-style symbols.

So when Putin and the Russian leadership refer to Ukrainian Nazism, that may not be 100% correct, conceptually, but it strikes a chord with every Russian.

Russians viscerally reject Nazism – considering that virtually every Russian family has at least one ancestor killed during the Great Patriotic War. From the perspective of wartime psychology, it makes total sense to talk of “Ukro-nazism” or, straight to the point, a “denazification” campaign.

How the Anglos loved the Nazis

The United States government openly cheerleading neo-Nazis in Ukraine is hardly a novelty, considering how it supported Hitler alongside England in 1933 for balance of power reasons.

In 1933, Roosevelt lent Hitler one billion gold dollars while England lent him two billion gold dollars. That should be multiplied 200 times to arrive at today’s fiat dollars. The Anglo-Americans wanted to build up Germany as a bulwark against Russia. In 1941 Roosevelt wrote to Hitler that if he invaded Russia the U.S. would side with Russia, and wrote Stalin that if Stalin invaded Germany the U.S. would back Germany. Talk about a graphic illustration of Mackinderesque balance of power.

The Brits had become very concerned with the rise of Russian power under Stalin while observing that Germany was on its knees with 50% unemployment in 1933, if one counted unregistered itinerant Germans.

Even Lloyd George had misgivings about the Versailles Treaty, unbearably weakening Germany after its surrender in WWI. The purpose of WWI, in Lloyd George’s worldview, was to destroy Russia and Germany together. Germany was threatening England with the Kaiser building a fleet to take over the oceans, while the Tsar was too close to India for comfort. For a while Britannia won – and continued to rule the waves.

Then building up Germany to fight Russia became the number one priority – complete with rewriting of History. The uniting of Austrian Germans and Sudetenland Germans with Germany, for instance, was totally approved by the Brits.

But then came the Polish problem. When Germany invaded Poland, France and Britain stood on the sidelines. That placed Germany on the border of Russia, and Germany and Russia divided up Poland. That’s exactly what Britain and France wanted. Britain and France had promised Poland that they would invade Germany from the west while Poland fought Germany from the east.

In the end, the Poles were double-crossed. Churchill even praised Russia for invading Poland. Hitler was advised by MI6 that England and France would not invade Poland – as part of their plan for a German-Russian war. Hitler had been supported financially since the 1920s by MI6 for his favorable words about England in Mein Kampf. MI6 de facto encouraged Hitler to invade Russia.

Fast forward to 2022, and here we go again – as farce, with the Anglo-Americans “encouraging” Germany under feeble Scholz to put itself back together militarily, with 100 billion euros (that the Germans don’t have), and setting up in thesis a revamped European force to later go to war against Russia.

Cue to the Russophobic hysteria in Anglo-American media about the Russia-China strategic partnership. The mortal Anglo-American fear is Mackinder/Mahan/Spykman/Kissinger/Brzezinski all rolled into one: Russia-China as peer competitor twins take over the Eurasian land mass – the Belt and Road Initiative meets the Greater Eurasia Partnership – and thus rule the planet, with the U.S. relegated to inconsequential island status, as much as the previous “Rule Britannia”.

England, France and later the Americans had prevented it when Germany aspired to do the same, controlling Eurasia side by side with Japan, from the English Channel to the Pacific. Now it’s a completely different ball game.

So Ukraine, with its pathetic neo-Nazi gangs, is just an – expendable – pawn in the desperate drive to stop something that is beyond anathema, from Washington’s perspective: a totally peaceful German-Russian-Chinese New Silk Road.

Russophobia, massively imprinted in the West’s DNA, never really went away. Cultivated by the Brits since Catherine the Great – and then with The Great Game. By the French since Napoleon. By the Germans because the Red Army liberated Berlin. By the Americans because Stalin forced to them the mapping of Europe – and then it went on and on and on throughout the Cold War.

We are at just the early stages of the final push by the dying Empire to attempt arresting the flow of History. They are being outsmarted, they are already outgunned by the top military power in the world, and they will be checkmated. Existentially, they are not equipped to kill the Bear – and that hurts. Cosmically.

]]>
U.S. and NATO Allies Arm Neo-Nazi Units in Ukraine as Foreign Policy Elites Yearn for Afghan-Style Insurgency https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/22/us-and-nato-allies-arm-neo-nazi-units-in-ukraine-as-foreign-policy-elites-yearn-for-afghan-style-insurgency/ Tue, 22 Mar 2022 20:30:56 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=797440 Corporate US media and foreign policy hardliners want to create a new Afghanistan in the middle of Europe by flooding Ukraine with weapons. The arms industry is very pleased.

By Alexander RUBINSTEIN

Following urgent requests for arms from the Ukrainian government, at least 32 countries have announced their intention to ship billions of dollars in weapons into Ukraine for use against Russian forces in Ukraine. Photographic evidence shows that these weapons have already ended up in the hands of neo-Nazi paramilitaries – units which have already received training and arms the US and its NATO allies.

Underscoring the careless nature of the unprecedented arms shipments, the formerly neutral country of Norway has warned that its government cannot “guarantee that the weapons [it is sending to Ukraine] will not fall into the wrong hands.”

As corporate media and Reddit forums spin out a rose-colored view of the Ukrainian military’s performance, some 20,000 foreign fighters from 52 countries have signed up to join the newly-formed “International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine.” Many are now fleeing back across the Polish border, filled with fear in the face of heavy casualties.

All of this builds on $3.8 billion in military aid from the United States to Ukraine, the training of 55,000 Ukrainian soldiers by Canada and the United Kingdom, and a longstanding CIA program aimed at cultivating an anti-Russian insurgency.

As Western officials clamor for a long and bloody war against Russia while shirking efforts at negotiation, progressive anti-war voices in Congress like Rep. Ro Khanna, who once railed against the US sponsorship of neo-Nazism in Ukraine, are now cheerleading massive arms transfers to Kiev.

