The Ukrainian Conflict: A Ukrainian Nationalist View, Part 1

Pavlo Khomenko


Editor’s note: This series of articles on the current upheavals in Ukraine is written from the perspective of a Ukrainian nationalist. It also provides a nationalist perspective on Ukrainian history leading up to the present. It is of interest to TOO readers for many reasons. In particular, there are detailed comments on the conflict with Russia — a textbook case of competing nationalisms as described by Tom Sunic in several places (e.g., “Which way White Man?”). 

Comments are open for this article.

Over the past few months, there has been an enormous amount of analysis done in Western nationalist circles on the conflict in Ukraine. This analysis was, quite naturally, originally focused on the protests against the now overthrown Yanukovych government — and has since transferred towards the conflict between Ukraine and anti-state protesters inside the country. The events have been analyzed from an array of different perspectives: everyone from Eurasianists (or perhaps, I should call them “Duginists”) to Third Positionists and everything in between.

Although each respective analysis has come from a different angle, virtually every single piece of information on Ukraine on Western nationalist websites shares one key trait:  a complete lack of anything even remotely close to the Ukrainian nationalist view. This complete lack of presence of the Ukrainian nationalist view has given rise to numerous myths and quite strange theories. It can be compared to a modern, informational  Iron Curtain. Western nationalists and Ukrainian nationalists currently live in separate universes in terms of their information, and this has lead to numerous, unfortunate misunderstandings. In this article, I hope to finally give the Ukrainian nationalist view.


There are many topics to cover, and I will try to go over each of them as briefly as possible. The article is divided into three sections: myths regarding Ukraine, the overthrowing of the Yanukovych government, and the current conflict with the Russian Federation. I will most certainly be reading the comments and note any criticisms. So please, do not be shy. I do not ask you to believe only the Ukrainian nationalist view. I do ask you to remember that when taking any side in a conflict, one must know both sides of the argument itself. And at this moment, this is essentially impossible. Due to a widespread lack of informational presence of Ukrainian nationalists, only one side is known.

Part 1: Myths of Ukrainian History and Culture

Regardless of ideological school, every nationalist in the modern West is essentially a dissident in the classical sense of the word. Any person in the West who feels that Western peoples have the right to self-preservation risks being violently attacked, fired from work, or simply thrown into jail. As with many dissidents, the modern Western dissident looks for alternative information from sources that appear different from those of their oppressors.

This is normal and logical. Yet, when discussing Ukraine this is a problem. The vast majority of information regarding Ukraine obtained by Western nationalists ultimately stems from the Kremlin: whether it is the more mainstream Russia Today or the more rebellious Alexander Dugin. It is no wonder, then, that the myths spread regarding Ukrainians closely resemble former Soviet myths and tactics regarding us. I will attempt briefly to go over the largest propaganda myths spread against Ukraine and refute them. Please be aware that a separate article can be written on each one, and I am only trying to briefly summarize the most widespread ones as briefly as possible.

Myth 1: Ukrainians don’t exist

Perhaps the biggest one (and most anti-Ukrainian one) is that “Ukraine is a fake state,” “Ukraine was never a state,” “Ukrainians are not a nation,” etc.  Essentially, this piece of propaganda claims that the Ukrainian state is not a legitimate idea — that it is a state that was essentially created out of nothing, and this is the cause of its political turmoil.

The myth becomes most insulting when it is claimed that the Communists created Ukrainians and/or Ukraine. This is the most insulting because it was actually the Communists that destroyed the first modern-day Ukrainian state: the Ukrainian Peoples Republic, which came into existence after the collapse of the Russian empire and was destroyed in 1920 after a war with the USSR.

The early 20th century in general was a chaotic one for Ukrainians. Two identical, geographically separate Ukrainian states arose with the goal of reuniting Ukrainians: the Ukrainian Peoples Republic (eastern central Ukraine, central Ukraine, and some of Western Ukraine, as well as some lands currently located inside Russia arising out of the Russian Empire), and the Western Ukrainian Peoples Republic (with the rest of modern Western Ukraine, arising out of the Polish Empire).



