Andy Anderson on the US proxy war in Ukraine
People in Donbas and Eastern Ukraine, like the Scots, have a right to self-determination
My letter on the proxy war in Ukraine, published by The National on 7th March, generated some interesting responses. Andy Anderson has kindly provided his answer to one from Alan Davidson. To date, The National has not published Andy’s letter.
Alan Davidson, like Leah Gunn Barrett and me, is a supporter of Scottish Independence, and I am sure he is a democrat and a defender of human rights all around the world as am I and most Scottish independence supporters.
Alan is correct to say that Leah has a right to an opinion but also says she has no right to create her own facts. So what “facts” does Alan challenge in Leah’s letter? Not one, as far as I can see. Leah calls this war a US proxy war, points to German and UK involvement and refers to reports in the US media that the CIA has been involved in Ukraine since 2013. Alan does not challenge these facts.
Alan refers to Russia’s involvement in the Budapest Memorandum which indicates that Russia, unlike the UK, was prepared to agree to the peaceful separation of the Ukraine from the USSR to become an independent country. I think both Alan and Leah would be delighted if the UK were to be so progressive.
A fact that Alan does not address is what happened to the democratically elected President of Ukraine in 2014 when armed fascist gangs, supported by the CIA, organised mass protests in the streets, including the shooting of police officers which led to the fall of the elected government.
This armed coup was not accepted by all Ukrainians. The people in Crimea, in the Donbas and in much of the east of Ukraine rejected this coup and wanted to set up their own democratic state, or devolved region. But the Ukraine coup leaders rebuffed this. They used the military and fascist militias to attack and thousands of defenceless men, women and children in the East of Ukraine.
Now these are recorded “facts” which are available to anyone who wants to find them.
What about the sovereign rights of the people in the Donbas and others in the East of Ukraine who wanted their own independence but were attacked by the Ukraine coup leaders for daring to ask for it?
I believe that the peoples in the east of Ukraine, and there are more of them than there are Scots, have the right to independence if they so desire. They most certainly should never have been attacked and killed by their “own” government for making that demand.
I think Alan would agree that the people in the east of Ukraine, who happen to be mainly Russian speakers, are entitled to have a peaceful independent state if they so determine. That isn’t something the US, UK, or the EU should decide for them.
Without a strong independent media, the story, narrative and context is easy to control. Conjecture and innuendo can then direct the public conclusion, to a different conclusion than the one where truth and free thought would have taken the majority.
When Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, I was waiting for an analysis of what had gone on in the background leading up to the annexation. I knew that there was an agreement in place, but I had to look up the details myself (Kharkiv Pact), no mention was made of any treaty or pact in the media.
Reading some of the details, you realise why it was never discussed, analysed by the MSM. Too many questions would arise and it would be counter to the narrative of the story they wanted to enter the ears of the public.
The Wagner leader Pyrgozin before his death let the cat out of the bag when he said there was no attack of real substance on Eastern Ukraine by Ukrainian forces and that yes his troops invaded in 2014. The fact that it was so easy for his Men to take over the place testifies to it. The Tories in the UK at that time were all welcoming to the Russian oligarchs and when the invasion happened in 2014 the Tory Bruges Group and the European Research Group the were calling Ukraine a "failed state.