During his widely broadcast, carefully scripted speech to Congress on March 16, Ukrainian President Vlodymyr Zelensky’s thanked the United States for its “overwhelming support” in terms of “weapons and ammunition, for training, for finances.”

He went on to beseech Congress for a no-fly zone, which even top White House officials have acknowledged as a call for conventional war against Russia.

While a no-fly zone remains off the table for the time being, NATO leaders are hoping for an extended war of attrition, consequences be damned. And arms dealers are having a field day, with stocks in top defense contractors Lockheed Martin and Northrup Grumman surged by 20% during the first week of the conflict.

As former special advisor to the Secretary of Defense Col. Douglas Macgregor told The Grayzone, “it looks more and more as though Ukrainians are almost incidental to the operation in the sense that they are there to impale themselves on the Russian army and die in great numbers, because the real goal of this entire thing is the destruction of the Russian state and Vladimir Putin.”

Priming the public for endless war, lobbying for an insurgency

David Ignatius, the Washington Post columnist and reliable voice of the US intelligence apparatus, noted that even prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, “the United States and NATO allies [were] ready to provide weapons and training for a long battle of resistance.”

This March, Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haas commented, “I think what you’re hearing from all of us — and it’s a real mindset change — we’re talking about potentially a long war… Think about this less as a classic war. Afghanistan went on [for] two decades… this could be another frozen struggle, and it could wax and wane, but this could be part of the new normal.”

The Afghan option has been advocated for Ukraine by some of the most prominent figures among the US foreign policy establishment, and particularly those on the Democratic side of the aisle.

“It didn’t end well for the Russians…but the fact is, that a very motivated, and then funded, and armed insurgency basically drove the Russians out of Afghanistan. I think that is the model that people are now looking toward,” former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared during a February 28 interview with MSNBC.

Clinton waxed nostalgic over the campaign to arm and train the Afghan mujahideen in a bid to suck the Soviet Union into a “Vietnamese quagmire.” If Western government can “keep the Ukrainian, both their military and their citizen volunteer soldiers supplied, that can continue to stymie Russia,” she added.

Next, Clinton pointed to the dirty war in Syria, where the CIA’s Timber Sycamore program funneled weapons to the so-called “moderate rebels” of the Free Syrian Army, creating what mainstream US analyst Sam Heller called “weapons farms for larger Islamist and jihadist factions, including Syria’s al-Qaeda affiliate.”

“It took years to finally defeat Syria in terms of the insurgencies, the democratic forces as well as others who battled the Russians, the Syrians, and the Iranians,” Clinton said.

As a no-longer official voice of the Democratic foreign policy establishment, Hillary Clinton is able to speak with more candor than the current US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, on the objectives of the liberal interventionist clique to which they both belong.

When Hillary Clinton resurfaced on MSNBC on March 8 for an interview with MSNBC’s Mika Brezinski – daughter of Zbigniew, the architect of the program to arm the Afghan mujahedin – Clinton was more explicit than before about her desire for the Afghan option.

“Lethal defensive weapons are making their way into Ukraine. They need more. I want to see them get more. I’ve urged publicly and privately that they get more,” the former Secretary of State said. “There is a concerted effort by governments, particularly NATO governments, both to provide weapons and aid.”

“This is not going to end quickly,” Clinton concluded, “it’s going to drag on.”

In a joint press conference with UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, Blinken insisted that should Russian President Vladimir Putin try to “enforce such a puppet regime by keeping Russian forces in Ukraine, it will be a long, bloody, drawn-out mess through which Russia will continue to suffer grievously.”

In one media appearance after another, the Secretary of State has alluded to the possibility of a forever war in Ukraine. “I think we have to be prepared, unfortunately, tragically, for this to go on for some time,” he told Face The Nation.

Biden too has hinted at efforts to stoke a long-term insurgency in the country, vowing that Russia “will pay a continuing high price over the long run,” though “it’s going to take time.”

Unlike the proxy wars in Syria and Afghanistan, where Western-backed jihadist foreign fighters took up their crusade in hopes of establishing a medieval Islamic caliphate, the champions of the “holy war” in Ukraine look to the country’s more recent history of Nazism as their call to arms.

Months before Russia launched its operation inside Ukaine, the CIA launched a program to train Ukrainian fighters for an insurgency. Meanwhile, weapons furnished by NATO allies have been placed in the hands of the Azov Battalion, a neo-Nazi former paramilitary organization incorporated into the Ukrainian National Guard/

US and Canadian military officers meet Azov Battalion commanders in Ukraine in November 2017

NATO and the CIA fashion a fighting force with fascist auxiliaries

The governments of Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom have presided over a massive program to train and equip Ukrainian soldiers for a full-scale war with Russia. Trainees have included top commanders of the Azov Battalion.

Canada’s Department of National Defense noted this January 26 that the Canadian Armed Forces have trained “nearly 33,000 Ukrainian military and security personnel in a range of tactical and advanced military skills.”

“Canada is playing a leading role in our response,” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said at the Ottawa Conference on Security and Defense on March 9, “including with training for tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops – many of whom are on the front lines today.”

The United Kingdom, via Operation Orbital, has trained 22,000 Ukrainian fighters and sent more trainers to the country in early March.

The United States has also openly trained Ukrainian forces, including members of the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion, like Sgt. Ivan Kharkiv, who reflected fondly on “his battalion’s experience with US trainers and US volunteers quite fondly, even mentioning US volunteers engineers and medics that are still currently assisting them.”

“Our vetting screens for human rights violations, not for ideology,” a US embassy representative in Ukraine told the Daily Beast. “The battalions that are in question have been integrated as part of Ukraine’s National Guard, and so the idea is that they would be eligible for training.”