While at the time, unfortunately, foreign aggression did not allow them ultimately to reunite, the fact that they all proclaimed such a goal, all had the same national anthem, crests and spoke the same language clearly shows they all belonged to one people. These states were identical in terms of language, symbols, etc., and covered all — I repeat, all — of the territory of modern Ukraine. One can view them as similar to North and South Korea, or eastern and Western Germany: one people, different states.

Actually, this fact is something Ukrainians can take pride in:  people who have lived separately, occupied by different empires for hundreds of years maintained the same language,  viewed themselves as one people and given the slightest chance, immediately pushed for reunification with their brothers. Ukrainians in this sense have been exactly the same as Kurds — a people divided by foreign empires, a stateless people, but most certainly one, united people.

Far from being a “falsely created people.” Ukrainians view our nation as one of the oldest in Europe and Asia: our roots are in the ancient Trypillian civilization that laid the foundation of the Ukrainian nation and culture over 5000 years ago. Many unique practices in modern Ukrainian culture and even words date back specifically to this civilization (For further reading, see Ukraine: from Tripillya to the Antes [Kyiv, 2009]) and it has been proven that the majority of Ukrainians by DNA are directly descendants of different tribes of this civilization.

Since then, human life that existed on inhabited parts of modern Ukraine always shared the same collective conscience (the key trait of a nation), from Kyivian Rus to Cossack states: there was never a time since then when (by their own will; thus, not counting foreign occupation) separate entities were formed by  Ukrainians that opposed each other — when completely separate worldviews and cultures existed amongst Ukrainians; there was always one genuine collective conscience in Ukraine for thousands of years that even transcended different imperial borders. This speaks of one, united ethnic people existing in Ukraine, and not “peoples brought together by Communists,” as propaganda from the Kremlin speaks of.

Of course, I do not wish to make it look like Ukrainians are some sort of special people. All peoples in Europe have a long history and their own national myths. I merely wish to reiterate that Ukrainians are by no means a “new people created by the Communists,” nor “Polanized Russians,” Ukrainians are a unique people who formed on all of the territory of modern Ukraine and were separated not by our own will, but by the will of foreign empires.

There is also significant proof that shows an enormous role modern Ukraine had in forming the White race — conducted largely by foreign researchers.

The Kurgan hypothesis of Indo-European expansion

The Kurgan hypothesis of Indo-European origins and expansion

Below: Versions of the Tryzub in ancient Ukraine, the state-symbol of modern Ukraine

Versions of the Tryzub in ancient Ukraine, the state-symbol of modern Ukraine

Myth 2: Catholic vs Orthodox

This myth states that Western Ukraine is Catholic and eastern Ukraine is Orthodox. This myth states that Eastern Ukraine favours Russia because it is Orthodox, while Western Ukraine favours the West because it is Catholic.

In reality, the majority of Western Ukraine is Orthodox and Ukrainians as a people are almost 90% Orthodox. Catholicism in Western Ukraine exists in the form of Greek-Catholicism — which is the religion of 60% of three small regions (out of over a dozen regions overall) of Western Ukraine called Galicia. Yet, Greek-Catholics have an inherently Eastern, Byzantine identity, cemented by the fact that this religion is, essentially, Orthodox Christianity that recognizes the Pope; and reinforced after years of unfortunate conflict with Roman Catholic Poles. Greek-Catholicism in Ukraine came into existence in the 16th century when Orthodox Ukrainians controlled by Poland turned towards the Vatican and asked it to protect Ukrainian culture inside Poland. The Vatican agreed, as long as they recognized the Pope. Some refused, some accepted. While internal conflicts did exist in history (for instance, early the Ukrainian King and leader of the Ukrainian Cossacks Petro Sahaydachny, from Galicia (Western Ukraine) himself, re-took key religious shrines in Kyiv from Greek-Catholics later in history), they were few and far between and, quite clearly, conflicts within one nation.

