Eric Zuesse

In a U.N. vote, on November 21st, only three countries — the United States, Ukraine, and Canada — voted against a resolution to condemn racist fascism, or “nazism,” and to condemn denial of Germany’s World War II Holocaust against primarily Jews.

This measure passed the General Assembly, on a vote of 115 in favor, 3 against, and 55 abstentions (the abstentions were in order not to offend U.S. President Obama, who was opposed to the resolution).

The measure had been presented to their General Assembly after a period of more than a decade of rising “neo-Nazi” (i.e., racist-fascist) movements in Europe, including especially in Ukraine, where two Ukrainian nazi parties were installed by the U.S. into high posts in Ukraine’s new government, immediately after the democratically elected Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovych was overthrown in a violent coup in Kiev during February of this year. The entire Ukrainian ‘defense’ establishment was then immediately taken over by the leaders of these two nazi parties, which rabidly hate ethnic Russians, and Ukraine is now led by the first — and so far, the only — nazi government to take charge of any country after the end of WW II. Within less than a mere three months after the coup, this new Government began an ethnic-cleansing program in Ukraine’s own ethnic-Russian southeast, where around 90% of the residents had voted for the man who had been overthrown in the coup — this was a campaign to isolate and exterminate those people, so that those voters could never again participate in a Ukrainian national election. Unless those voters would be eliminated, these nazis would be elected out of power — removed from office.

Ukraine voted no on this resolution because this new Ukrainian Government is the only nazi regime in the world, and they are doing the standard nazi things, and so what they are doing is in violation of numerous international laws, which are not being enforced, but which are re-asserted and re-affirmed in this resolution, though Ukraine and the Ukrainian situation aren’t at all mentioned in the resolution. The United States voted no on it, because the U.S. Government had placed them into power. And Canada voted no on it because their far-right Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has been a virtually unquestioning supporter of all U.S. foreign-policy positions, and wants U.S. President Barack Obama to approve construction of the Keystone XL pipeline to assist the Koch brothers and other large oil giants to profitably transport and sell to Europe and around the world, tar-sands oil from Canada’s landlocked Athabasca region.

Germany abstained from voting on this resolution because their leader, Chancellor Angela Merkel, does not want to offend the U.S. President by voting for a resolution that the U.S. Government strongly opposes; and also because, as today’s leader of the land where nazism started — in the first nazi political party, the Nazi Party of Germany — she does not want Germany to vote against a resolution that condemns Nazism. If Germany were to have voted against this anti-nazi resolution, she would have faced a political firestorm at home. So, Germany abstained, in order not to offend Obama on the one side, and her public on the other.

Key to understanding the vote on this resolution is knowing the relevant historical background, which has largely to do with the world’s only nazi-led Government: today’s Ukraine. Consequently, the remainder of this article will explore that issue in depth, so that this otherwise-incomprehensible U.N. vote will become comprehensible.

According to the U.N.’s press-report on the votes occurring on November 21st, “Speaking before the vote [on this resolution], the representative of Ukraine said Stalinism had killed many people in the Gulag, condemning Hitler and Stalin alike as international criminals. Calling on the Russian Federation to stop glorifying and feeding Stalinism, he said he could not support the draft text.” Ukraine refused to condemn nazism, because the resolution did not call for a condemnation also of Stalin, and of Russia. “Any intolerance should be dealt with in an appropriate and balanced manner, he added.”

Samantha Power, the U.S. Representative at the U.N., gave as her reason for voting against the resolution, its unacceptability to the Government of Ukraine. “Her delegation was concerned about the overt political motives that had driven the main sponsor of the current resolution. That Government had employed those phrases in the current crisis in Ukraine. That was offensive and disrespectful to those who had suffered at the hands of Nazi regimes. Therefore, the United States would vote against the resolution.” In other words: the U.S. opposed this resolution, supposedly, because it was offensive to Ukraine, even though the very term “Ukraine,” and all other conceivable references to Ukraine, were and are entirely absent from it. (Here is the entire resolution.) The world’s only nazi Government, Ukraine, thus had an opportunity to condemn nazism, and chose not to not vote on it, but to vote against it. And their sponsor, the United States, joined them in that. But which was the master here, and which was the slave? Was the U.S. simply doing the will of the Ukrainian Government? Or was the Ukrainian Government doing the will of the U.S. Government — the Government that had installed it? Consider this:

