How and Why the US Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in Ukraine

Donate

How and Why the US Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in Ukraine

Written by Eirc Zuesse; Originally appeared on strategic-culture.org

This will document that the ‘new Cold War’ between the US and Russia did not start, as the Western myth has it, with Russia’s involvement in the breakaway of Crimea and Donbass from Ukraine, after Ukraine — next door to Russia — had suddenly turned rabidly hostile toward Russia in February 2014. Ukraine’s replacing its democratically elected neutralist Government in February 2014, by a rabidly anti-Russian Government, was a violent event, which produced many corpses. It’s presented in The West as having been a ‘revolution’ instead of a coup; but whatever it was, it certainly generated the ‘new Cold War’ (the economic sanctions and NATO buildup on Russia’s borders); and, to know whether it was a coup, or instead a revolution, is to know what actually started the ‘new Cold War’, and why. So, this is historically very important.

Incontrovertible proofs will be presented here not only that it was a coup, but that this coup was organized by the US Government — that the US Government initiated the ‘new Cold War’; Russia’s Government reacted to America’s aggression, which aims to place nuclear missiles in Ukraine, less than ten minutes flight-time from Moscow. During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, America had reason to fear Soviet nuclear missiles 103 miles from America’s border. But, after America’s Ukrainian coup in 2014, Russia has reason to fear NATO nuclear missiles not just near, but on, Russia’s border. That would be catastrophic.

If America’s successful February 2014 overthrow and replacement of Ukraine’s democratically elected neutralist Government doesn’t soon produce a world-ending nuclear war (World War III), then there will be historical accounts of that overthrow, and the accounts are already increasingly trending and consolidating toward a historical consensus that it was a coup — that it was imposed by “somebody from the new coalition” — i.e., that the termination of the then-existing democratic (though like all its predecessors, corrupt) Ukrainian Government, wasn’t authentically a ‘revolution’ such as the US Government has contended, and certainly wasn’t at all democratic, but was instead a coup (and a very bloody one, at that), and totally illegal (though backed by The West).

The purpose of the present article will be to focus attention on precisely whom the chief people are who were responsible for perpetrating this globally mega-dangerous (‘Cold-War’-igniting) coup — and thus for creating the world’s subsequent course increasingly toward global nuclear annihilation.

If there will be future history, then these are the individuals who will be in the docks for that history’s harshest and most damning judgments, even if there will be no legal proceedings brought against them. Who, then, are these people?

Clearly, Victoria Nuland, US President Barack Obama’s central agent overseeing the coup, at least during the month of February 2014 when it climaxed, was crucial not only in overthrowing the existing Ukrainian Government, but in selecting and installing its rabidly anti-Russian replacement. The 27 January 2014 phone-conversation between her and America’s Ambassador in Ukraine, Jeffrey Pyatt was a particularly seminal event, and it was uploaded to youtube on 4 February 2014. I have discussed elsewhere that call and its significance. Nuland there and then abandoned the EU’s hope for a still democratic but less corrupt future government for Ukraine, and Nuland famously said, on that call “Fuck the EU,” and she instructed Pyatt to choose instead the rabidly anti-Russian, and far-right, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. This key event occurred 24 days before Ukraine’s President Victor Yanukovych was overthrown on February 20th, and 30 days before the new person to head Ukraine’s Government, Yatsenyuk, became officially appointed to rule the now clearly fascist country. He won that official designation on February 26th. However, this was only a formality: Obama’s agent had already chosen him, on January 27th.

The second landmark item of evidence that it had been a coup and nothing at all democratic or a ‘revolution’, was the 26 February 2014 phone-conversation between the EU’s Foreign Minister Catherine Ashton and her agent in Ukraine investigating whether the overthrow had been a revolution or instead a coup; he was Estonia’s Foreign Minister, Urmas Paet, and he told her that he found that it had been a coup, and that “somebody from the new coalition” had engineered it — but he didn’t know whom that “somebody” was. Both Ashton and Paet were shocked at this finding, but they proceeded immediately to ignore that matter, and to discuss only the prospects for Europe’s investors in Ukraine, to be able to get their money back — their obsession was Ukraine’s corruption. Ashton told Paet that she had herself told the Maidan demonstrators, “you need to find ways in which you can establish a process that will have anti-corruption at its heart.” So, though the EU was unhappy that this had been a coup, they were far more concerned to protect their investors. In any case, the EU clearly wasn’t behind Ukraine’s coup. Equally clearly, they didn’t much care whether it was a coup or instead what the US Government said, a ‘revolution’.