As The Grayzone has reported, a photo posted on the Azov Battalion’s website in November 2017 shows a US military officer meeting with an officer from the neo-Nazi battalion. A year before the exchange, the US embassy in Kiev helped coordinate the transfer of rocket-propelled grenade launchers to the Ukrainian military in 2016, a portion of which were immediately sent to Azov.

“An American military inspection team visited the Azov Battalion on the front lines of the Ukrainian civil war to discuss logistics and deepening cooperation,” The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal wrote in 2018. “Images of the encounter showed American army officers poring over maps with their Ukrainian counterparts, palling around and ignoring the Nazi-inspired Wolfangel patches emblazoned on their sleeves.”

Meanwhile, a lesser-known neo-Nazi order of Ukrainian military officers called Centuria has bragged that its members have “participated in military exercises with France, the UK, Canada, the US, Germany, and Poland,” according to a study published by the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at George Washington University.

According to the study, the Ukrainian government and Western militaries including the US, UK, Canada, Germany do not screen Ukrainian trainees for extremism.

One figure linked to the Centuria organization posed from the US-Canada training facility in the West of Ukraine with two black US service members, geotagging himself in “Zimbabwe” and writing “14/88” – neo-Nazi code for “Heil Hitler” and a reference to the white supremacist “14 words” slogan.

While the US and other militaries have openly trained Ukrainian forces, support from the CIA was secret until a January 13 report by Yahoo News based on disclosures by six former CIA officials.

Dorfman revealed that fighters were being flown into an “undisclosed facility in the Southern US” to undergo training by the CIA. The program has also included members of the CIA “traveling to the front in eastern Ukraine to advise their counterparts there.”

According to the Yahoo News report, the CIA has trained fighters over the course of multiple weeks in “camouflage techniques, land navigation, tactics like ‘cover and move,’ intelligence and other areas.”

One former CIA official who spoke with the outlet said that “The United States is training an insurgency” to “kill Russians.”

A former executive of the agency told the outlet that the program has helped train Ukrainian fighters in “potential critical nodes the Russians may focus on” in the event of a Russian invasion.

These “critical nodes” likely refer to frontline cities like Mariupol and Kharkiv where the Azov Battalion maintains its strongest presence.

“If the Russians invade, those [CIA-trained fighters] are going to be your militia, your insurgent leaders,” a former senior intelligence official said. “We’ve been training these guys now for eight years. They’re really good fighters. That’s where the agency’s program could have a serious impact.”

“All that stuff that happened to us in Afghanistan … they can expect to see that in spades with these guys,” a former CIA official told the outlet.

Foreign fighters flock to Ukraine, retreat in full panic

It’s not just Ukrainian soldiers that are fighting Russia. Since Zelensky’s appeal for foreign fighters in late February, thousands have reportedly signed up to be shipped off for war with Russia.

“Every friend of Ukraine who wants to join Ukraine in defending the country please come over, we will give you weapons,” Zelensky pleaded.

Less than a week later, on March 3, Zelensky said that “Ukraine is already greeting foreign volunteers. (The) first 16,000 are already on their way.”

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuelba said that 20,000 people from 52 countries have volunteered to fight on March 6.

To aid this campaign Ukraine created a new battalion called the “International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine” and set up a website called “Fight for Ukraine” to attract foreign soldiers, listing contacts in 68 countries for would-be fighters to reach out to. A button at the bottom right of the homepage urges visitors to “donate to the Ukrainian army,” promising that “all proceeds received go directly to supporting the front-line defense of Ukraine.”

Foreign fighters are being processed in the Western Ukrainian city of Lviv where one Finnish volunteer has claimed that he “just want[s] to kill Russians.”

Veterans from Western countries bored of the mundanities of civilian life are flocking over. As one former Canadian veteran billed as “one of the world’s deadliest snipers” put it, “a week ago I was still programming stuff. Now I’m grabbing anti-tank missiles in a warehouse to kill people.”

According to a Ukrainian recruiter in London, 6,000 people from the United Kingdom, about half of which are veterans, have signed up to go fight. Across the pond, a Ukrainian Embassy representative in Washington told the US-government funded Voice of America that about 3,000 people in the United States have “responded” to Zelensky’s appeal for foreign fighters.

Zelensky’s call to arms has even spread to Latin America. In Colombia, the death squad capital of the world, where hundreds of social movement leaders were killed by paramilitaries in the past two years, 50 former soldiers have reportedly begun the process of joining the Ukraine Territorial Defense Legion. Colombia is an official NATO partner.

While many veterans have flocked over to Ukraine to escape post-service ennui they are now finding themselves confronted by a far more existential mental malady: dread in the face of the enemy’s total air dominance for the first time of their military careers.

On March 13, Russia pummeled a base hosting the foreign legion with 30 cruise missiles, killing 35 foreign volunteer fighters according to Western sources and 180 according to the Russian Ministry of Defense.

The base, known as the International Peacekeeping and Security Center, has hosted both Canada’s Operation UNIFIER and the US-led Joint Multinational Training Group. It has been previously described as the “main hub for training Ukrainian troops, a process in which the US, Canada, and others play a prominent role.”

“Up to 180 foreign mercenaries and a large quantity of foreign weapons were destroyed,” according to Russian defense spokesman Igor Konashenkov.

“Americans, British, tons of British dead. They’re not saying nothing, they’re counting our dead as their dead,” said one American volunteer Henry Hoeft in a video posted online. “They’re trying to send us to Kiev with no fucking weapons, no kit, no plates. The people who are lucky enough to get weapons are only getting magazines with like 10 fucking rounds.”

Hoeft, who fled the country, said that when they refused to be shipped off to Kiev, they were threatened: either leave or get shot.

“People need to stop coming here. It’s a trap and they’re not letting you leave,” he said.

