Oliver Stone’s 2016 Ukraine on Fire defies mainstream narrative on Russia-Ukraine war

 Article published in Travel Tomorrow

Ukraine on Fire presents a likely controversial overview of Ukraine’s political history leading up to the 2014 protests in Euromaidan and shedding light on today’s military developments in Eastern Europe.

Directed by Igor Lopatonok and produced by Oscar winner Oliver Stone, the 2016 documentary defies the mainstream media narrative on the geopolitical analysis of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, spanning events from the World War II to the Cold War. The film features the international pressure over Ukraine — leading to an apparent coup d’état ousting the democratically elected Viktor Yanukovich and culminates with the implications of NATO expansion.

In the documentary, Oliver Stone uses his critical lens on the Ukraine crisis, and more specifically on the role played by the US. Labelled as propaganda by the Western media, Russia’s argument of “denazifying” Ukraine as a justification for the invasion is analysed in Ukraine on Fire with the spotlight on a number of neo-nazis groups that, over time, seemed to have incorporated the Ukrainian National Guard.

Ukrainian Nazis joining forces with Hitler

In a throwback to World War II, the documentary denounces the estimated 80,000 Ukrainian ultra-nationalists — notorious for their cruelty towards the Polish, the Jewish and Russian people — who have joined the Schutzstaffel, the infamous Nazi SS.

In 1929, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) was founded by Stefan Bandera, an ardent nationalist known by the CIA for leading a “reign of terror” and masterminding several ethnic cleansing operations, such as the 1941 Babi Yar massacre, where nearly 34,000 Jews were killed. However, after the war, Bandera fled to Europe, backed by the CIA for safe entry.

Cold War

“The CIA’s fingerprints can be found throughout the conflict,” the film stated, referring to the aftermath of the protests in Ukraine, both the 2004 and 2014 revolutions and events dating back to the Cold War. According to the documentary, CIA documents declassified in 2016 reveal strong ties between US intelligence and Ukrainian nationalists since 1946.

Such ties would serve as a possible source of counter-intelligence against the Soviet Union. During the Cold War, Ukrainian nationalists were part of numerous military operations, including Operation Belladona, Operation Lynx, and Operation Trident. Yet, during the Nuremberg trials in 1945-1956, Ukrainian Nazis were spared from proper justice. “By 1951, the Agency [CIA] excused the illegal activities of OUN’s security branch in the name of Cold War necessity,” reads a declassified memo from the CIA.

The Ukrainian ultra-nationalist movement kept growing with names like Dmytro Dontsov, Andriy Melnyk and Roman Shukhevych shaping the neo-Nazi movement. In 1989, the Ukrainian nationalist organisation Narodny Rukh (People’s Movement) was created, serving as an incubator for neo-Nazi leaders against the Soviet Union’s trajectory towards the West guided by Mikhail Gorbachev’s Perestroika and Glasnost policies.

Shortly before the end of the Soviet Union, in 1991, Oleh Tyahnybok founded yet another nationalist group, Svoboda, which ideology was the purging of Jews and ethnic Russians in Ukraine. As early as 2012, the BBC reported the danger of Ukraine’s ultra-nationalists, particularly Svoboda, and the EU passed a resolution condemning the group as anti-Semitic and xenophobic.

US ties with Svoboda

Despite the warnings from Europe, Victoria Nuland from the US State Department met Tyahnybok, Svoboda’s leader, in February 2014, ahead of the Euromaidan protests. The plot thickens when Nuland was caught on tape with the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, masterminding an apparent coup d’état. “Now it would be great to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it and, you know, f*ck the EU,” said Nuland.

Recalling his troubled tenure as a President (2010-2014), Viktor Yanukovich told Oliver Stone: “My high-level contact was VP Joe Biden. We had frequent phone conversations but the problem was that Mr Biden said one thing but they did different things in Ukraine.”

As for Mr Pyatt, the US Ambassador, Yanukovich said he received visits from Maidan representatives all the time. “We got the impression that the headquarters in charge of the whole process was in the US embassy,” said Yanukovich.

