Voices from Russia

Saturday, 11 November 2017

Aleksei Zhuravko: “Soon, Everybody Will Turn Away From the Ukraine, Including its American Masters”


Dear Friends!

The herd [on the Maidan] shouted:

The whole world’s with us! The Ukraine is part of Europe!

Yet, today, we see Poles burning the Ukrainian flag. More and more, we see beatings of Ukrainians in Poland. Poles hold street rallies demanding that their government stop the flow of Ukrainian migrants. The “European” government of the Ukraine, which took power via a coup d ‘état, brought the country to a complete collapse through its domestic and foreign policy. Soon, everybody will turn away from the Ukraine, including its American masters.

In respect,

Aleksei Zhuravko

11 November 2017

Igor Krupikov



Saturday, 31 December 2016

Racked by Protests Over Skyrocketing Utilities Prices, Kiev Blames Putin and Trump


The banners read, “For Life!” (an old Soviet slogan)



This is a month old, but it still has tread and cred. Things have only gotten worse for ordinary people in the notional “Ukraine” (the CIA and the Western media don’t give a rat’s ass for the shitty deal given ordinary folks by their cosseted clients… what does that tell you about them?). What’ll happen after the Uniate junta loses its sugar-daddies in the Obama administration? Time will tell us, won’t it?



Kiev suffered a series of mass protests this week, with demonstrators marching against skyrocketing utility prices, rising costs for necessities, cuts to social benefits, and a string of bank bankruptcies. Ukrainian officials blamed everyone but themselves for the protests, including the Kremlin and even US President-elect Donald Trump. The series of protests, beginning earlier this week and planned to continue into the next, saw over 6,000 people take to the streets of central Kiev on Tuesday in several separate demonstrations. Police responded by blocking off the downtown area and moving 5,000 police and National Guard thugs into the area to control the situation. Protesters gathered in several areas in the city-centre, including in front of the Verkhovnaya Rada building. Organisers installed a mock “toilet” as a caricature of the Ukrainian Constitution there, symbolising how the Ukrainian authorities had “flushed down” the people. At least ten associations and parties came out in support of the latest protests, which organisers said could grow to up to 50,000 people in the coming week.

On Monday, protesters marched in front of several banks that recently filed for bankruptcy. Depositors accused the president and government officials for what they claimed were artificially inspired bankruptcies. Moving on to the Central Bank building, protesters called on Bank head Valeriya Gontareva to resign. Protesters, some organized by political parties including ex-Ukrainian Prime Minister Yu V Timoshenko‘s all-Ukrainian Fatherland Union and a new opposition party called For Life, also came out to mark their dissatisfaction with Ukrainian President P A Poroshenko and his team’s social policy. They shouted slogans including:

Presidential gang… get out! Impeachment for offshoreniks and liars!

Organisers slammed authorities for the IMF-mandated increases in electricity, gas, and water prices, as well as what they called a “Chernobyl of cuts” in social benefits. Next Monday, ultranationalists plan to join the fray with their own protests on the Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square). The groups vowed to “remind” Poroshenko and the government that they’re in power thanks to the nationalist gangs’ efforts three years ago, and that the country’s current leaders are proving themselves to be little better than the old ones. This week’s mass demonstrations come amid the third anniversary of the beginning of the so-called Euromaidan protests, which culminated in the ouster of democratically elected President V F Yanukovich in February 2014, helping to spark a crisis in relations between Russia and the West.

Earlier this week, preparing for the protests, Ukrainian Interior Minister Arseny Avakov urged security forces:

Take tough measures against protesters. Act quickly, decisively, and professionally; you should detain and isolate provocateurs and rioters. The courts will determine the details of their involvement, guilt, and punishment.

Observers familiar with the situation warned that they couldn’t rule out the authorities introducing martial law in the Ukrainian capital in the event that the situation gets out of control.