On Reddit, a social media platform favored by many foreign fighters, one US volunteer described a harrowing experience as he awaited transport back over the Polish border.

“The cannon fodder term is what was coming out of a lot of volunteers’ mouths,” wrote one apparent foreign volunteer, “the reality of basically being bodies in front of the advancing Russians.”

“I had been mortared before and thought that was pretty gnarly… but being absolutely defenseless and in the open with three aircraft just shitting all over you with such heavy ordinance was a whole new level of helplessness,” the Redditor said.

In a separate incident, Jason Haigh, a volunteer from the United Kingdom who served in two tours in Iraq, fled Ukraine after about one month, telling The Sun that “Iraq and Afghanistan was totally different. The Russians are a conventional modern army.”

Meanwhile, the Canadian veteran marketed by UK tabloid media as one of the “world’s deadliest snipers” was killed during his first day in the field.

Donations of death

Within less than a week since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the United States and NATO have rushed 17,000 anti-tank weapons into the country in the course. A whopping 70 percent of the $350 million in lethal aid approved by the Biden Administration on February 26 was delivered in just five days.

The Wall Street Journal has described the response as “one of the largest and fastest arms transfers in history,” and “a supply operation with few historical parallels.”

So who is receiving those weapons, and what will they do with them if the conflict continues indefinitely? That question is clearly not on the minds of NATO officials hungry for escalation.

In celebration of International Women’s Day on March 8, the verified Twitter account for NATO celebrated the “remarkable women of Ukraine” in a now-deleted tweet with a photo of a woman dressed head-to-toe in military gear with a patch of the Nazi “Black Sun” symbol displayed prominently on her uniform.

That same day, photographs appeared showing the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion receiving a shipment of Western instructors and NLAW grenade launchers from “NATO countries.” The National Corps, the political wing of the Azov Battalion, has also posted photos of NLAWs its members received, explaining that they were “mastering” them. “We will send Rusny to hell,” they declared.


Members of the ultra-nationalist Right Sector have also appeared in the field with UK-made NLAW launchers, as seen below.

UK  Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told the House of Commons on March 9 that “as of today, we have delivered 3,615 NLAWs [to Ukrainian forces] and continue to deliver more. We will shortly be starting the delivery of a small consignment of anti-tank Javelin missiles as well.”

The NATO country of Luxembourg has also delivered 100 NLAW systems to Ukraine’s military in recent weeks.

In late February, the European Union opened the floodgates of weapon shipments to Ukraine, approving financing through the aptly-named “European Peace Facility” to reimburse countries sending weapons to the country to the tune of $500 million USD. Another $55 million USD is earmarked for non-lethal military aid.

At least 32 countries, many of which belong to NATO and the European Union, are involved in flooding Ukraine with lethal and non-lethal military aid.

This February, the State Department announced $350 million in additional military aid to Ukraine, bringing “the total security assistance the United States has committed to Ukraine over the past year to more than $1 billion.”

Another $200 million was sent in early March, and following Zelensky’s March 16 appeal to Congress for more weapons, Biden is reportedly set to dole out another $800 in military aid including 800 Stinger anti-aircraft systems, 9,000 anti-tank systems, 5,000 rifles, 1,000 pistols, 400 machine guns, 400 shotguns, 400 grenade launchers, 20 million rounds of ammunition, 100 tactical drones, 25,000 sets of body armor and 25,000 helmets. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

These figures add to the $2.5 billion in military aid the US delivered between 2014 and the summer of 2021, bringing the total to $3.8 billion.

“On NATO territory, we should be the Pakistan”

Pressed by a reporter about whether the US was pushing Ukraine “to commit suicide” by arming it against a vastly more advanced military force whose ultimate victory is inevitable, White House press secretary Jen Psaki declined to push back on the argument that Kiev’s defeat is only a matter of time.

“We have provided military assistance, humanitarian assistance, to the Ukrainians, enabling them to fight back for far longer than the Russian leadership anticipated,” Psaki responded.

Taking the lead in the international campaign to arm Ukraine, the US and UK have reportedly set up a so-called “International Donors Coordination Center.” Shipments are being stockpiled in Poland, a NATO ally that shares a border with Ukraine.

Douglas Lute, a former US Ambassador to NATO and retired US Army Lieutenant General, alluded to the parallels between Operation Cyclone, which saw the CIA and Pakistani intelligence training the Afghan Mujahideen often inside Pakistani territory, stating “On NATO territory, we should be the Pakistan.”

Indeed, Poland has been repeatedly described as the “linchpin” of the West’s war efforts. One Polish airport 60 miles from the Ukrainian border was “so crowded with military cargo jets that… some flights were briefly diverted until airfield space became available.”

While much of the arm-and-equip effort has been conducted openly, the Wall Street Journal reported that “the operation to supply Ukraine in many countries has been shrouded in secrecy.” Some analysts suggest that “most countries” participating in the arming campaign “prefer not to share details.”

While the arms continue to flow unabated, a “senior Ukrainian military official” told the outlet that “there were now no major equipment shortages among his troops.” Despite this, Zelensky continues to claim that the aid is “insufficient.”

And while the prospect of an Afghan-style insurgency dims in Ukraine, with Russian forces seizing strategic cities and severing supply lines to their adversaries, the arms manufactures that fund think tanks and politicians from Washington to London are making the most of the opportunity.

“We’re going to have to backfill some of [the arms shipments to Ukraine] ourselves,” an arms industry lobbyist told The Hill on March 15, “so that will force the Pentagon to buy more from some of the defense companies.

NATO states pour weapons into Ukraine to ratchet up the violence

At least 32 countries have sent direct military aid to Ukraine this year, including:

Australia: On March 1, a joint statement between Australia’s Prime Minister and Minister of Defense stated the country would “provide around $50 million USD in lethal military assistance” to Ukraine including missiles and ammunition.