Furthermore, especially during the 19th century, it was among the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic clergy — not Ukrainian Orthodox clergy — that so-called Moscowphile (pro-Moscow) tendencies arose, with numerous priests and bishops pledging allegiance to Moscow after conflicts with Poland and calling upon all Ukrainians to do so. It was the Ukrainian Orthodox who trusted Moscow less and Ukrainian Orthodox who were more nationalistic, especially at the beginning of the 20th century.

I can confidently say that amongst Ukrainians, virtually no religious tension exists. Throughout the world and in Ukraine, if there is no Orthodox Church, Ukrainian Orthodox people will always visit a Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church and vice versa. This is because both of these religions are what we call Kyivian Christianity: they are a direct result of when King Volodomyr Christened Ukraine, and Ukrainians view both of them as “ours.” A Ukrainian Greek-Catholic views the Ukrainian Orthodox Church with more trust than the Roman Catholic Church; and a Ukrainian who is Orthodox views the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church with more trust than any other Orthodox Church. Ukrainian nationalists, both Greek-Catholic and Orthodox, always state that in terms of religion the goal is to re-unite the two Ukrainian Churches into one (Orthodox) Church. Thus, Catholic vs. Orthodox is not a reason for the division of Ukraine.

Myth 3: Ukrainian nationalists as Nazis

This myth states that Ukrainian nationalists are essentially all neo-Nazis. The government in Kyiv is apparently even Fascist, says Russia Today. This myth has gained ground for a few reasons: namely due to symbols used by us and and because of history.

Firstly, there exists a Ukrainian nationalist symbol that looks quite similar to a Wolfsangel. This symbol is actually called the Ідея Нації symbol, or the “Idea of the Nation” symbol. It was first used and resurrected by new-right organizations in Ukraine in the 1990s. The only movement that officially uses it as its symbol is the Patriot of Ukraine movement, yet currently it is essentially the unofficial symbol of the new-right in Ukraine, regardless of organization, used unofficially by everyone everywhere.  It combines the I and N letter in the ancient Ukrainian Cyrillic alphabet to symbolize our connection with our ancestors, with the I made to look like a sword. The exact same symbol has also been used on numerous occasions by Ukrainian dynasties and families in history.

5.jpeg (148×128)

The “Idea of the Nation” symbol used in history

For the overwhelming majority of Ukrainian nationalists, this is our symbol and has nothing to do with the Wolfsangel. We do not use it because we are neo-Nazis, or want to be like Germans. We use it because we view it as ours and a symbol of our movement, transcending across organizations.

Of course, I cannot go into the mind of those who resurrected it in the 1990s, but the explanation they gave is what I myself wrote above and what the overwhelming majority of us feel. Never, has any Ukrainian nationalist called this symbol a Wolfsangel. It is even used now (unfortunately) by more liberal nationalists too. It is how we identify our movement within Ukraine; from young people using it as avatars on social networking sites to professionals using it as a symbol for their book, we view it as our native symbol that differentiates patriots from other groups in Ukraine. I will not waste time reiterating that it is not a Wolfsangel: perhaps whoever resurrected it actually viewed it as such. The fact of the matter is that it is not viewed as such by Ukrainian nationalists. It is viewed as our own, unique Ukrainian and unique nationalist symbol.

Outside the captured Kyiv City Hall during the Maidan protests, pictures of Ukrainian poet Taras Shevchenko and independence fighter Stepan Bandera were hung.

Kremlin propaganda tried later to say a portrait of Hitler was placed there, photoshopping an image and spreading by official media as being authentic (see BBC  News, “Ukraine: Doctored ‘Kiev Hitler poster’ tweeted in Russia“).


Of course, symbols like the Celtic Cross are also widely used in Ukraine by nationalists. In fact, along with the flag of Ukraine, the Celtic Cross was even raised on top of certain buildings captured by protestors in Kyiv in the winter of 2013. Naturally, we don’t view the Celtic Cross as ours (and indeed, it is even called the “Celt” in Ukrainian)— nor as a symbol of Nazism. For us, this is simply a symbol of European unity.