The network behind this coup had actually started planning for the coup back in 2011. That’s when Eric Schmidt of Google, and Jared Cohen, also now of Google but still continuing though unofficially as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s chief person tasked to plan ‘popular movements’ to overthrow both Yanukovych in Ukraine, and Assad in Syria.

Then, on 1 March 2013, the implementation of this plan started: the first “tech camp” to train far-right Ukrainians how to organize online the mass-demonstrations against Yanukovych, was held inside the US Embassy in Kiev on that date, which was over nine months before the Maidan demonstrations to overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected President started, on 20 November 2013.

The American scholar Gordon M. Hahn has specialized in studying the evidence regarding whom the actual snipers were who committed the murders, but he focuses only on domestic Ukrainian snipers and ignores the foreign ones, who had been hired by the US regime indirectly through Georgian, Lithuanian and other anti-Russian CIA assets (such as via Mikheil Saakashvili, the ousted President of Georgia whom the US regime subsequently selected to become the Governor of the Odessa region of Ukraine). Hahn’s 2018 book Ukraine Over the Edge states on pages 204-209:

“Yet another pro-Maidan sniper, Ivan Bubenchik, emerged to acknowledge that he shot and killed Berkut [the Government’s police who were protecting Government buildings] before any protesters were shot that day [February 20th]. In a print interview, Bubenchik previews his admission in Vladimir Tikhii’s documentary film, Brantsy, that he shot ahd killed two Berkut commanders in the early morning hours of February 20 on the Maidan. … Bubenchik claims that [on February 20] the Yanukovich regime started the fire in the Trade Union House — where his and many other EuroMaidan fighters lived during the revolt — prompting the Maidan’s next reaction. As noted above, however, pro-Maidan neofascists have revealed that the Right Sector started that fire. … Analysis of the snipers’ massacre shows that the Maidan protesters initiated almost all — at least six out of a possible eight — of the pivotal escalatory moments of violence and/or coercion. … The 30 November 2013 nighttime assault on the Maidan demonstrators is the only clear exception from a conclusive pattern of escalating revolutionary violence led by the Maidan’s relatively small but highly motivated and well-organized neofascist element.”

Although Hahn’s book barely cites the first and most detailed academic study of the climactic coup period of late February, Ivan Katchanovski’s poorly written “The ‘Snipers’ Massacre’ on the Maidan in Ukraine”, which was issued on 5 September 2015, Hahn’s is consistent with that: both works conclude that the available evidence, as Katchanovski puts it, shows that:

“The massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It [his investigation] found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas.”

Hahn downplays US heading of the coup. But shortly before the coup, the CIA secretly trained in Poland the Right Sector founder/leader Dmitriy Yarosh (“Dmytro Jarosz”), who headed Ukraine’s snipers. So, even the Ukrainian ones were working for the US

On 19 November 2017 was issued Gian Micalessin’s “The hidden truth about Ukraine– Part 1”

& Part 2

Summarizing them here: Two Georgian snipers say Saakashvili hired them in Tbilisi for a US-backed operation. But they know only about the “Georgian Legion” part. They think it was patterned on Georgia’s Rose Revolution. They each got $1000 for the operation and flew to Kiev on 15 January and were promised $5000 on return. (9:00) “We had to provoke the ‘Berkut’ police so they would attack the people. By February 15th the situation [at the Maidan] was getting worse every day. Then the first shots were fired.” It was February 15 or 16. Mamunashvili [Saakashvili’s man] introduced them to “an American military guy, … Brian Christopher Boyenger” a former “sniper for the 101st Airborne Division” who “after Maidan he went to Donbass” to fight in the “Georgian Legion” but during the coup-climax, the far-right Andriy “Parubiy came very often,” and “Brian always accompanied him” and also instructing there was Vladimir Parasyuk, one of the leaders of the Maidan. The snipers were told not to aim but just to kill people randomly, to create chaos. There were also two Lithuanian snipers in the room. Some went down from the Ukraine Hotel to the second floor of the Conservatory Building, balcony. “They started to take out the guns and distributed them to each group.” “Then I heard shots from the next room” It lasted 15 minutes, then they were all ordered to escape.