Austria has committed to sending more than $19 million USD in non-lethal aid to Ukraine including helmets, body armor and 100,000 liters of fuel.

Belgium is sending 3,000 machine guns and 200 anti-tank weapons as well as 3,800 tonnes of fuel.

Canada: A February 4 press release announcing a shipment of “body armor and load carriage kits, binoculars, laser rangefinders, metal detectors, and spotting scopes” from the Department of National Defense noted that “Canada has provided $23 million dollars in non-lethal military equipment to Ukraine” since 2015. On February 27, Canada more than doubled its historical total, announcing $25 million in non-lethal military gear to be sent to Ukraine. Defense Minister Anita Anand said they would also ship 100 Carl-Gustaf anti-tank weapons systems, 2,000 rockets, 4,500 M72 rocket launchers, 7,500 hand grenades, sniper rifles, carbines, pistols, and 1.5 million rounds of ammunition.

Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenković has committed more than $18 million USD in “infantry weapons and protective equipment.”

The Czech Republic vowed to send 4,000 artillery shells valued at around $1.6 million USD in January. The following month, the government announced an additional $8.1 million USD in lethal aid, including 30,150 pistols, 5,000 assault rifles, 2,085 submachine guns, 3,200 machine guns, 31 sniper rifles and millions of cartridges. One day after this announcement, the Czech Republic reportedly approved an additional shipment worth $18.2 million USD but declined to detail its contents due to “security concerns.” However, Czech media have reported that this package would include 10 anti-aircraft launchers with 160 missiles. The Wall Street Journal additionally reports that the Czech Republic has sent 10,000 rocket-propelled grenades.

Denmark is sending 2,000 armored vests to Ukraine. Initially opposed to sending weapons, Denmark has committed to donating 2,700 anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and sending 300 decommissioned FIM-92 Stinger to the US so that they can be made operational again and sent to Ukraine.

Estonia sent a batch of Javelin missile systems in mid-February and an additional package of “personal equipment, ammunition, additional javelin missiles and anti-aircraft munitions” later in the month.

Finland reversed its longstanding neutrality and gave the “green light to Estonia to send previously Finnish-owned field guns to Ukraine” and announced they would send 2,000 bulletproof vests and 2,000 helmets, Reuters reported. Additionally the country will provide 2,500 assault rifles, 150,000 bullets and 1,500 anti-tank weapons.

France has acknowledged that it is providing Ukraine with military assistance, France has refused to specify in what form so as to avoid “provoking” Russia, a departure from its NATO allies.

Germany: Reversing the country’s post-WWII policy of banning German-made weapons being sent to conflict zones, Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced he’d send 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 Stinger missiles to Ukraine. Berlin later approved the shipment of 2,700 shoulder-fired Strela missiles.

Greece has committed to sending two plane loads of weapons to Ukraine filled with rocket launchers, ammunition and Kalashnikovs.

Iceland: With no military, Iceland has sought to fill gaps in the international effort to arm Ukraine, providing cargo flights to send equipment from other countries in.

Ireland has agreed to provide body armor and fuel.

Italy initially sent $120 million USD to Ukraine and approved additional “non-lethal” aid like demining equipment. Later, the country sent $109 million USD to $164 million USD in the form of “mortars, Stinger launchers, Browning heavy machine guns, browning rounds, light machine guns, anti-tank launchers, anti-tank shots, K-rations, radios, helmets and vests.”

Japan has agreed to send “bulletproof vests and other defense supplies” likes military tents and helmets.

Latvia has sent Stinger anti-aircraft missile systems, 30 truckloads of helmets, medical supplies, dry food and ammunition, and 90 unmanned aircrafts.

Lithuania has also sent stingers and ammunition and said it will send “body armor vests, helmets,” and Kalashnikovs.

Luxembourg sent 100 NLAW anti-tank weapons, jeeps, and military tents.

The Netherlands sent 3,000 helmets, 2,000 pieces of body armor, 30 metal detectors, two mine surveillance radars and five weapon location radars, 100 sniper rifles and 30,000 rounds of sniper ammunition all worth $8.12 million USD. Later, the country sent $21.7 million USD of lethal supplies including 50 Stinger systems and 200 missiles, 40 Panzefraust anti-tank weapons and 400 missiles, 171 helmets, 85 vests and 1,250 armor plates.

North Macedonia has announced that they will send unspecified military equipment to Ukraine.

Norway has sent 1,500 bullet proof vests, 500 helmets and other non-lethal supplies. Like Germany, Norway later decided to reverse its ban on weapons exports to warzones, announcing the donation of 2,000 M72 anti-tank weapons. Defense Minister Odd Roger Enoksen said he cannot “guarantee that the weapons will not fall into the wrong hands.”

Poland has sent ammunition, javelin systems, unmanned surveillance drones,100 60mm LMP-2017 mortars with 1,500 rounds, Piorun portable anti-aircraft missile systems, unmanned reconnaissance systems, 30,000 pieces of ammunition for ZU-23-2 cannons, Javelins, 10,000 GROT automatic rifles, 42,000 helmets, and more.

Portugal has sent “vests, helmets, night vision goggles, grenades and ammunition of different gauges, complete portable radios, analog repeaters and automatic G3 rifles.”

Romani approved a shipment of $3.3 million USD worth of “fuel, ammunition, bullet-proof vests, helmets” and other “military equipment.”

Slovakia has sent $12.3 million worth of ammunition and fuel including, “12,000 rounds of 120-milimetre caliber ammunition, 10 million litres of diesel fuel and 2.4 million litres of aircraft fuel.” An additional shipment of nearly $5 million USD was approved and included “486 air-defense missiles and anti-tank rockets, 100 air-defense launchers, 120mm artillery ammunition and fuel.”