When Things Go Wrong, Blame Moscow 

As is too common, Ukrainian politicians and media reacted to the protests by blaming Moscow. For his part, presidential advisor Yu S Biryukov spoke on the demonstrators:

Anyone who wants to yell about “criminal authorities”’ or “unbearable [utilities] prices” is truly either consciously or unconsciously a helper, friend, comrade, and brother to Putin. Anyone who at this time organises or participates in these protests, legal and guaranteed by the constitution, is rocking the army, rocking the country, putting the country in jeopardy. This isn’t 2013. It isn’t 2004. This is the third year of war (referring to the conflict in the former eastern Ukraine, which Kiev blames on Russia).

Some Ukrainian journalists and “political experts” went even further, claiming that President Putin himself is personally to blame for the protests. In an article for online news site online.ua, one analyst suggested that the Kremlin is consciously trying to present Ukraine in a negative light to US President-elect Donald Trump. The images of never-ending protests in Kiev help Putin do so, the article claimed. The article didn’t detail exactly how Moscow might try to influence Ukrainians to come out to the streets. Nor did it consider that perhaps Kiev’s failed social and economic policy, the unending war in the Donbass, IMF-mandated cuts in social services, and hikes in utilities prices might be the real cause for Ukrainians’ growing frustration with authorities. Instead, online.ua suggested:

The victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential election reassured Putin’s the administration, which expects a change of tone in negotiations with Washington, including toward the Ukraine. The Kremlin has an interest in showing our country in a maximally unfavourable light, to restore old fears Americans have, and to strengthen them with terrible images from the streets of Kiev, a task that’d allow Moscow to stake out its influence over the Ukraine.

Already, Ukrainian politicians warned that the new protests could culminate in a “Maidan 3.0”, i.e. another revolutionary overthrow of the government. However, in light of the catastrophic political and socio-economic situation Kiev’s current “revolutionary” authorities “governed” themselves into, one thing is clear… as in 2004 and 2014, if the country does face another coup, Moscow won’t be the one to blame.

18 November 2016

Sputnik International




Uniate/schismo “National Guard” nationalist thugs… friends in the Ukraine tell me that many (if not most) of their leading officers are American/Canadian Galician expats (both Uniate and schismo “Orthodox” fascist nationalists). The Berkutovtsy acted professionally… these are nothing but CIA-led and –paid thugs.



V F Yanukovich’s government won election in a proper election, the Ukraine had recognition throughout the world as a legitimate sovereign state, and the Party of Regions (and the KPU) was the choice of the voters in the regions outside of Malorossiya (the area under the ACTUAL control of the Ukrainian Peoples Republic of 1918… the Donbass and Krivoi Rog were a separate Peoples Republic) and Galicia (the former Polish/Habsburg territory). The Maidan rioters were rebels… they were trying to overturn an election result that they didn’t like (sound like Obama and Clinton in the USA? Don’t forget… Obama and Clinton are the two biggest sugar-daddies of the Uniate/schismo junta). That is, like Trump, Yanukovich won the election… but the Uniate and schismo nationalists wanted to overturn it. They found foreign backers in the USA. American policy in the region is often set by a set of Galician émigré nationalists who’ve insinuated themselves as advisors to the American Establishment and intel apparat (often, with backing from this-or-that Vatican faction), just as policy to Israel often comes from the “Israel Lobby” (do note that not all Jews are part of this pressure group… far from it). The Maidan started as a peaceful rally against corruption (which was less under Yanukovich than under the present junta)… the CIA exploited it. Langley didn’t start it, but it did use it. Yanukovich used far less force than the junta does, but he ran a semi-socialist state, so the Americans wanted it gone. Russia couldn’t do much about it… VVP didn’t want to have a “1914 in Sarajevo”… which is what some of the Americans DID want (tells you much about the Anglos and their (lack of) character, doesn’t it?). The Americans installed a lickspittle ramshackle junta… the rest is history. Shall it last the end of the Obama Administration that backed, armed, trained, and funded it? That depends on Donald Trump…

By the way… there was one difference between Donald Trump and V F Yanukovich. Both won their elections, but Viktor Fyodorovich won by garnering the majority of the popular vote in an election that had  a larger turnout than the late American election. If the winner of a relatively open election is illegitimate in the eyes of the American government and intel apparat, what does that tell you about that government and apparat (and the people who populate, guide, and control it)? Shall it change? Sadly, most of my friends in that part of the world think not… “Israel and Saudi Arabia will tell Trump what to do, and he’ll roll over and play dead”, as one friend put it. Shall that happen? Time WILL tell us…


