Supplementary reading: How the US has used Ukraine
Many people, particularly readers of The Duran already know that Ukraine has been used by the US to try and provoke Russia. These events dominate Ukraine’s sad history over the years especially since 2014, and we will offer a summary of these in a separate piece.
- The Euromaidan was an American-driven ‘rebellion’, with US implants working in and with the Ukrainian government, like Victoria Nuland and Hunter himself.
- Most of the activity the US does in Ukraine was masked by a media anxious to protect the advance of world globalism.
- Sam Brownback, United States Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, helped Petro Poroshenko to illegally create a new Church structure, supposedly Orthodox, even endorsed and created by the money-starved Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, for which $25 million reportedly appeared in the coffers at the Phanar in Constantinople. This move was openly endorsed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
- That group immediately showed itself as a conduit for promoting LGBT lifestyles in Ukraine, using the trappings of an “Orthodox” church to give this legitimacy.
- It did not matter that the new church structure was formed from two schismatic groups in Ukraine, groups that absolutely no one in the canonical Orthodox Christian world recognized before this action. (They still do not, nor has the new church been accepted by any other Church.)
- This group could not even stick together for six months.
- “Patriarch” Filaret Denisenko proved that even a broken clock can be right once or twice a day, breaking his schismatic group away from the new structure and going his own way.
However, with Poroshenko out of power, the new President of Ukraine seems to be differently motivated.
The reason for all this interference was simple. Because, Russia. The United States and the Ecumenical Patriarch each have their own axes to grind with Russia, for reasons real and fancied, and this unholy alliance was intended to marginalize Russia and its Church one way or another, but with (atheist) Volodomyr Zelensky’s winning the presidency in Ukraine, he, too, showed wisdom by taking the government of Ukraine completely offline with regard to Church affairs.
Further, President Zelensky, after adopting a hands-off policy with regard to the Church situation, was to have met Patriarch Bartholomew, ostensibly so that the Patriarch and his American money men would try to “correct” the new President’s course and resume the policies followed under the Poroshenko regime.
US policy toward Russia has been notably hostile since at least the 2014 Olympic games, when President Vladimir Putin made it clear that homosexuals were not to be allowed around children during the Games. For the globalist aligned, like President Obama and many other European leaders, this was an absolute outrage. For the globalist and secular humanist faithful, such a move was considered backward and barbaric, not aligned with “progress.” Thankfully, they were exactly right. Russia is not interested in that sort of progress. She is interested in reclaiming her place as a Christian nation, governed by Christian principles in all areas of life from social to geopolitical. This is what spurred the multi-year ostracization of the Russian Federation, and it is also what has been primarily responsible for the efforts to neutralize President Trump, as well as the effort to get rid of him.
One of the big questions that comes out of the EuroMaidan is “how is Ukraine actually doing today?”
This is a very difficult question to answer if one turns their attention to media sources in the West. All of the mainstream Western media is strongly influenced by the notion of globalism and secular humanist elitism, so for people with this perspective, the signs of things going well in Ukraine or any other country would be the normalization of secular humanist ideals: LGBT rights, abortion on demand, promotion of bigotry against people holding traditional Christian values and lifestyle as important, fealty to the New World Order which itself is the culmination of “cultural Marxism” in its attitudes about the sovereignty of the person. Viewed in this light, Ukraine is in terrible conflict because even with the incursions into the Church life there, the Moscow-based Ukrainian Orthodox Church is holding its own quite well in that country. Like the rest of the Moscow Patriarchate and most all other FSU Orthodox jurisdictions, the Orthodox people have become very dedicated to traditional values and norms. For example, abortion remains legal in Russia. But as the Church grows and teaches more people about the Christian view of life, the number of actual abortions performed in Russia is plummeting – down 10 percent year over year from 2017 to 2018 alone.
Economically, the country is reported by some who visit there to be a disaster. Personal accounts I have heard show that if one has American dollars to spend in Ukraine, you can buy a town for a song. The local currency, the hrvinia, does better against the dollar than the Russian ruble does, but the value of the hrvinia plummeted against the dollar from 5.30 to 1 in April 2005 to the current level of 24.30 to 1. In other words, the Ukrainian currency is at about one-fifth of its pre-Maidan value, and, yes, most of the devaluation took place starting around the time of the Maidan revolution.
This does not look like the “European, wealthy Ukraine” that was promised. And while the Western press is quick to blame Russia for this, such a claim makes little sense when framed in the view that “Ukraine is now Europe (and therefore it should be prosperous, just like other European nations).” Here, too, it is difficult to get an accurate picture of why this is happening. From the Western press standpoint, the mantra it is all Russia’s fault is the hypnotic fallback for all of Ukraine’s problems. Here is an example from the Brookings Institute that is often forced to make acknowledgements of the problem while at the same time shifting blame for their existence:
For 2019, the West should patiently pursue its policy of supporting Ukraine. U.S., European and international financial institution officials should be ready to engage the Ukrainian president in the spring and the new Rada and prime minister in the fall on the country’s future reform course. Those discussions could be delicate, particularly if populist ideas win in the elections. Western donors will have to resist backsliding on what Ukraine has achieved and press for completing the critical mass of reforms that would allow the economy to grow at a substantial and sustained rate. Given their assistance funds and low-interest credits, the donors will have leverage.
One important key for Ukraine’s economic future lies in reforms that will draw in more investment. While the economy achieved 3 percent growth last year, it should be achieving growth levels of 5 to 6 percent. The finance minister said recently that, at its current rate of growth, Ukraine will need 50 years to catch up with neighboring Poland. That has to change for Ukraine to succeed.
As for Russia, the United States and Europe should sustain—and intensify—visa and economic sanctions while making clear that a genuine settlement in the Donbas would lead to a lifting of sanctions (excepting those related to Crimea). A settlement would also remove what now constitutes the biggest obstacle to moving relations between the West and Russia toward a more normal place.
In light of the utterly mangled and dishonest coverage coming from the West about Ukraine, one is reminded of this scene and its message:
Sign Up to Our Newsletter
Get notified about exclusive offers every week!