THE IMMEDIATE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:

My prior article, “Meet Ukraine’s Master Mass-Murderer,” documented how U.S. President Barack Obama — through his State Department and CIA and the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, and with funding by U.S. and Ukrainian oligarchs — exploited the “Maidan” movement in Ukraine, to replace the corrupt but democratically elected pro-Russian Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, by a rabidly anti-Russian, racist-fascist and thoroughly corrupt regime, whose most powerful person is Dmitriy Yarosh, who had founded and still leads one of Ukraine’s two racist-fascist, or “nazi,” armed political parties, Right Sector, and who commands a dedicated personal army of 7,000 highly trained “paramilitaries,” who not only terrorize and freely murder dissenting Ukrainians, but who even publicly, and with equal impunity, threaten the nation’s figurehead President, Petro Poroshenko, to keep him in line.

The present article will mainly describe Yarosh’s chief competitor for power, the thuggish Ukrainian-Israeli-Swiss multibillionaire, Ihor Kolomoysky, who likewise commands a private Ukrainian army of around 7,000 mercenaries, and likewise issues public threats to overthrow Poroshenko, if Poroshenko fails to do his bidding. But first, here’s the story about

THE FIGUREHEAD LEADER — POROSHENKO:

It’s important to note that the figurehead, Poroshenko himself, is a corrupt billionaire oligarch, who, like Kolomoysky and Yarosh, has long been working with the CIA and U.S. Ambassadors and Presidents, in order to wrench Ukraine away from its historical alliance with Ukraine’s main bordering nation, Russia. So, Ukraine’s figurehead is the man whom U.S. President Obama and Republicans in Congress, and conservative congressional Democrats such as Senator Robert Melendez of New Jersey, parade before the U.S. media and their essentially captive American audience, as the face of ‘Ukrainian democracy,’ which is threatened by the ‘imperialistic designs’ of Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin.

Putin, of course, doesn’t like America’s and the EU’s surrounding his nation by new NATO nations (such as, perhaps, now Ukraine) which invite in U.S. military bases, and become next-door launching-pads for U.S. nuclear missiles aimed against Russia. Putin is vilified in “the West,” as Washington wants. The media pass along what the U.S. Government says. The American public doesn’t care whether Russia is surrounded by hostile nuclear missiles, and whether ethnic Russians in Ukraine, right next door to Russia, are being exterminated and driven out to become refugees in Russia. Putin isn’t being feted in Washington, as Poroshenko is. Instead, the United States is on Poroshenko’s side, against Putin’s side. In fact, U.S. President Obama, all congressional Republicans, and all conservative Democrats, praise Poroshenko, and condemn Putin, as if Putin were surrounding the U.S. with his military bases, instead of us surrounding his country with ours.

But, actually, Poroshenko is on America’s side: America isn’t on his side. Poroshenko has for a decade been a bought U.S. agent, after having first achieved his wealth by serving Ukraine’s Russian-appointed communist leaders, and then getting sweet inside deals on Harvard-designed privatizations of what had formerly been Ukrainian state-owned properties, such as a shipyard, a chocolate factory, and a TV station. But now, he’s ‘on America’s side.’

For America’s oligarchs, the Cold War never ended; it wasn’t really about communism versus capitalism; it was instead about which nation’s oligarchy would be supreme over all other nations’ oligarchies. And, when the communist (Russia-allied) team went down, Poroshenko knew to take his favors from them before, in 2004, selling himself out to the opposite (America-allied) team. And that’s what he did.

As regards what type of man Poroshenko himself actually is, consider carefully the phone-conversation between the top EU foreign-affairs official Catherine Ashton and her investigator in Kiev Urmas Paet, on 25 February 2014, right after the coup. See the call’s transcript in the middle of this, in italics, at the point where I’ve marked in brackets, “[So, Poroshenko himself knows that his regime is based on a false-flag U.S.-controlled coup d’etat against his predecessor.]”. In other words: by no later than 25 February 2014, Poroshenko already knew that this was a U.S.-backed coup and not an action on the part of the Yanukovych Government. From at least that moment forward, he was participating in, and keeping quiet about, treason to his country. He is a traitor to his nation. That’s the type of man he is. (EU officials likewise knew about it, after this phone-conversation. But they’re all quiet about it. Apparently, they, too, are on the take.)

