THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE COUP D’ÉTAT IN KIEV AND ITS CONSEQUENCES TO UKRAINE AND GLOBAL SECURITY
The year 2024 marks the 10th anniversary of the beginning of a series of tragic events in Ukraine, which eventually led to a national catastrophe. A bloody coup d’état, which took place in Kiev in February 2014, has severe consequences both for Ukraine itself and global security.
In November 2013, following Yanukovych’s refusal (then President of Ukraine) to sign the EUUkraine Association Agreement, ultra-nationalists took thousands of people to the streets in Kiev. Manifestations (known as the “Euromaidan” or pro-EU protests) started under the banner of liberal values, but very soon they turned into extreme violence against public order, government and everything that did not fit the ideology of ultra-nationalism.
It didn’t take long to understand that the “Euromaidan” had nothing to do with justice, rule of law or democracy, but was another “colour revolution” – a political know-how invented by the US to change unwanted regimes all over the world. The driving force of the “Euromaidan” was a long-standing Ukrainian nationalists’ obsession to build a mono-ethnic state, which would be free of Russians and even Russianspeakers.
The Ukrainian nationalists and the West had been preparing an anti-Russian upheaval in Ukraine for many years. Following the USSR’s collapse the West began investing in leadership of the former Soviet republics in an attempt to detach them from Russia and expand its own influence there.
Ukraine has always been of a particular importance for the West, which encouraged anti-Moscow rhetoric and eventually turned Ukraine into its loyal proxy that was ready to take on the role of a battering ram against Russia. To this end, much has been done to destroy historical, human, political, economic and even family ties between Russians and Ukrainians.
The US spin doctors staged the first coup d’état (the so-called “Orange Revolution”) in 2004, when the ultra-nationalists seized power in Kiev and then redoubled the efforts to cancel the relationships between Russia and Ukraine. However, that attempt was not fully successful and the two States kept cooperating. But the US and NATO had not given up destabilizing Ukraine and severing its ties with Russia. The next crisis broke out in 2013-2014 and became a precursor to the current catastrophe in Ukraine.
The crisis would have been resolved quickly, if the agreement signed between President Yanukovych and the Ukrainian opposition and sealed by Germany, France and Poland as guarantor-states on February 21, 2014, had been respected by all sides. President Yanukovych made a number of concessions. He agreed to a new government of “national trust”, constitutional reform and snap presidential election. However, a few hours later the opposition seized power in Kiev. The next day, Parliament dismissed President Yanukovych, usurped power and handed it over to the so-called “government of victors”.
The West neither condemned the upheaval, nor raised its voice in support of the “reconciliation” agreement that it had guaranteed the day before. To the contrary, it saluted the coup d’état, rushed to recognize the unconstitutional regime and thus encouraged the perpetrators to spread violence across Ukraine.
The bloody coup d’état in Kiev divided the nation. The security situation threatened to escalate in many Ukrainian regions. At that juncture, the people of Crimea almost unanimously decided to break up with the aggressive ultra-nationalist regime in Ukraine and reintegrated with Russia at the referendum in March 2014.
Another Ukrainian region with a population closely connected with Russia was Donbass that had to go through a dramatic ordeal on its way to freedom. A full-scale armed conflict started there in the spring of 2014. Donbass people rejected the ultra-nationalist power in Kiev with its discriminatory measures against everything Russian (including a ban on the use of native for them Russian language). In revenge, the “new regime” accused the self-proclaimed Donbass People’s Republics of separatism and sent regular troops and neo-Nazi punitive battalions to suppress resistance. Ukrainian lawmakers, being under the full control of the ultra-nationalists, legitimized this military campaign cynically baptized the “AntiTerrorist Operation”.
Since the outset of the “Euromaidan”, Russia tried its best to prevent a civil war in Ukraine. Moscow was a main broker of the Minsk Agreements, which provided for a peaceful solution of the conflict. It should be noted that the UNSC Resolution 2202 endorsed the second Minsk Agreement signed in February 2015. However, both Ukraine and the West (Germany and France were guarantor states thereto) did not even try to implement them. Poroshenko, former Ukrainian President and signatory of these Agreements, made an outrageous revelation in 2022. He said that the unique value of the Minsk Agreements was a truce given to Ukraine to prepare for a future war with Russia. The former German Chancellor Merkel and French President Hollande shamelessly confirmed this.
So, dishonestly haggling over the Minsk Agreements for many years Ukraine took every opportunity to build up its military capacity with the West’s assistance. Evidence abounds of how hatred to Russia was instilled in Ukrainians, especially among the younger generation, in an attempt to modify their cultural code, erase memory of a millennium-long common history and dismiss any thoughts of shared future with Russians. In-depth analysis is not needed to understand why the US and NATO have been turning Ukraine into anti-Russia. However, it is unclear what benefits Ukraine has from this.
The West has always treated Russia (with few exceptions) as a strategic adversary and not tolerated Russia’s independence, adherence to international law, protection of sovereignty, national interests, traditions and values. The West’s stubborn unwillingness to take into account Russia’s priorities and legitimate concerns is one of the root causes of the ongoing crisis in Ukraine.