Perhaps another reason for this view is our sympathy with so-called “Nazi collaborator” Stepan Bandera. Of course, it wouldn’t matter to us if he was a Nazi-collaborator, but it is strange for a Nazi-collaborator to sit in a German concentration camp during the war, as well as to have his immediate family members executed by the Nazis. For us, Bandera is a symbol of someone who fought for an independent Ukraine: nothing more, nothing less.

Besides Bandera, there is SS Galicia — a Ukrainian nationalist movement during World War Two that was actually allied with Germany (not only allied in Soviet propaganda, as in the case of Bandera). Of course, we sympathize with them as well — but because they also fought for the rights of Ukrainians. In this sense, SS Galicia is much more like similar movements in the Baltics or Croatia directly allied with Nazi Germany than Stepan Bandera’s movement that fought against the Nazis as much as against the USSR. There are numerous nationalist folk songs about both the movement of Bandera and SS Galicia.

What might surprise many is that the Ukrainians who fought in the Red Army are also viewed as heroes by the vast majority of Ukrainian nationalists. We differentiate the Red Army, where most people were forced to fight, from the secret police like the NKVD, where people went by their own will. They, of course, are absolute enemies. The grandfathers of many nationalists fought in the Red Army, and no one views it as something they are afraid to mention. The majority of veterans of these armies now shake hands and are all happy that their dream of an independent Ukraine finally came true. The fact that three separate armies existed of the same people is a small example of a large tragedy that took place during WWII — a war between brothers.

To summarize, while Ukrainians are by far not “anti-fascists.” the view held by most Ukrainian nationalists is that Germany sadly lost the war because of its own ethnic chauvinism. Had it recognized the Ukrainian state in 1941, it would have obtained an enormous amount of resources and manpower that could have shifted the balance of the war. But it didn’t and actually threw the leaders of that state in jail. This ultimately turned most locals against them. Ukrainian nationalists are not Nazis or neo-Nazis.

Below:  Examples of variations of the Idea of the Nation symbol used today

ІN (10)




Below: Idea of Nation symbol on Maidan, mistakenly called a Wolfsangel. Note numerous Orthodox icons in the background.


Below:  Same symbol on protesters.



Myth 4: Divided Ukraine

This myth states that there is some sort of deep and eternal divide in Ukraine — a divide so large that it has caused “civil war.” This divide is between Western and Eastern Ukraine and the fact that Western Ukraine is “Ukrainian,” whereas eastern Ukraine is “Russian”.

In reality, every single piece of land in modern Ukraine is ethnically Ukrainian and belongs to Ukraine. It is land where the Ukrainian nation historically formed and land where one, united national consciousness existed that sometimes even transcended borders.

I will not get into history, except to say that after losing statehood in the 13th century to the Mongols, Ukrainians did not regain it again until the 20th century.

(For a good account of the basic history, I recommend Emile Durand’s Countercurrents article, “White Nationalist Delusions about Russia, because it differentiates between Kyivian Rus [which was an early Ukrainian and perhaps Belarusian state that later helped in forming Russia] and the Grand Duchy of Moscow, which was an early Russian state. They were two separate political entities.)

When Ukraine was invaded by the Mongols in the 13th century, different principalities fell at different times, and a united Ukraine, incorporating both the Western and eastern parts that were ruled by Kyiv prior to this invasion did not come into existence again until the early 20th century.

The Mongol invasion was the beginning of a long occupation by foreign powers. Yet, despite this, both in Eastern and Western Ukraine, Ukrainian political entities existed on every piece of land that is currently Ukraine. Whether in the form of autonomy within a greater empire (such as inside Poland or in the Rzeczpospolita) in Western Ukraine, or in terms of briefly independent states and/or autonomy in Central and Eastern Ukraine, there is an array of evidence that shows the rulers of these states/autonomies  viewed themselves as rulers of a particular people, as did ordinary citizens. They spoke the same language, had the same heroes, professed the same religion, had the same traditional clothes and had the same traditions. Again, as mentioned earlier: Ukrainians in history are much like the Kurds today.