Slovenia has sent helmets, ammunition and Kalashnikov rifles on “several” planes.

South Korea will send unspecified “military equipment” and uniforms.”

Spain’s Defense Minister Margarita Robles said the country would send “1,370 anti-tank grenade launchers, 700,000 rifle and machine-gun rounds, and light machine guns.”

Sweden, a once-neutral country, approved “5,000 helmets, 5,000 body shields and 5,000 anti-tank weapons” and more to be sent to Ukraine, as well as $52.9 million in direct financial assistance to the Ukrainian army. The total contribution is valued at $148.4 million USD.

United Kingdom: In addition to the 3,615 NLAWs, the UK government authorized a loan worth $2.25 billion USD to the Ukrainian government for the acquisition of two minesweepers, eight missile boats and a frigate. Additional weapons are being sent but have not been detailed as they are “operationally sensitive.” The UK is also sending “body armour, helmets and combat boots.”

United States: On February 26, the State Department announced $350 million in additional military aid to Ukraine, bringing “the total security assistance the United States has committed to Ukraine over the past year to more than $1 billion.” The shipment reportedly included Javelins and Stingers. Days later, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken assured his Ukrainian counterpart of more weapon shipments down the line. Biden is reportedly set to advance another $800 million in military aid to Ukraine after Zelensky’s address to Congress. This package will include 800 Stinger anti-aircraft systems, 9,000 anti-tank systems, 5,000 rifles, 1,000 pistols, 400 machine guns, 400 shotguns, 400 grenade launchers, 20 million rounds of ammunition, 100 tactical drones, 25,000 sets of body armor and 25,000 helmets.

]]>
A History of NATO and Nazis, with Asa Winstanley https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/21/a-history-of-nato-and-nazis-with-asa-winstanley/ Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:00:36 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=797403 Asa Winstanley explores post-WW2 European history and reveals how Nazis were rehabilitated and dispatched as Cold Warriors.

By Lowkey

This week Lowkey is joined by Asa Winstanley, an investigative journalist living in London, who writes about Palestine and the Middle East. He hails from the south of Wales and has been visiting Palestine since 2004. He writes for the groundbreaking Palestinian news site The Electronic Intifada, where he is an associate editor, and also writes a weekly column for the Middle East Monitor.

Following the NATO Bucharest Summit in 2008, several conclusions were reached and published in a joint statement of those attending. One read: “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agree today that these countries will become members of NATO.”

At the time, the Russian government made absolutely clear that Ukraine becoming part of NATO was an existential threat to Russia’s security. In 2003, the Ukraine NATO Civic League was founded with the aim of gradually integrating the state into the military alliance. Across the decade-and-a-half since, the U.S. has pushed further and further, steering Ukraine to the point of no return.

Today, Russia has NATO missile systems pointed at it from Poland and Romania. If missiles were to be placed in Ukraine aimed at Russia, they would be only 500 km from Moscow. Asa Winstanley makes the point that, were someone to suggest an equivalent arrangement by Russia with Mexico against the United States, the U.S. would likewise respond with force. The economic side of this war has seen Russia cancel from the global economy and effectively separated from Europe. The closing of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is a major victory for U.S. liquid natural gas producers, who can now take over the market for gas in Europe overnight.

Since 2019, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has integrated Neo-Nazis into the Ukrainian state to serve as a bulwark against Russia. We now have the clear situation of NATO arming and training Nazi organizations. But this is not an aberration of history. NATO and the United States have embraced Nazis many times before. Lowkey and Winstanley delve into the sordid story of these strange bedfellows. “This is a big unspoken part of our history,” Winstanley said.

Winstanley explores the post-WW2 period of European history and reveals examples of Nazis being rehabilitated, subsumed into the U.S. machinery of empire, and dispatched as Cold Warriors. He points to an irony of history that the Soviet Union itself tried to join NATO at one point:

If you look at the history of NATO, the Russians, the USSR at the time, knew what this was about — it was about creating an anti-Russian military alliance at the beginning of the Cold War. The Russians said OK, it is a defensive alliance, we’ll join. They applied to join and of course, they were rejected.”

Winstanley also expands on his investigation into Israel’s controversial arming of Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Azov battalion with Taavor rifles. Another unspoken aspect of the present is the relationship between Ukrainian-Israeli oligarch Igor Kolomoisky and President Zelensky. Kolomoisky was his top funder in the 2019 election and also a key benefactor of the Azov battalion. Pointing out this uncomfortable truth has led to significant ramifications in the digital sphere. Winstanley, who is currently suspended from Twitter for pointing out the NATO alliance with Neo-Nazis, said, “We are reaching a really dangerous moment where this McCarthyism is being whipped up.”

mintpressnews.com

]]>
Meet Ukraine’s Azov Figurehead Olena Semenyaka, Europe’s Female Führer https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/20/meet-ukraine-azov-figurehead-olena-semenyaka-europe-female-fuhrer/ Sun, 20 Mar 2022 16:33:56 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=797367 If any positives are to emerge from this war, it is that all Europeans, must reject NATO and try to make plowshares instead of swords.

With Ukraine’s Clown President Zelensky hogging the headlines, Olena Semenyaka has been sidelined. That is a pity as Semenyaka far more typifies the issues at the heart of Ukraine than does Ukraine’s corrupted Mr Bean.

She has been described as the “first lady” of Ukrainian nationalism. Her pseudo-intellectualism and international networking with NeoFascist groups, as well as her guru-like command of the Azov movement in Ukraine, make her a formidable power behind the throne in the Kiev regime.

Though Zelensky’s Russophobic jokes (sic) raised laughs in Kiev’s more halcyon days, Semenyaka has never been a laughing matter. Born in 1987 and raised in the post-Soviet era, Semenyaka was a gifted philosophy student, who dabbled in all kinds of pan-Slavic supremacist ideas until the 2014 fascist Maidan coup landed her with her current role as High Priestess of Ukraine’s Nazis.