Thursday, 28 July 2016

Conspiracy Against Poroshenko: Kiev Waiting for Coup

00 Quo vadis. ukraina. kiev. 21.03.15


In Kiev, there are quite open preparations for the overthrow of President P A Poroshenko. The sluggish political campaign for the early elections due for the Verkhovnaya Rada in six months intensified, shown by demonstrations by the Nazis of the Azov Battalion and a sharp decline in working-class living standards. Another trigger for this was the shocking car-bomb terakt that killed journalist P G Sheremet. Media reports said that he was under “illegal police surveillance”. It looked like an exact replay of the “Gongadze affair“… a match down to the smallest detail (from the involvement of Sheremet’s paramour Prytula to the police surveillance).

The trigger for the coup may be riots prepared by Nazi elements, probably, through an attack on the UPTs/MP peace march. The two streams of this religious procession are converging on Kiev from both sides… one cohort coming from Svyatogorsk Lavra of the Holy Assumption in the east and another from Pochaev Lavra of the Holy Assumption in the west… in a week, they’re due to meet in the Ukrainian capital. Opponents of the Kiev authorities believe that this religious procession could bring a half-million people onto the streets of Kiev. Even if these estimates exaggerate, it’s clear that tens or even hundreds of thousands of Orthodox anti-fascists, agitating against the war, constitute a legal political alternative to the régime, something that the junta tried to suppress by banning the KPU, by silencing opposition media, and by taking repressive measures against anti-fascist activists.

Poroshenko may still try to play the Orthodox card in his favour by supporting the peace initiatives, hiding behind religious procession from radical elements, to try to deploy society against the radicals. However, at present, the radicals themselves can’t prevent the emergence in the formal political arena of organised alternatives to them. Attempts to protect the religious procession via the normal power structures might lead to a split in the security forces themselves, many of whom support the Nazis… after two years of purges; they’re in the majority. In addition, any confrontation of the Nazis with the power structure (the use of weapons would be all too probable) would undermine the régime’s support. No matter who’d “win” such a confrontation, both sides would actually lose. Finally, in terms of propaganda, the radicals would use any attempt by Poroshenko to protect “the Moscow padres” from “patriots” as clear evidence of “treason”. Then, they could easily channel the anger of anti-Orthodox Nazi yobbos towards Poroshenko.

Why No One Overthrew Poroshenko Until Now

The “behind closed doors” reasons for Poroshenko’s ouster are of long-standing. On the first day of his presidency, most Ukrainian politicians and oligarchs lined up against him, as this would drive redistributing the national (and private) resources in their favour. In the first year of his presidency, Poroshenko avoided a coup solely because of the chaotic nature of Ukrainian politics. Kiev pols really believed that the USA and EU would rush right in to help them financially, so, they tried not to anger their putative sugar daddies. Therefore, they showed naïve timidity before American and European demands. Ergo, “don’t upset Poroshenko” became the only guarantor of stability. In this regard, the West was right… if Yanukovich was the last legitimate Ukrainian President, then, Poroshenko was its last illegitimate president. I know that many won’t agree with my assessment of his illegitimacy, pointing to the fact that Poroshenko had international recognition. However, this actually means nothing at all. The Bolsheviks, Franco, Pinochet, and many other régimes that came to power in Asia, Africa, and Latin America because of pro-American or pro-Soviet coups had international recognition. This doesn’t negate the fact that as they took power they violated internal constitutional procedures; from the point of view of national constitutionality, such régimes were illegitimate.

They couldn’t give Poroshenko legitimacy. Two years after his “election”, his approval rating fluctuates between 2 to 5 percent. Nevertheless, the Ukraine’s inability to provide a stable and independent basis for a state disappointed the West, and Russia began to realise that nothing in the Ukraine corresponded to actual reality, so, Poroshenko became the lesser evil. The next Ukrainian President simply won’t be able to get international legitimacy by claiming that he toppled a “bloody tyrant” and that a “national hero” replaced him. Poroshenko’s collapse would mean that the Ukraine’s dissolution would move from a latent phase, where regional power centres ignore Kiev, to an active phase.