On 13 February 2015 was telecast a German documentary, “Maidan Snipers. German TV expose. ARD Monitor. Eng Subs” in which one of the demonstrators said that many of the bullets were fired from buildings controlled by the demonstrators, but that “We were also shot at from the other direction.” However, at least before 21 February 2014, police (Berkut) were seized by demonstrators and at least the possibility exists that some of the Right Sector snipers were taking positions in and especially atop some of the government buildings so as to fire down into the crowd and seem to be firing from Yanukovych’s side. Gordon Hahn hasn’t been able to verify any firing in February 2014 by the Yanukovych government. Moreover: “they were the same snipers, killing people from both sides.”

On 1 February 2016 was posted to youtube a French documentary, “Ukraine — Masks of the Revolution” which shows, from a meeting at Davos, at 48:00, Victoria Nuland, the announcer trying to speak with her and saying to the audience, “The US diplomat who came to support the Revolution, could she really ignore the existence of the paramilitaries?”; 48:50 Larry Summers at a meeting in Kiev during 10-12 September 2015 and then later at the “12th YES Annual Meeting” saying, “Ukraine is an essential outpost of our fundamental military interests”; 49:25: Petraeus also shown there and the announcer says, “He also thinks that Ukraine is essential to block Putin.” Petraeus urges investment in Ukraine to block Russia; 51:00 McChrystal there also urges arming Ukraine; 51:50 Nuland is there and the announcer says: “The country that is most invested in Ukraine’s future is the US” “She is the architect of America’s influence in Ukraine.” Nuland says there at the “YES” meeting, “We had a significant impact on the battlefield.” But the US regime blames Russia for that war.

Gordon Hahn’s restriction of blame for the coup only to native Ukrainian nazis doesn’t fit the evidence, because there clearly is leadership of Ukraine’s nazis by the US regime. Furthermore, the US regime and its Ukrainian client-state are the only two nations at the U.N. who vote and repeatedly to back fascism, nazism and Holocaust-denial. The anti-Russia nazis took over America’s Government, which has taken over Ukraine’s. All of this goes back to the key US decision, which was made on 24 February 1990.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • PZIVJ

    That’s a lot to read and I am being a bit lazy today.
    Can someone break it down for me.
    You know “the short version” :D

    • Rob

      The author in his story have said that how the Ukrainian elected government was removed and instead of that how a new anti Russian government brought into power. The Zionist CIA have plotted this all chaos in Ukraine by shooting on protesters from different directions to assure them that the government police are shotting them.

      The main purpose of this plot was to take Ukraine from Russia and to remove the elected president of that time and bring a new anti Russian president in power. The CIA hired some idiots and gave them training and sniper rifles to kill important Ukrainian politicians. On killing of these politicians the Ukrainians commenced protests so then CIA order them to shoot protesters and then they will pay them US $1000 to US $6000 per person. So they shoot protesters. At the same time in CNN and BBC news it mentioned that the Ukrainian government have use live fire on protesters due to which many casualties could be expected. The US CIA man purpose was to take Ukraine to come close to the Russian capital Moscow.

      The Zionist main purpose is to rule on the whole world including Russia. The US and Zionists are now on the loosing side because they have lost their all energies and wealth in wars all over the world. Now they don’t have enough money to keep these wars continue because in the US, UK and in the Zionist Israel the corruption is at high level. The US and Zionists have butchered a couple of millions of innocent civilians just for to get the power of the whole world. Now the defenses of US, UK and Zionist Israels are collapsing while the power of Russia, China along with their allies are emerging in the world.