Semenyaka more than pulled her weight in the Azov movement’s attempts to put Ukraine at the helm of a European racist revival. Working as the Azovs’ international secretary and head of their publishing empire, Semenyaka forged links with kindred spirits overseas and the various intelligence agencies that run them. Additionally, Semenyaka was seminal in forging an intellectual base for Kiev’s 2017 so-called Pact of Steel, for white supremacists worldwide to rally behind Azovs’ Russophobic pogroms. And, to top it off, as Semenyaka is personable and presentable, she was also central in knitting today’s Nazis their velvet media glove that masks their base brutality.

Though gifted, she is not novel. Robert Jackson, in his opening remarks at the Nuremberg Trials, had Hitler’s accomplices, deluded crackpots like Semenyaka included, in mind as Hitler’s Reich sprung as much from seeds intellectuals like Semenyaka planted just as much as it did from the fighting prowess of the SS volunteers who served under Heydrich’s adjutant, Joachim Peiper. Just as the Wehrmacht would not have congealed into the seemingly unstoppable Juggernaut it became in 1941 without the assistance of countless Semenyakas, so also would the Azovs not have been the power behind Ukraine’s throne without crucial actors like Semenyaka, who steered Ukraine’s re-emerging nationalist ideology away from its Russian roots and into the pan-Slavic, Russophobic cul-de-sac that is now being pulverized by Russian airstrikes and Russian ground advances into Ukraine’s heartland.

Semenyaka must take her fair share of the blame for all that. Working with Azov warlord Andriy Biletsky, she glorified the Azovs’ eight-year-long ethnic cleansing campaigns in Eastern Ukraine and tied those criminal endeavors into her Intermarium and ReconquistaPan Europa fantasies, which envisaged a white supremacist empire stretching from Germany in the west to the Russian border in the east, and from Latvia in the north to Sicily in the south.

Like Hitler before her, Semenyaka did not lack ambition, and, like Hitler before her, Semenyaka, working through the Azovs, was determined to realize her ambitions, no matter how unrealistic and ultimately unattainable they were in practice.

Semenyaka’s vast secretariat put their hearts and souls into these projects. As well as publishing widely and facilitating the publication of other racist tracts, Semenyaka forged alliances with German neo-Nazis, the French New Right (Nouvelle Droite), Serbian Satanists, CasaPound Italia, the Estonia’s People’s Conservative Party (EKRE), and Blue Awakening (Sinine Äratus) movements, Latvia’s National Alliance movement, Polish young traditionalists, Alternative for Sweden, Finnish neo-pagans, Finnish identitarians Suomen Sisu, Portuguese identitarians Escudo Idetitario, sundry other European identitarians and American white supremacists, many of whom have been recently killed fighting for the Azovs in Ukraine.

Because her philosophical prowess enabled Semenyaka to weld Western Europe’s diverse far-right ideologues onto the Ukrainian nationalist narrative of Stepan Bandera and similar Nazi-collaborating Ukrainian pogromists, Semenyaka allowed Azov ideology to seep westwards into the European Union.

Philosophy, however, is a poor shield against Russian ordnance. Semenyaka’s dreams of a Baltic-Black-Adriatic Sea space, an Aryan Luciferism based on Black Metal, and fascist feminism is built, like the Ukrainian national anthem itself, on the false premise that Russophobia is a solid foundation stone. It is not. It is, as the Azovs are painfully discovering, quicksand.

Russophobia, like all such xenophobic manifestations, is only a prelude to war and to nothing else. True Ukrainian patriots must work for Ukraine by forging economic and social links with all her neighbors and not by instigating pointless pogroms that had to, at some point, reverberate on the perpetrators. This is not to whitewash, warp or discard interpreted histories but, to declare that a true Ukrainian patriot is one who makes two blades of grass grow where one grew previously.

Even without this war, Ukraine was in dire economic straits and because dreams of the Reconquista of the Intermarium, under the unlikely banners of Aryan Luciferism and Semenyaka’s dubious Black Metal musical icons, would not have been the ordinary Ukrainian’s preferred poison chalices. The project was doomed to ultimate failure. There can, in logic, be no new Holy Roman Empire without the socio-industrial means to promote its ideology and the military means to project it, Europe-wide. The Azovs have no hope of doing either of those from their vulnerable bases in Ukraine’s forests and besieged urban outposts. They are being played and not just by cut-price philosophers like Semenyaka and her Nietzschean and Wagnerian fantasies.

Although the Ukrainian war will end, as the Second World War did, with the defeat of Europe’s Nazi forces, the lasting peace all true Ukrainian and other patriots desire can only be found in a rejection of all esoteric beliefs that lead, in this world at least, not to an Aryan Valhalla, but only into the fathomless abyss that all those civilians who have been at the business end of NATO’s endless wars know too well.

If any positives are to emerge from this awful war, it is that all Europeans, both from within and without Semenyaka’s Intermarium, must reject NATO’s bombs and bullets, and try, in the words of the prophet Isaiah, to make plowshares instead of swords; and while they are at it, to trade Semenyaka’s philosophy books for Dostoevsky and Tolstoy and her Black Metal collection for Tchaikovsky. Though that is not as nihilistic as Semenyaka’s Nietzschean Crusade, it is infinitely more rewarding and productive. And it might, just might, make Europe worth living in.

]]>
‘We Trained Nazis’ – Former U.S. Marine Corp Intelligence Officer, Scott Ritter https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/18/we-trained-nazis-former-us-marine-corp-intelligence-officer-scott-ritter/ Fri, 18 Mar 2022 20:01:53 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=795060 “We Trained Nazis” – Former US Marine Corp Intelligence Officer, Scott Ritter. “The first troops to be trained by US and British soldiers were the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion”

]]>
Wagging the Ukrainian and Irish Dogs https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/18/wagging-the-ukrainian-and-irish-dogs/ Fri, 18 Mar 2022 19:52:45 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=795058 How are we, who are denied credible, alternative news sources, supposed to divine between right and wrong, between truth and propaganda.