EU and IMF pressure

Throwing back to 2013, Yanukovich explained that Ukraine was going through a difficult economic period and the country was torn between turning to the EU, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), or Russia. With an existing trade agreement with Russia, Yanukovich sought to negotiate a new — and better — agreement, but both the EU and the IMF offered “unacceptable solutions”, he said.

“A significant rise in utility rates, for electricity and natural gas. This would mean a lot more expenses for the people, while their income would stay at the same level,” said Yanukovich about the IMF’s proposal. Ukraine suggested other solutions, but these were officially rejected by the IMF in November 2013.

Kyiv was left with Russia, which said it was ready for partnership if their interests were taken into account. Interviewed by Oliver Stone, the Russian President Vladimir Putin said that an agreement with Ukraine “would mean that EU goods would enter the Russian market without any negotiations”, which was not tolerated by the EU.

Talking about the trade agreement proposed by the EU, Yanukovich said that Ukraine couldn’t go ahead because it “required essential economic expenses and Europe didn’t provide any loss balancing.”

Euromaidan

After Ukraine’s decision to move towards the East for trade partnerships, the documentary reveals the manufacturing of a protest, with Euromaidan right behind the corner. As the November 2013 protest started in Ukraine, three new TV channels went on the air and suddenly became stunningly popular. Spilno TV was launched on November 21, Hromadske TV went live on November 22 and Expresso TV followed on November 24. These channels went viral supporting the protests, which were asking for an alignment with the EU and encouraging more and more people to go to Maidan.

Eventually, the protests led to overthrowing the President Yanukovich after an apparent coordinated action between the US and Ukrainian nationalist groups. Such outcome was reported by the filmmaker as the result of a successful staged revolution which included “money, the media and techniques”.

NATO expansion

A crucial element featured in the documentary is NATO’s military threat bordering the Russian Federation. NATO has not stopped expanding since the fall of the Soviet Union, growing from 17 countries in 1990 to 30 today, several of which were once part of the Soviet-led Warsaw pact.

“Why do we react so vehemently to NATO’s expansion?” asked Putin. “We are concerned with the decision-making process. I know how decisions are made. As soon as the country becomes a member of NATO, it can’t resist the pressure of the USA.”

Putin stressed the military threat that NATO membership poses to Russia, saying that “anything at all can appear in such country such as missile defense systems, new bases, or, if necessary, new missile strike systems.”

Putin’s lack of sense of security has been compared to the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, when the US drew a red line in respect of the installation of medium-range missiles 70 km from its border and the world was at the brink of nuclear war.

“This is a very dangerous topic. It’s a topic of war. War between the US and Russia would be complete madness,” said Yanukovich referring to NATO expansion.

Described by critics as Russian propaganda, Oliver Stone’s Ukraine on Fire 2016 documentary presents verifiable claims that bring a different perspective when reflecting on the military escalation in Ukraine and have recently been voiced by the US political scientist John Mearsheimer.

Greek Debt Audit's Coordinator Accuses Criminal Debt System

Article published in Cafebabel

Greek tragedy. Andrea_44 © Flickr 

The situation in Greece is calamitous. Draghi has dictated the closing of all banks, restricting people to withdrawals of 60€ per day from the ATMs. How far will the Greek crisis go? The mainstream media has been flooding our news feed with the same discourse over and over again: Will there be reforms? Will Greece pay its debt? But what do we really know about what is happening in Greece? 

Outcomes of the Greek Debt 

Auditor Brazilian Maria Lucia Fattorelli is the coordinator of the Greek Debt Audit, whose outcomes she has presented in the Hellenic Parliament early in July. This technical and detailed description of the debt system’s modus operandi is a must see in order to widen our perspective and therefore our own conclusions about what is really happening behind this massive debt. The first point to note is that the set of agreements was not an initiative of the Greek government. "It was an initiative of the Troika and the benefits reverted to the organisms that constitute it,” said Fattorelli. 