For many years, the US and NATO have been turning Ukraine into an enemy of Russia and an advanced military bridgehead on the Russian border..
In December 2021, two months prior to the Russian military operation in Ukraine, Moscow made comprehensive proposals to NATO and the US on how to settle mutual concerns. The West refused to even discuss them.
In early 2022, a military situation escalated dramatically in Donbass. Kiev was preparing to occupy the territories of both Donbass People’s Republics in March 2022. Thousands of refugees fled across the border seeking shelter in Russia.
The Ukrainian aggressive plans were reiterated by Zelensky at the Munich Security Conference in February 2022. He said that Ukraine badly needed nuclear weapons. In light of previous statements of Ukraine’s officials that nuclear weapons had to be used against Russia, such rhetoric was alarming and extremely dangerous.
To prevent the imminent risk of Ukrainian occupation of Donbass People`s Republics, Russia had no choice but to launch the Special Military Operation (SMO) to protect Russian people in Donbass and remove security threats coming from Ukraine.
Russia recognized the independence of both People`s Republics of Donbass and signed with them the Agreements on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance on February 21, 2022. Among others things, they provided for common defense. Only after that the SMO started in full compliance with the applicable rules of international law, including Article 51 of the UN Charter (the right to a collective self-defense).
Since then combat activities have escalated, while the West has been supplying weapons and ammunition, including tanks, air defense and artillery systems to Ukraine.
Suffering huge human losses on the battlefield, Ukraine is trying to take revenge by barbaric shelling Russian territory and killing civilians along the border. In the last month, there was a number of desperate Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory, which proved futile and claimed thousands lives of Ukrainian soldiers. Under international law the deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure and killing of innocent people constitute war crimes and acts of terrorism.
In this context, one cannot help recalling the recent terrorist attack in Moscow on March 22, which has a Ukrainian trace. The entire world was shocked by the heinous crime at the “Crocus City Hall”, that claimed 144 innocent lives and 551 persons injured. The perpetrators were detained on the same day on their way to Ukraine. Trying to escape they drove 340 km to the Ukrainian border until they were captured. Russia has evidence of terrorists connection with Ukraine’s special services as it was officially stated by the Russian Foreign Ministry.
Russia’s enemies admit that their strategic goal in Ukraine is to defeat Russia, and to achieve this the West is ready to fight “to the last Ukrainian”. Whether Russia’s opponents wish it or not, willy-nilly they are sinking deeper into the conflict. Non-stop arms deliveries and a reckless intention of some of them to send troops to Ukraine are extremely provocative as such steps would lower inadmissibly the threshold for the outbreak of hostilities between NATO and Russia and bring humanity closer to the red line that separates the world from nuclear war.
As for the prospects for a negotiated solution of the conflict, it is evident that Ukraine’s leadership itself is the main obstacle to this. Russia has never dismissed this option provided that its own priorities are taken into account. Moscow insists that Kiev cease hostilities and terrorist attacks against Russia; the West stop pumping weapons to Ukraine; Ukraine legally fix its neutral, non-aligned and nuclear-free status; Ukraine recognize new Russian territories (former Ukrainian); Ukraine should be subjected to complete demilitarization and denazification; the rights of Russian-speaking residents of Ukraine should be guaranteed.
Russia and Ukraine were close to a compromise in Istanbul at the end of March 2022. But Ukraine was literally banned to sign the agreement at the last moment. If it were not for the West, the fighting would have ended already.
Under pressure from the West, Zelensky even signed a decree in September 2022 depriving himself of the right to negotiate with Russia.
Against this background, the so-called “Zelensky’s peace formula” is cynical and deceptive. Its unrealistic demands presume the surrender of Russia and its withdrawal from the new territories. In order to impose the “peace formula” on the Global South the West invented the “Copenhagen format”, but failed. For the same purpose Switzerland is planning to convene a “high-level international conference”, which Russia is not going to attend.
It is known that the Global South is itself seeking a negotiated solution of the Ukrainian crisis. Russia highly appreciates all constructive proposals that are on the table now. Among them the Chinese 12-point initiative is the most comprehensive one based on a correct understanding of the root causes of the Ukrainian crisis.
Post Scriptum
Taking this opportunity, the Russian Embassy in Windhoek extends its gratitude to all those who expressed condolences on the tragedy happened in Moscow “Crocus City Hall”.
Special gratitude we address to H.E. Dr. Nangolo Mbumba, President of Namibia, for his message to President Vladimir Putin and Russian people with words of condolence and solidarity with Russia in the uncompromising combat against terrorism.
We highly appreciate the sympathy and support expressed by the Namibian Parliament, and also on behalf of MIRCO and other Namibian government authorities, the SWAPO Party, diplomatic missions and the UN Country Team.
Special thanks to all Russians living in Namibia who shared the grief of the tragic loss with our country. Many our compatriots came to the Embassy to express condolences, leave flowers and light up candles in memory of the victims of the terrorist attack.