As mentioned above, the predecessors to modern Ukraine can be viewed as three separate states: the Ukrainian People’s Republic of 1918 (covering some of modern-day Western Ukraine, modern-day Central Ukraine, modern-day Eastern Ukraine, as well as some lands currently located inside Russia), the Western Ukrainian People’s Republic (covering most of modern-day Western Ukraine) and Carpathian Ukraine (covering the rest of modern-day Western Ukraine).

It is quite clear that the Ukrainian People’s Republic, even in 1918, was as pro-Ukrainian as any political entity that ever existed in Ukrainian history. All of Eastern Ukraine today, as well as some lands currently located in Russia, were in this state, and inside the state they clearly had a Ukrainian identity. After centuries of being in the Russian Empire, it was clear that this region of modern day Ukraine never viewed itself as even anything other than Ukrainian.

The only reason the Ukrainian People’s Republic and the Western Ukrainian People’s Republic did not re-unite was due to the fact that the Western Ukrainian People’s Republic was so short-lived and did not obtain the international recognition that the Ukrainian People’s Republic did. Yet, after the Western Ukrainian People’s Republic fell, the security units of that state immediately transferred into the Ukrainian People’s Republic and, alongside the Ukrainian units of the army of the former Russian Empire, formed one national army. Without any conflicts whatsoever.

Again, this is something incredible: men from completely different empires, who lived in different countries for hundreds of years, immediately understood each other as one and formed one army. The Kurds of Europe.

Incidentally, one further interesting fact is that Eastern Ukraine at the time was originally staunchly anti-Moscow — it proposed getting closer to Poland as being the best idea for an independent Ukraine, while Western Ukraine was originally staunchly anti-Poland, and wanted to get closer to Moscow.

So, what exactly happened?

Why was Eastern Ukraine the heart of Ukrainian nationalism then, and why is it not now? Why was it the headquarters for Ukrainian intellectuals deciding how to liberate Western Ukraine and create — finally — a united Ukraine, and something quite different now? How did it go from being the heart of Ukrainian identity in the 1920s to the heart of anti-Ukrainian separatists in 2014?

The politically incorrect reality is that the division of modern Ukraine is largely a result of the Holodomor 1932–1933 famine. This genocide specifically targeted Ukrainians and Ukrainian cultural presence in the part of Ukraine that was then part of the Soviet Union: Eastern Ukraine, as well as areas where mostly Ukrainians lived that are now part of Russia, like the Kuban region. There is no division between Ukrainians. There is a division between Ukrainians  and the descendants of those whom the Soviet government moved to Eastern Ukraine to replace the murdered Ukrainians. We are all well aware that the famine itself was not committed by Russians. Yet, the population of the region was nevertheless largely changed from Ukrainians to Russians.

Yes, there are other differences: one side of Ukraine was historically more influenced by Poland, and the other Russia; on one side, one finds more Catholicism than the other. But this is very minor and these differences never stopped Ukrainians in history from Eastern and Western Ukraine as always viewing each other as the same people. Furthermore, such differences exist in all countries. The division of Ukraine today is a direct result of the Holodomor and the mass political repression against the Ukrainian identity that followed, changing Eastern Ukraine from a center of Ukrainian nationalism to an exhausted region without an identity.

Out of the key modern Ukrainian nationalist thinkers through history, the majority are not from Western Ukraine (as Russia Today or Alexander Dugin might claim), but eastern Ukraine: everyone from Dmytro Dontsov (the greatest Ukrainian traditionalist thinker and theoretician of integral nationalism, he actively worked with Stepan Bandera), to Mykola Mikhnovsky, to Mykola Stsiborsky, to Taras Shevchenko and beyond… . All of these intellectuals had a vision of one, united Ukraine and had no sympathy for Moscow, which they viewed as an oppressor.