Londoner Robert Stuart has spent quite a few years documenting his Fabrication in BBC Panorama’s Saving Syria’s Children blog which details the alleged collusion of the BBC and rogue British Army elements in a false flag chemical attack in Syria perpetrated, he alleges, to get Britain to join the USA in bombing Damascus back to the Stone Age.

Though Stuart’s site is well worth exploring, it is important here because Stuart’s critics, the BBC included, have not been able to find even the smallest chink in his work. Until Stuart’s work is discredited, the man on the Clapham omnibus would have to conclude that the BBC, the British security services, the Muslim Brotherhood and their casts of crisis actors colluded to propel Britain into war against Syria and were, therefore, by definition, guilty of crimes against the peace, the very crimes Hitler’s top brass swung for at Nuremberg.

The issue of crisis actors not only in Syria but in Ukraine as well is worth more than a cursory glance. This is because, to take but one topical outrage, Russia alleged Ukraine’s Nazi battalions deployed crisis actors to pretend that casualties from Russia’s attack on Mariupol’s maternity hospital which, Russia alleges, the Nazis converted into a critical forward post, included many pregnant women and new-born babies.

Although the use of crisis actors on Ukraine’s front lines sounds implausible, Stuart’s work strongly suggests that such actors exist. And this site, one of very many, shows where and by whom they are hired and the various professional groups they can network through. Given CrisisCast’s strong military links, given Britain’s long track record in deceptive military techniques, given Britain’s military secrecy and given the expertise of Britain’s Brigade 77 and Israel’s Hasbara in such dark arts, one must, despite “conspiracy theory” (sic) scepticism, expect such wag the dog events as well as budgets to finance them on a scale we cannot begin to imagine.

If the Russians are wrong and crisis actors and meme producers are not employed, the Clapham bus commuter would consider Ukrainian outrages as horrific as Iraqi soldiers ripping babies out from incubators or, indeed, the Kaiser’s troops bayoneting Belgian babies to death in August 1914. But, how are we, who are denied credible, alternative news sources, supposed to divine between right and wrong, between truth and propaganda.

Well, one such way is to first use the 10-step cheat sheet of Belgian historian, Anne Morelli, which perfectly distils the essential propaganda techniques of Falsehood in War-time, Containing an Assortment of Lies Circulated Throughout the Nations During the Great War, Arthur Ponsonby’s timeless 1928 classic. Those steps are as follows:

  1. We do not want war. NATO does not want war, even though NATO’s arms manufacturers benefit immensely from war and even though NATO’s main states have been almost continuously at war for hundreds of years.
  2. The opposite party alone is guilty of war. Russia is now in the naughty corner for doing to Ukraine a fraction of what NATO’s various Coalitions of the Willing have “reluctantly” done to Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Libya, criminal wars we are now supposed to forget about, bar whatever Hollywood throws up on them.
  3. The enemy is inherently evil and resembles the devil. The Daily Mail and its Irish imitations have the same low opinion of Russia’s president as they did of the leaders of those other countries, who have recently been in NATO’s crosshairs. Beelzebub personified.
  4. We defend a noble cause, not our own interests. The millions who were murdered from NATO’s ordnance might disagree, as might Julian Assange, who is being extradited from one NATO country to another because he dared expose that mantra.
  5. The enemy commits atrocities on purpose; our mishaps are involuntary. Not according to the evidence Wikileaks and others produced (but see point 10 below).
  6. The enemy uses forbidden weapons. There is overwhelming evidence depleted uranium was used in Serbia, Iraq and Syria and let’s just skip those bio-warfare labs Russia captured on its Ukrainian border.
  7. We suffer small losses, those of the enemy are enormous. And so it is with Ukraine where Russia has overwhelming military superiority but, by all our media accounts, are being slaughtered in Somme-like numbers to further the James Bond-villain aims of their leader. (see three above).
  8. Recognised artists and intellectuals back our cause. Hurrah for Hollywood and Ireland’s virtue signallers. In the meantime, Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky are banned, presumably because they were neither artists nor intellectuals.
  9. Our cause is sacred. Going abroad to slaughter innocents is as blasphemous now as it was when Britain’s Irish regiments slaughtered Boers by the tens of thousands in the 2nd Boer war, whose sacred cause was about looting South African gold and nothing else.
  10. All who doubt our propaganda are traitors. Herman Goering put it best at Nuremberg. “Why, of course, the people don’t want war,” he said. “Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

It is certainly how it works in Ireland where war fever is at least as high as it was in the summer of 1914. Our political elite, their chums in charge of our defence forces, and the various foreign cartels they are beholden to, are the only “humans”, who will benefit from our increasing entanglement into NATO’s orbit. Their obsession with serving both King and Kaiser at the expense of Ireland not only spits in the face of generations of long-dead Irish patriots but does today’s Irish generation no favours at all, as it condemns almost all of them to little more than the role of hewers of wood and drawers of water Cromwell assigned for our ancestors.

There is, in economics, a basic trade-off between producing guns and producing butter which says that, with the limited resources Ireland has after our leaders skim off the top, you can produce either Kerrygold butter or you can buy NATO pop guns but you cannot do both in any appreciable numbers because you do not have the wherewithal to do so.

Our political elite are determined to take the pop gun option at the expense of the Kerrygold route as that will maximise their bribes. We have a mirror choice. We can rid ourselves of our entire political elite or we can expect our living standards to plummet. Though it is a simple choice, it is a necessarily hard one because nothing good comes easy.

]]>