A Spectacle of Regional Sovereignties

For a long time, Kiev hasn’t been able to give local authorities anything, so, regional centres are trying to pick up what remains. Local authorities have their own militias, formed from Nazi hooligans, embodied in territorial defence battalions. The collapse of the national economy led to an alternative market arising. Under these conditions, with homegrown networks in each region, each locality is much more stable than the Ukraine as a whole is. Poroshenko is still a symbol of international recognition (so regional power centres choose not to risk to opt out of the “nation” just yet), as well as being the last factor ensuring relative unity in the army and other security agencies. However, if he goes, then, decomposition would accelerate sharply, not least because regional power centres would have to solve many problems immediately without regard to Kiev. Both Russia and the West understand this, but neither Moscow nor Brussels have sufficient influence to shape the situation in the Ukraine. Ukrainian politicians have lost faith in the absolute power of the West, so, they’ve flip-flopped to the other extreme… they think that anyone who’d win any internal struggle for power in the Ukraine would automatically become the West’s darling.

How the Mechanism of the Coup would Operate

Thus, one sees that the people hate Poroshenko (over falling living standards), the Nazis hate him (for being an oligarch and of Jewish descent), and his fellow-oligarchs hate him (because he controls the remnants of material resources). However, since a coup against Poroshenko didn’t occur in the last two years, I think that the most probable time for such a move would be the first half of October. At this time, the American election campaign would be in its final phases, virtually paralysing the US federal governmental apparat until February 2017. The rebels would have about four undisturbed months to divvy up the spoils and patronage without interference from unwanted external “mediators”. Indeed, developing events in Kiev show that interested parties have initiated the mechanism of a coup; only a rare stroke of luck or his opponents’ stupidity could help Poroshenko survive.

In addition to the abovementioned facts, I’d point up the panic amongst political circles and “expert” elements in Kiev. Recently, important and influential Ukrainian politicians and experts who’d predicted the collapse of Russia and its dissolution, now scream with one voice about the dangers of Ukrainian destabilisation. Moreover, many speak openly about an impending coup. Even the usually sycophantic political analyst Vadim Karasev suddenly lost it, advising Poroshenko to urgently follow the example of Erdoğan and write a penitential letter to Putin… only surrender to Russia could save Poroshenko from a coup. I doubt that even if it wanted to that Russia would be able to do this, but the very fact that hysteria leads some to bet on Putin as the last hope of “Ukrainian democracy” is telling. This tells us that a beleaguered Poroshenko understands that Russia would find his overthrow currently unprofitable… the Kremlin won’t support any possible putschists. As we’ve just said, it isn’t profitable for the West either. So, what are the putschists betting on? Surely, they must realise that they can’t survive in complete isolation. The Ukraine isn’t North Korea.

Who’d Support the Rebels

Today, there’s an implacable struggle in American politics between dovish isolationists, represented by Trump and his faction, and hawkish interventionists, who bet on Clinton. The isolationists want a stable situation in the Ukraine prior to the American election. The interventionists wouldn’t mind using chaos in the Ukraine as propaganda (to criticise Obama’s lack of firmness and Trump’s “opportunism”). In addition, they want to aggravate any Ukrainian crisis to entangle the USA into a serious confrontation with Russia, so that any ensuing administration wouldn’t be able to change the course of American foreign policy. In fact, the interventionists wouldn’t mind to start a “little war” involving American allies and Russia, which would force any future administration to support such “allies”, until there was a risk of an all-out war with Russia. The hawks truly believe that Moscow would kowtow to them under the risk of nuclear blackmail at the last moment.