The referendum on independence, in which every modern region of Ukraine voted on whether it wanted to be part of a future, independent Ukraine, was conducted in 1991. The results can be seen below. Needless to say, the overwhelming majority of the population in every part of the country voted to be part of an independent Ukraine. In general, the support for Ukrainian unity and independence was supported by around 95% of Western Ukraine and 90% of eastern Ukraine. It is also worth noting that the opposition against the vote was strongest in areas with the highest numbers of ethnic Russians. Indeed, only in Crimea, which is the only region of Ukraine where the majority of the population is ethnically Russian (largely due to the Soviet Union) were the results even close, with 56% voting for, 41% voting against and the rest abstaining or not voting correctly.


Percentages voting ‘yes’ at the 1991 referendum


Percentages voting ‘no’ in the 1991 referendum)

Ukraine is a completely homogenous country. In 2001, ethnic Ukrainians composed almost 80% of the country. They are a strong majority not only in all of Western Ukraine, but in Eastern Ukraine too. Thus, certain news reports calling eastern Ukraine “Russian inhabited” are completely false. Ethnic Ukrainians are the vast majority of the population, although there does exist a vocal Russian minority. Russians are approximately 17% of the population of Ukraine, and around 15% to 30% of eastern Ukraine, depending on the region, with ethnic Ukrainians composing the rest.

Even despite the Holodomor, Eastern Ukraine remains staunchly pro-Ukrainian. Although a strange example, I feel it is actually quite telling: those who talk of a divided Ukraine should merely watch matches of the Ukrainian football team in any city of Ukraine and observe how people celebrate after a victory. Regardless of the city, the support is very strong anywhere it plays. In cases of a truly divided country — such as the old Yugoslavia — I cannot imagine Croatia playing a match in Belgrade and receiving staunch support or fans singing the Serbian anthem in Zagreb. Yet the Ukrainian national team can play anywhere in eastern Ukraine and receive incredible support, as it did during Euro-2012. This is minor, yet telling.

Even today, and despite all of this history, there hardly exists a divide between Eastern and Western Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine today largely speaks Russian. This is a result of the Holodomor and the staunch Russification policies of the USSR that followed. Yet, the overwhelming majority of eastern Ukraine view their native language as Ukrainian.  Everyone in eastern Ukraine speaks Ukrainian fluently, and it is only a generation before the majority will speak Ukrainian in day-to-day life. There is currently a rebirth and reawakening of Ukrainian identity well underway in eastern Ukraine, as the vast majority of the population take back what is rightfully theirs. This will be and is undoubtedly something that the aggressive minority of the population — largely the ancestors of those brought to Ukraine after the Holodomor — dislikes.

To summarize, Ukrainians are, indeed, a real nationality with a long history. Although Ukrainians are very far from being anti-fascists, the average Ukrainian sees himself as a Ukrainian nationalist, not a Nazi. There is no division of Ukrainians based on geography or religion. There is a division between those inside Ukraine who recognize Ukraine and those who hate Ukraine, similar in the West to anti-Whites.

Go to Part 2.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

34 Comments to "The Ukrainian Conflict: A Ukrainian Nationalist View, Part 1"

  1. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    July 2, 2014 - 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Mike, you stated, “Yet my family spoke Ukrainian and not Russian. The whole concept of being Ukrainian was “foreign” to them.”

    So, this means nothing much. Look at the varieties of white European people who’ve been in North Amerika for centuries. I know I can’t understand a word some of the deep southerners are saying, but they are still northern European, same as those who live in more northerly areas of N. Amerika. They can still rightly all call themselves “white” or “of European descent” or even just “Amerikan”.

    People who consider themselves Ukrainian come from a variety of tribes, same as British northern Europeans living here come from somewhat different tribes and have quite different speech. My parents are Hutsuls and they are Ukrainian and they didn’t consider themselves separate from or different from other who describe themselves as Ukrainians here in N.A.

    But, hey, we’re all headed for the high jump anyway and can die together still wondering if we are Russians or Ukrainians. LOL.

  2. Gwst's Gravatar Gwst
    June 17, 2014 - 11:36 am | Permalink

    The situation in Ukraine today: Jewish “elites” encouraging whites to kill each other, so that Jews may have more power.