    • Wise Gandalf

      The second try of coup was successful fo yanks.
      Good night! :))

    • S Melanson

      I wrote some commentary below that you may find of interest.

    • The Farney Fontenoy

      Read it you lazy git.

  • Serious

    And the next article should be : “How Putin let it happen”.

    People say that I’m anti-russian but maybe Putin is anti-russian.

    I ask to not recognize the ukrainian gov and force the ex-ukrainian president to participate to the election. But, once again, “I’m a troll” who is 90% right. XD.

    • PZIVJ

      Did I ever say you where anti-Russian?
      Ok, perhaps I did 1 time today.
      My argument is that you are 50% right, just like flipping a coin. XD

      • jako

        he is paid anti-Russian troll who is trolling this agenda all day long on different places

    • Elmarie Muller

      Putin works in the interest of it allies enemies.Just after the Russian UN report that Iran and Hizbolla will withdraw its forces, US open another border base between Iraq and Syria. This clearly shows that Putin never tell USA and coalition to withdraw from Syria.Whenever USA support terrorist attack Syrian forces in Ephrata or Detroit Ezzor there is no counter attack.That is way the war drags on.Serious you are Wright in most of your opinion as you are always straight forward to reality.

      • Serious

        Putin to force USA to withdraw is the joke of the century. When you can’t defend, you can’t attack.

      • AM Hants

        President Assaad, who is the leader of the Sovereign Nation, has no problems with the help that Russia has provided him, at President Assad’s request.

        You should listen to what he has to say, when interviewed by RT.

        ‘…Syria’s president heaped praise on Moscow, claiming that Russian “wisdom” had prevented a direct conflict between Russian and American forces in Syria. “We were close to having direct conflict between the Russian forces and the American forces, and fortunately, it has been avoided, not by the wisdom of the American leadership, but by the wisdom of the Russian leadership.”

        While Assad reiterated that the United States military was not welcome in Syria, he said that avoiding escalation was the key to restoring Syria’s territorial integrity. “We need the Russian support, but we need, at the same time to avoid the American foolishness in order to be able to stabilize our country.”

        He emphasized that Russia has shown restraint – not weakness – in Syria, noting how Russian warnings had likely dissuaded Trump from launching a full-scale attack against Damascus.

        “The Russians announced publicly that they are going to destroy the bases that are going to be used to launch missiles, and our information – we don’t have evidence, we only have information, and that information is credible information – that they were thinking about a comprehensive attack all over Syria, and that’s why the threat pushed the West to make it on a much smaller scale,” the Syrian president said. ‘You either have a country, or you have no country…’

        Read more
        © Mikhail KlimentyevPutin & Assad hold ‘extensive’ talks in Sochi, discuss political settlement – Kremlin… https://www.rt.com/news/428395-assad-interview-rt-highlights-syria/

        • jako

          Elmarie Muller with “6 Comments” only… is him again “Serious” the troll…. with just newly opened account

          • AM Hants

            I seriously need to break the habit of feeding the trolls. Though, sometimes they are handy, when you wish to post links, that others might not have seen, but, be interested in. Use and abuse a troll a day, so comes to mind.

      • Jonathan Cohen

        Russia owes nothing to the Middle East or anyone in it, including Iran and Syria.

    • AM Hants

      I thought President Putin was the President of Russia, not Ukraine. Remember, they were enjoying their winter Olympics, in Sochi, when the cookie monsters turned up in Ukraine. Funny, the Georgians invaded the Russian dependent territory of South Ossetia, taking out the Russian Peace Keepers, when President Putin went to enjoy the Bejing Olympics. How long did it take Saaakashvili to beg for a ceasefire, when they got a Russian escort home? Just 3 hours.

      • Serious

        Of course, it’s good to let hostile gov next to your country. XD.

        When Russia will surrounded by ennemies with american bases everywhere, you will ask Putin to tell Russians how it is good for Russia. XD

        • AM Hants

          Hahahaha. Not much good when Russian weapons make anything the NATO member states, including the US, obsolete. Now what does the US spend on Defence (ignoring the $US trillions that cannot be accounted for)? Isn’t it now $717 billion and rising? What does Russia spend on defence? Isn’t it $47 billion and decreasing.