Moreover, the conclusions from the audit show that all contracts analysed are attached to the memos and within an attachment they found another agreement. The mechanism found in the Bilateral Agreement was hidden in one of its annexes where it was another agreement. Fatorelli claims that through this mechanism, the money borrowed from bilateral creditors did not go to Greece; instead, abusive costs were transferred to the Hellenic country. 

The revelation of this mechanism tears down the utterance that the taxpayers of other European countries would be funding Greece. “We must submit a report. It is an instrument, not an opinion. Once made available, it is the responsibility of the government and society to know how to use it to change the situation of the country and its relations with creditors,” alerted Fattorelli. Many wonder why we haven't seen this information on the mainstream media. Shouldn’t this be public knowledge? 

Behind Fattorelli’s audit on the Greek debt, there are three main players at stake: The European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). 

The EFSF was created as a temporary crisis resolution mechanism by the Euro zone Member States in June 2010. However, some voices like Fattorelli claim that the IMF imposed the creation of the EFSF, turning this new mechanism into a disguised money laundering facility. The EFSF has already provided financial aid to Portugal, Greece and Ireland. A permanent rescue mechanism was also created in October 2012, the ESM. The ESM acts currently as the unique instrument responding to new requests for financial assistance by the Eurozone. So far, it has provided loans to Spain and Cyprus. 

During an event to promote support for the Greek people in Portugal, Francisco Louçā, coordinator of the Left Bloc party, has said that a “new order in which there is no space for either contracts or solidarity” has been created in Europe. To be true and proven that the entire debt system is a big scheme, dictating an ultimatum to Greece, is the absolute proof of how the world elite is working on shrinking human rights and dignity of life. Let us keep in mind that a bailout with the same features and conditions, massive austerity and the downfall of social rights, is now being paid back to its creditors, from Ireland, Portugal and Spain… 

The Greek Tragedy 

Luckily, we are living in a democracy, at least that is what all Europeans believe, and even though the Greek people might be under a terrible financial dictatorship, they were recently able to vote on a referendum where most Greeks admittedly manifested interest in leaving the Eurozone. Sunday, the so-called “Ultimate Summit” decided whether the creditors extended financial aid to Greece or not. As expected, Eurozone leaders reached an agreement over a new Greek bailout, which is still under discussion about its conditions. However, German Finance Minister Schäuble as well as Angela Merkel will put a short leash on Greece. 

What we are witnessing currently is a political struggle between the Greek Government and the “European government.” Along came a societal struggle and different stances have been formed throughout the EU. In one side, we see numerous protests across Europe trying to appeal to the suffering that the Greek people is enduring now and likely even more in the future. On the other side, we see a faction condemning Greece for its fiscal irresponsibility and many years of living like kings. This group claims that Greece should leave the Eurozone since they don’t want to pay more taxes because of the laziness of the Greek people. But is this really the truth? When we live in a democratic society, we have to face and respect other people’s opinions… 

A look back into Greek’s political history 

Despite of a big percentage of the European population being well aware of the tyrannical procedure of the banking system, in the Greek case, we have to take into consideration that, compared to many other European nations, they have been slightly more irresponsible when dealing with their public finances. 

When it comes to Politics, Modern Greece has always been an unstable country. It is important to rewind the tape in order to better understand the Greek crisis. In 1967, with support from the United States, Greece saw the installation of a dictatorship, which only ended in 1974. Considering that for half a century Greece hasn’t closed its budget (!), we must assume that there was an enormous governance problem inside the country. Along with an extreme badly management of Greek public accounts there is a powerful banking synchronization that has been destabilizing the whole Eurozone as well. 

For example, if we look at fractional-reserve banking, a very common banking policy and the current form of banking practiced in most countries worldwide, we can have a small idea of how banks play with our money generating debt — a huge irresponsible financial policy. The process is very simple: for instance, if you put 1 euro in the bank, 50 euros will automatically be assumed as ready to be lent, depending on the reserves of the bank. This system is clearly not sustainable on a large scale. 