    Don’t be stooges, Ukraine. Wake up.

  3. TD's Gravatar TD
    June 10, 2014 - 5:15 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for your article (charm offensive) but I have to really disagree on what you are trying to explain. I am a proud european nationalist (and I visit Ukraine several times per year) and would like to make some thoughts and state some very painful facts:

    1. Sorry to say but the majority of Ukrainians (those you are calling Ukrainians in your article ) are shockingly naieve and extremely ill informed when it comes to politics, geopolitics and power structures in general. This was already proven during earlier failed coloured ”revolutions” and with the outcome of the most recent uprising, it has been proven once again. You are making the wrong alliances on every level in your struggle. The vast majority of european nationalists are vehemently opposed to your actions and the way you guys have conducted yourselves (Adinolfi being the only exception, strange you do not mention any other nationalist movements in europe…). We can all see who now rules in Ukraine. Is that the outcome you wanted? Thanks to you guys it is the final outcome: more jewish domination with all associated consequences.

    2. If you feel ukrainian nationalists are misunderstood or never heard, why can’t ukrainian nationalists make a simple webpage explaining your position in english, just a few key bulletpoints. For example, Jobbik in Hungary does this. And it helps other nationalists in Europe to understand. That is a basic strategy to get some support. Greek Golden Dawn is another example. Why can’t you guys do it? It is obvious why. See point 1.

    3. Why on earth did the consortium of Ukrainian nationalists accept an invitation by the Israeli Embassy and subsequently sign a truce + explicitly pledge to refrain from any ”antisemitic” attacks during the uprising? (proven fact)? Where did that come from and why do you accept such a ridiculous idea?

    4. Why did the consortium of ukrainian nationalists allow (former) members of the IDF to be leaders in the recent street battles (proven fact, as also reported in Haaretz). Add this to the above point.

    5. During the uprising, many ukrainian nationalists were directly paid on a daily basis by several jewish oligarchs to keep the pressure on and cause havoc (proven fact). In other words you were bought by your eternal enemies who seek to ultimately destroy YOU and you fell for it.

    Look what you have achieved now: those that seek to destroy us, nationalism and all the traditional values we jointly stand for, are in charge. Well done!…

  4. nick's Gravatar nick
    June 10, 2014 - 3:06 pm | Permalink

    Make peace with your russian brethren!
    This conflict is harmful to us all.

  5. Askold's Gravatar Askold
    June 10, 2014 - 3:04 am | Permalink

    Just take intervals away

    h t t p : / / e r s i e e s i s t . l i v e j o u r n a l. c o m / 8 1 3 .h t m l

  6. Askold's Gravatar Askold
    June 10, 2014 - 2:55 am | Permalink

    Well, Rosa, Valtzman/poroshenko also claims to be orthodox. Thats mean little for jew. Talmud prescribe to cheat gentile to advance jewish cause. In 1996 Firtash immigrated to Germany as jew-immigration was almost completely closed for non jews, as you might know from Jackson-Vanick law.

  7. Rosa's Gravatar Rosa
    June 8, 2014 - 3:41 pm | Permalink

    can you provide links on the jewshness of the politicians you mention? I think Firtash is catholic

  8. Book Adams's Gravatar Book Adams
    June 8, 2014 - 12:10 am | Permalink

    James Reinfeld’s comments nailed it.

    This article didn’t once mention the Jewish oligarchs that own Ukraine. The crypto-JEWS like Yats who were installed by Victoria Nuland.