          Dmitry Orlov, explains it perfectly.

          ‘…• On NATO encroachment on Russian borders, anti-Russian slights by the Baltic midgets and NATO troops training to “attack Russia”—well, frankly, the Russians are a little bit insulted, but they are not exactly afraid. Everybody knows that NATO is part of the American defense establishment racket. Its purpose is to steal boatloads of money, not to make weapons that work or to train armies that can fight. There is now quite a bit of NATO armor and manpower prepositioned in the Baltics, but not enough to actually invade Russia in any meaningful way.

          And if they ever do, they will get lonely very quickly. You see, NATO armor doesn’t fit under most bridges and can’t move large distances over rough terrain like Russian armor can. It has to be transported to the field of battle by train or on flatbed trucks over federal highways. Or it has to be shipped in via deepwater ports…’ Dmitry Orlov… https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/russias-maddening-patience-why-doesnt-she-strike-back-when-attacked/ri23653

          • Serious

            Expert ??? XD. I have seen so much experts on expertise. XD.

            What is the goal of letting a threat growing and growing if Russia can actually remove it ? Absolute non sens.

      • jako

        No purpose of explaining to the guy whose paid job is to slender Russia; Putin and everything of that kind.
        Whatever you say and whichever argument you give he will turn it upside down or distort it in any way just to fit his anti-Russian agenda.
        He is not to here to exchange opinion but to pass his propaganda in any way possible.
        He is paid troll

        • AM Hants

          Cheers.

  • AM Hants

    Nice summary, reminding us of how it all came about. Not just to place missiles on Russia’s borders, but, why is Ukraine so important to those that are behind the Greater Israel Project.

    The EU, when they were playing with Ukraine, with regards the ‘EU Neighbourhood Agreement’, it was on condition that the ‘Gas Princess’ Julia Tymoshenko had to be released from prison. Which happened, when Yanucovich, witness by the opposition and three witnesses, who represented the EU, agreed that he would stand down, bring forward the elections, due later that year and revert the Constitution back to the 2004 Constitution, if only they would guarantee a peaceful transaction. Hours later, Russia was saving the President of Ukraine and his family from an assassination attempt. Who witnessed the agreement? The President of Germany, who was the Foreign Minister at the time, M at the time, Frank-Walter Steinmeier. Radoslaw Sikorski (who was standing in for Catherine Ashton the EU Foreign Minister) Polish foreign minister and Laurent Fabius, French foreign minister.

    http://eeas.europa.eu/delegati
    Speech 11/898
    José Manuel Durão Barroso, President of the European Commission. Statement by President Barroso following the EU-Ukraine Summit
    I also had the opportunity to convey to President Yanukovych our concern regarding recent cases of what is perceived as selective justice in Ukraine against members of previous administrations, notably Mrs. Tymoshenko. And we also have discussed reforms, including in the constitutional and judicial spheres. It is precisely at a moment when we are striving to build strong and lasting relations that Ukraine needs to show its commitment to democratic principles, the rule of law, good governance, human rights and fundamental freedoms.http://europa.eu/rapid/press-r

    Then you had the fact that NATO were on their way to kick Russia out of Sevastapol, Russia’s only warm water port, but, met Bastion.

    How Russia Ruined American Plans In Crimea… https://www.fort-russ.com/2016/03/how-russia-ruined-american-plans-in/

    Soros funded the Orange Revolution, back in 2004 and then tried again in 2014. However, who was expecting to take control of Crimea, before Stalin sorted the problem?

    Constantinople to Crimea – control of the Black Sea and how many centuries have the same old crowd been after it?

  • Smaug

    Russian propaganda alert.

  • Smaug

    Russian propaganda alert.

    • Wise Gandalf

      I did not read the article, but i am 100%-ly sure, you are wrong. :DDD

  • AM Hants

    I seriously need to break the habit of feeding the trolls. Though, sometimes they are handy, when you wish to post links, that others might not have seen, but, be interested in. Use and abuse a troll a day, so comes to mind.

  • AM Hants

    Cheers.