UKRAINE’S MOST POWERFUL OLIGARCH — KOLOMOYSKY:

Britain’s Independent reported on 11 September 2013 (which was before the coup and so our ‘news’ media were reporting such things then), “Mr Kolomoisky had the reputation of being a ‘corporate raider’, someone who attacked companies by destabilising management, driving down the share price and grabbing control ‘without paying what the other shareholders would regard as a proper premium for their shares’. Mr Kolomoisky had, the judge noted, a reputation of having sought to take control of a company ‘at gunpoint’ in Ukraine. Even his main witness in the trial admitted that was his boss's image.”

Then, on 15 January 2014, barely a month before the coup, The Hill reported about Kolomoysky and his sidekick Bogolyubov and about Kolomoysky’s huge bank, Privat, that, “In the takeover of the Kremenchuk steel factory in 2006, Privat’s raid was literal, with Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov hiring an army of thugs to descend upon the plant with baseball bats, gas and rubber[-bullet] pistols, iron bars and chainsaws. Needless to say, Kremenchuk’s steel production was soon under Privat’s control.”

Then, after the February coup, the great American independent journalist George Eliason, who happens to live in Ukraine’s conflict-zone, reported on 23 June 2014, that, “When the Kolomoisky mercenaries go into the shops it's like a siege. They come twenty at a time circling the shop with their weapons pointing at anyone walking by. They do not receive government supplies so they clean out the stores, leaving little for residents.”

Then, Eliason added: “In reaction to the peace plan, Kolimoisky (banker, Jewish leader, oligarch statesman of Ukraine) stated that he will not be governed by Poroshenko. He would continue military operations until all the Moskal [ethnic Russians] are killed. Take him seriously: this is a guy that rips down holocaust memorials (Crimea—before Maidan) and built luxury housing where the crematorium stood. He organized and paid for the Odessa Trade Union House massacre and the Mariupol massacre. He has challenged the legitimacy of Kiev and declared himself a separatist. Should we tell president Obama?” (Obama says that the people who are being killed by his new Ukrainian Government deserve to die because they’re separatists.)

In other words: Kolomoysky respects no law but his own.

Right after the coup, Kolomoysky was appointed by Obama’s team as the Governor of the Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, or region, on 2 March 2014.

AFP reported on October 31st, “Kolomoisky, one of Ukraine's most controversial billionaires, funds the paramilitary, which returns the favour in these troubled times by boosting the banking and industrial tycoon's personal security and political clout. All the signs are of a flourishing military enterprise.” Kolomoysky’s henchman Yuriy Bereza was asked how many men are in the battalion, and he answered, "Unofficially, it's 7,000.” Bereza was threatening to overthrow the Poroshenko Government if they didn’t kill or drive out enough ethnic Russians fast enough, and was asked how much time Kolomoysky was intending to give Poroshenko. "We're going to give them half a year.” And then, if Kolomoysky still isn’t satisfied? “‘A coup,’ he said.”

I have previously written about Kolomoysky’s links to the Obama White House. Kolomoyskyi has hired Joe Biden’s son, and another young man who is connected to John Kerry. Both could become billionaires if the U.S. team kills and drives out enough people in the targeted regions, because Ihor Kolomoysky’s company that hired them has claims to the fracking rights in much of the area the Government is bombing. To Obama’s team, the residents there are trash, but the land is golden.

RESISTANCE TO OBAMA’S UKRAINIAN OPERATION:

Some members of the U.S. Congress are opposed to the U.S. supporting nazism in Ukraine. All are Democrats. One, Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, introduced a bill against it, and the journalist Max Blumenthal posted its text at Alternnet,on November 18th. Headlining there, “How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis,” Blumenthal presented the “Failed Amendment barring US assistance to Ukrainian neo-Nazis.” What killed it was the rabid anti-Russian sentiment at the Anti-Defamation League, plus congressional Republicans, and the few conservative congressional Democrats.

As that incident shows, anti-nazi sentiments can pass toothless measures at the United Nations, but not meaningful measures in the U.S. Congress, where Obama’s campaign to vilify Russia resonates strongly, especially amongst the U.S. Establishment.

Even after communism in Russia ended, America’s oligarchs (including even Democratic ones, such as George Soros, and Pierre Omidyar) still loathe Russians, and aren’t at all shy about using foreign nazis in order to do the dirty-work of mass-murdering them, where and when they can.

-###-