The isolationists control official decision-making institutions. Therefore, officially, the USA is trying to establish a constructive dialogue with Russia (Kerry’s visit to Moscow). The interventionists have many supporters in the State Department and the Pentagon, which, without having formal authority, nevertheless promise American support for any insurgency capable of giving Russia trouble. The attempted coup in Turkey, as well as destabilisation attempts in Armenia and Kazakhstan, didn’t yield the desired effect. The Ukraine is the last trump card of the interventionists. The main thing is that there are objective conditions for a rebellion. It isn’t necessary to organise it, the rebels don’t need help; therefore, the USA wouldn’t have to take any responsibility. They need only to nod in time, and everything will go by itself.

The overthrow of Poroshenko doesn’t simply mean intensifying the collapse of the Ukraine, but also the beginning of a bloodbath throughout the country. The DNR and LNR would have an easier time of it, since the Ukrainian forces would fall apart in a time of Makhnoshchina*. The interventionists calculate that if they used the Libyan or Syrian scenario in the Ukraine, the Kremlin wouldn’t be able to keep out of it. They want to draw Russia into the conflict, to make Russia act against its long-term interests, giving the USA room for manoeuvre.

  • Makhnoshchina: time of anarchy and disorder, with collapse of state structures, function, and order. After N I Makhno, a prominent anarchist at the time of the Civil War.

Thus, we see that any possible rebellion in the Ukraine, with subsequent escalation in the current civil war, would lead to a Makhnoshchina, which would disintegrate the remaining residue of Ukrainian statehood. That situation has the danger of changing a major regional conflict into a global crisis. The possibility that Poroshenko could localise any rebellion is extremely limited. One hopes that he’d be lucky. He wouldn’t be able to avoid the worst-case scenario; he’d only postpone it. However, time is one of the most important strategic factors. In the first half of 2017, much in the world will change. We should start to see tangible results of Russian strategic successes later in 2016, which means that the global balance would clearly begin to move in our favour. The conflict is now one that we don’t need in the least. We’re almost on the other shore; it’d be a shame to let the whirlpool suck us under due to uncontrollable events at the last moment.

22 July 2016

Rostislav Ishchenko

RIA Novosti


Thursday, 5 May 2016

Zakharchenko Predicts Short Life for Current Kiev Junta

00 zakharchenko 240116


In a news conference broadcast on Wednesday, DNR Head of Government A V Zakharchenko said:

The régime now ruling in Kiev, isn’t viable, primarily because it isn’t independent, and because it rests on distorted ideological principles. Therefore, it’ll be short-lived. Either an economic collapse or a political crisis like the last one will kill it. It’s just a matter of time and it’s going to happen soon. Power changes are usually provoked by tragic events involving the death of people. Terrible crimes committed on the Kulikovo Field and the Dom Profsoyuzov in Odessa paralysed the will of Odessa residents back in 2014. The crackdown on the Odessa residents was demonstrably ruthless. I miss Odessa and I’ll visit it when it’s free again. I love Odessa, the Arkadiya, and the embankment. I used to come there often. Sometimes, I stayed there for months. It’d be an enormous pleasure to be able to visit the free multiethnic Russian seaport of Odessa again, but first, we, together, should make it free.

Odessa, as well as the Donbass and Sloboda Ukraine with Kharkov, should determine their own future. Kiev has lost the moral right to make decisions for other Ukrainian regions. Maybe the regions would have to build the Ukraine anew, on another… federative or confederative… basis. The regions… with all their historical, cultural, and economic peculiarities… should themselves decide whether they want to remain within the Ukraine, and if they wish to do so, then, they should decide what kind of “Ukraine” they want. The people should decide this at regional referendums. The first step for the future Ukraine should be cleansing it of the evil that enslaved the country after the Maidan events. I think we should talk about denazification as a minimum. Of course, this should lead to the trial of the criminals, who staged an armed coup d’état and unleashed a civil war. Amongst the global first priority decisions it’s necessary to confirm the Ukraine’s neutral military status and start trilateral negotiations in the Ukraine-Russia-EU format. We need to resume negotiations to stabilise the situation in the country, to straighten out the tangle into which first Yanukovich (former Ukrainian President), and then Maidan dragged the country, making it an object of others’ interests and not the subject of its own.

4 May 2016



Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.