  • S Melanson

    Thank you Southfront for this well researched article and my complements to the author. The author has backed up much of what says, particularly the US role. I think it is hardly up for debate as there is overwhelming evidence it was a US sponsored coup, even without considering the highly damning taped telephone conversations. That said, there are some arguments by the author I think warrant additional comment.

    I think it is relevant to point out that Nazi penetration of the US government occurred shortly after WWII, quite some time ago. This was because the US was impressed with Nazi counterinsurgency methods, so much so they brought, in addition to German scientists, a large number of Nazis to the US under operation Paperclip. This operation resulted in Nazi infiltration of the US government and Nazi methods were honed and perfected by the CIA and put to effective use many times, such as in central Latin America. So I question the authors link of a Nazi takeover of the US government with a 1990 seminal date. The training of fascist ‘demonstrators’ for the planned revolution (coup) in Ukraine followed Nazi methods that were perfected well before 1990 in generating effective insurgencies in foreign nations.

    The other point I raise is the danger of nuclear war which the author give prominent attention in his article. Ukraine has no doubt increased the risk of nuclear war but the author does not mention two important inter-related reasons for the increased risk. Placement of offensive systems on Russia’s borders is a big factor mentioned by the author but the danger of nuclear war by this development is greatly amplified by (1) potential to use ABM systems offensively to destroy Russian ICBM, radar and other strategic installations with Russia having only a few minutes of reaction time (US claims they are defensive only is propaganda and Putin sees through this) (2) the short reaction time means Russia will rely on its perimeter (dead hand) system – a computer controlled automatic counterstrike to any detected nuclear attack. Auto counter strike greatly increases the risk of accidental nuclear war or a strategic exchange due to a false flag event. For how plausible such a scenario is, I suggest watching the excellent 1991 movie ‘By the Dawn’s Early Light’. You will find the Russian city destroyed in the false flag attack of interest.

  • Doom Sternz

    Erik……The Maidan demonstrations led to the overthrow of the legally elected Ukrainian government and witnessed an estimated 15,000 people marching in celebration of Stepan Bandera’s 105th birthday. The neo-Nazi Svoboda Party along with the Fatherland Party of Yulia Tymoshenko both supported this commemoration of the former Nazi ally and war criminal.

    In the late 1930s Stepan Bandera became the leader of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) was the name of the Ukrainian partisan paramilitary force that arose from the OUN and fought Soviet armies in the 1940s. During World War II the OUN worked with the German occupation and participated in the massacre of Jews, Poles, and Russians.

    • S Melanson

      You have added greatly to our understanding of what happened, I learned quite a bit. Thank you. However, I thought it worthwhile to provide below discussion of Obama being a continuation of long standing US policy that has been consistent across administrations.

      You are correct Obama picked OUN precisely because of there track record for brutality and it was truly a despicable affair. But Obama is not a departure from US methods in foreign policy, in fact there were US administrations that engaged in actions arguably more despicable such as Guatemala (worst atrocities 1954 to 1988) and Nicaragua (escalating atrocities 1979 to 1988).

      Selection of the OUN followed decades old criteria for selecting foreign organizations as instruments of US foreign policy (intervention): (1) Bloodthirsty with established track record for brutality, (2) amorality – having no moral standards, restraints or principles and (3) they understand who gives the orders. While Obama was despicable yes, he was no different from prior administrations.

  • SG

    Although a crude assertion, this is pretty much the nature of the relationship between the US and Ukraine.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3f66788a9ef7916701b0b4e83e57e5ee5e6cf4f1aabd57c10b2d14cf877181d4.png

  • Sinbad2

    The US took over Ukraine, because it is the conduit for Russian gas to Europe. Joe Biden appointed his son to the board of Burisma oil and gas.
    The US wants to be the middleman on all gas sales to Europe, so it can ensure all sales are in US dollars, and via fees and charges makes LNG price competitive with American LNG.
    Disruptions to supply could be blamed on Russia, and it would keep Europe beholden to the USA.

    The US admitted they spent $5 billion to overthrow the Ukrainian Government. They are Americans, they expect a good return on their investment.

    All wars are about money.