The economic imperialism that has now blown-back to the United States and Europe has been evolving for decades and can be directly traced to the end of World War II, to the birth of the CIA, the IMF and the World Bank. “The stock market and economy have become weapons of mass oppression manipulated by an imperial banking cartel to impose order and exploit the masses. This crisis boldly represents the manifest evolution of the fascist spirit reasserting itself as the dominant ideology,” wrote David DeGraw in Global Research. 

Conclusions 

It is always difficult to make a reasonable judgment on the Greek crisis as many factors are at stake and we cannot take for granted that we know everything of this complex tragedy. 

It seems to be that an agreement will take place very soon and therefore Greece will remain in the Eurozone. The conditions of this agreement are yet to be known, but we already know that many of Syriza’s promises during the campaign period went downhill. Instead of getting rid of the debt, the Greeks will now pay more taxes, the VAT on restaurants will go up, and pensions will diminish. This is a recipe for disaster. If Greece wants to rise from the ashes and save the country from a likely default, it must open up, attract external investors, encourage internal investors and reduce the huge amount of bureaucracy that is constantly obstructing any attempt of progress. This is the only way of generating wealth in a country that has nothing to offer, besides tourism and high quality olive oil. 

Above all, one must have respect towards the Greek people, the cradle of democracy. Youth and the elderly do not have to pay for the mistakes of past governments, and the global banking cartel must be stopped. But, by whom? Are we really living in a democracy?

European Union Has Its Eyes On Greece

Article published in Cafebabel

Protestors in Greece, 2012. Josefcramer.com © Flickr

In two weeks, Greece’s trajectory might see a deep change in its modus operandi. With the left-wing party Syriza promising a debt renegotiation, the future of Europe might be unveiled on January 25th. 

After three unsuccessful voting rounds for presidential elections, Greece was pushed to parliamentary elections to be held on January 25th. Opinion polls show a victory by the left-wing party Syriza, known for its radicalism and anti-austerity ideology. Alexis Tsipras, Syriza’s leader, has already manifested his intention of wiping out part of the Greek debt as well as cancelling the terms of the bailout imposed by the European Union and the International Monetary Fund. "With the will of our people, in a few days bailouts tied to austerity will be a thing of the past," said Tsipras. However, the future is uncertain with Samara’s Conservative New Democracy gaining more prominence. This political pandemonium in Greece is worrying the financial markets, but Alex Tsipras has promised to keep Greece in the euro and renegotiate the debt instead of completely ignoring it. 

According to the latest polls, Syriza is leading the elections followed by the centre-right New Democracy. The communist KKE ranks third and the centre-left To Potami fourth. The extreme far-right Golden Dawn is ahead of PASOK, the centre-left coalition partner. The great new (or recent trend of the countries affected by the crisis) was the creation of a new political party, the Movement of Democratic Socialists, by former Prime Minister George Papandreou. This new bloc deserves some consideration as it might steal votes from both the weak PASOK and feared Syriza. Nevertheless, there’s always the possibility of governmental coalitions and there’s nothing that we can do but speculate while waiting for the elections’ outcomes. 

 Alexis Tsipras. Bulge-Luver © Flickr 

Europe is clearly apprehensive and different stances towards Greece are taking shape. The European left is supporting Greece and the end of austerity measures. Submissive countries reporting to autocratic entities is not the desired scenario for the leftists, let alone for the other Southern countries affected by this attack to their sovereignty such as Portugal, Spain and Cyprus. On the one hand, if Syriza succeeds, this could be the beginning of an economic and financial renegotiation, potentially unlocking Greece's deflated economy. On the other hand, the fear of an increased and cumulative debt has risen with the apprehension of what will happen if Greece doesn’t pay. Will it become the responsibility of other European states? 

Let us go back in History and recall the London Debts Agreements in 1953, a political treaty enabling Germany to re-enter the markets and to evolve as a nation after the catastrophic consequences of World War II. Greece was involved in this renegotiation, which provided Germany serious debt relief and eventually, allowed the country to prosper again. This is Alexis Tsipras' idea for the future of Greece and Europe. If history is cyclic, why not repeat the good deeds instead of only disasters and crisis?