The 14 Words

Sunday, 15 December 2013

Ukraine Eurevolution? Who benefits? The EU and NATO


Catchy new buzz words and the tried and true
Eurevolution and Ukraine Spring

A question that begs asking repeatedly?- Why would the Ukrainian people really want to join the EU or NATO, for that matter? I have yet to see one good reason, one real incentive any real benefit for the Ukrainian people to undertake these mostly small and rather bizarre demonstrations.

Two articles.Ignoring completely the usual spin and just cutting to the chase

When the first protests against the Ukrainian government’s E.U. kibosh broke out in Kiev two weeks ago, I was on the ground with a French friend who works for a European supermarket chain. Watching the hordes of angry Ukrainians wave the starry blue E.U. flag on Independence Square and shout, ‘Ukraine for Europe,’ he shook his head in disgust. “Why would the Ukrainians want to join a bankrupt union? Europe is weak now, but Russia is strong. I would go with Putin if I were Ukrainian.”
Other European friends in Kiev echoed his sentiments. “The European Union is a vast bureaucracy,” complained an Italian friend. “We’re stuck now in a circle of debt that we’ll never be able to escape from. Why are Ukrainians so keen to submit to the iron rule of Berlin?”
The EU is indeed a vast bureaucracy. By design. And nothing more. The more bureaucracy there is, the worse life is for humanity in general. Bureaucracy is a vampire.
The protests are also a bonanza for the European Union, which has been suffering from a spate of bad PR recently. With support for the European project at an all-time low among its citizens, the television images of tens of thousands of Ukrainians protesting for Europe are a powerful reaffirmation of the European dream. They give Brussels a respite from the stream of negative news coming out of Greece, Portugal, Spain, or elsewhere in struggling southern Europe.
It’s no surprise that European politicans have rushed to embrace the protest movement. (Rushed to embrace it? EU politicians were openly fomenting the protests) German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle made a dramatic speech before the protesters last week, stressing that the “door to Europe is still open.” E.U. President José Manuel Barosso went as far as to express his gratitude to the Ukrainian demonstrators in a statement this week: (A very telling statement) 
“The European Union has the right and the duty to stand by the people of Ukraine in this difficult moment, because they are giving to Europe one of the greatest contributions that can be given.”
Ukraine’s “greatest contribution” has been to bolster the E.U.’s flagging reputation with its revolution, or “Eurolution.”
I think the Ukrainians will be giving much more up to the EU then simply good PR.

Now NATO- NATO’s Trojan Horse Riding Toward a Ukraine Spring
Economic conditions in Ukraine are dire: $15 billion in IMF loans suspended, danger of default and a zero growth forecast.
While the draft of the EU "Association Agreement" is being sold as an economic boon for Ukrainian citizens, in reality it appears to be NATO's Trojan Horse: a massive expansion of NATO's military position in the region. What's more, the Agreement occurs under the cover of nebulous economic promises.
But is the plight of Ukrainians being exploited to usher in a new military agreement under the guise of economic reform?
Yes
For NATO, the goal is expansion. The prize is access to a country that shares a 1,426-mile border with Russia. The geopolitical map would be dramatically reshaped by the Agreement, with Ukraine serving as the new front for Western missile defense at the doorstep of Russia. Should the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran fall apart, Ukraine could be employed in larger regional disputes, too.
As an EU deal appears imminent, few people are asking questions about NATO's role in the deal
NATO’s role in the EU deal?
While NATO is not specifically mentioned in the draft of the "Association Agreement," the proposal, which was posted online (and translated to English here) by the Ukrainian cabinet in August, pledges convergence of foreign and security policy.
Read: NATO expansion.
For instance, in the draft of the Agreement, foreign and security policy mandates:
"The Parties shall explore the potential of military and technological cooperation. Ukraine and the European Defence Agency (EDA) will establish close contacts to discuss military capability improvement, including technological issues."
The draft of the Agreement's preamble links Ukraine to "ever closer convergence of positions on bilateral, regional and international issues of mutual interest" including the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) of the European Union and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) -- which underscores the military nature of the agreement.
Since 22 of 28 members of the EU have NATO membership, there is little doubt that Ukraine is being drawn into the broad military arrangement with EU nations.
When military spending goes up, domestic spending goes down. The winners are unlikely to be the people of Ukraine, but instead the "people" of Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and other defense interests. The Ukrainians didn't go to Independence Square to rally for NATO. Yet NATO's benefit is clear. Less clear is whether Ukrainians will receive key economic benefits they seek.
Ukrainians may be pro-EU,(as presented via the managing your perception media) but are the EU and NATO pro-Ukrainian?
Of course the EU and NATO are no pro-Ukraine. The EU and NATO are pro EU and NATO.Unsurprisingly I still can see no benefit to the Ukrainian people.


No comments:

Post a Comment