    Here’s an eyeopener:

  9. Askold's Gravatar Askold
    June 8, 2014 - 12:04 am | Permalink

    Another interesting observation of the situation in the “New nationalistic ukraine” that this entity is now is so jewish, that never was in history, exept may be khazar kaganat 1000 years ago. Ukraine now is new khazaria in fact. Two main sponsors of the “popular uprising of the Ukrainians on the path to their liberty, prosperity and European union” better known under the name Maidan-2 (Maidan -1 was 10 years ago in 2004 and received 500 millions of dollars from the infamous jewish oligarch from Russia-Boris Berezovskiy, who called it “one of the best investment I ever made”)) were jewish oligarch igor (beniamin) kolomoyski- president of the european jewish congress, member of chabad lubavitch and driving force behind biggest jewish center in Europe-“menora” center in Dniepropetrovsk and other oligarch, “chocolade baron”- now turned “president”, illegally elected of course, with acting Presi dent alive and by only 27% of Ukranian voters-Petro Poroshenko (his true name is Valtzman). They created even specific name for this alliance between “jews” (“zhidy”) and banderovtzy”-“zhidobandera” and very peculiar symbols – trident with payots. Unfortunately, author of the article that show older tridents, is perhaps too shy and didntt show to the readers of “The Occidental Observer” this newest symbol of “modern Ukraine”.бендеровцы-коломойский-Жидобандера-троль-80-уровня-1160560.jpeg
    Indeed political figures of this recently formed “new kazaria” on ukranian territory are formidable: president Valtzman/poroshenko, premier-minister -protege of Victoria Nuland/Nudelman – Arseniy (Senya) Yatzenuk/ Bakai-descendant of famous talmudist Rabby Bakai and married to the jewish “princess” from Gur(Ger) dynasty, mayor of Kiev-capital and most important city of Ukraine – Etinzon/Klitchko, second in ranks on political scene Yulia Timoshenko/Kapitelman, one of the main actors of recent coup d’etat on “Maidan-2″ so called by some people Anti-Zionist” ‘Svoboda” party is completely on paycheck from Igor Kolomoyskiy – President of European Jewish Congress and builder of biggest jewish center in Europe – “Golden Rose” synagogue complex in Dniepropetrovsk. Leader of “Svoboda’ Oleg Tyagnibok grandmother had very proud but not very ukranian last name of Frotman. The gobernors of richest regions of Ukraine:Taruta, Kolomoyskiy, Gennadiy Adolfovich Kernes, jewish oligarch Pinchuk, Rabinovich, Firtash, etc., etc., in total at least 80% of all the assets and wealth of Ukraine are now in jewish hands. It could be called incredible if it wouldn’t be so evident!
    The neocons-neotrotzkists from the state department and other top washington political insitutions (3 generation pale of settlement e.g. Ukraine immigrants, as nudelman/nuland and company) and jewish oligarchs (that became politicians in Ukraine) want to present current situation there as a conflict between big bad Russia (and most personally bad Putin, so evil, that he is now a new “new Hitler” after older “new Hitlers e.g. Saddam Husein and Gaddafi. And when jews speak about “new Hitler” indeed they mean “new Aman”) and small good and brave Ukraine – quintessence of all virtues, fighting big bad fearful Goliath for its liberty, independence and “European choice”. Such a simple, useful and false story!
    The young people of Ukraine were fed by this nonsense anti-Russian ideology during last 24 years everywhere, from school to mass media and now jewish oligarch are exploited them as useful idiots for overtake completely political and economic structures of power in Ukraine.
    The jews use these carefully cultivated “ucranian nationalists” feelings “to divide and conquer” first of all Ukraine itself, but mostly to debilitate and conquer Russia, as they did it with the former Yugoslavia 10 years ago. Later on they will trow away all those radical “ukranian nationalists” with their galitzian mythologies as they did it already with croatian nationalists after Yugoslavia was divided and conquered.
    P.S. US Department of State spent at least 5 billions of dollars in recent years on “support democracy and open society” in Ukraine as Victoria Nudelman/Nuland said. They announced plans to spend 30 billions during next 3 years in Russia for the same goal. In plain terms it is the war against Russia and personally against Putin! revenge for his stance on Syria and Iran.

  10. Askold's Gravatar Askold
    June 8, 2014 - 12:03 am | Permalink


  11. shelbyco's Gravatar shelbyco
    June 7, 2014 - 11:23 pm | Permalink

    The article was excellent. It confirmed what I always felt the labeling of the nationalist as Nazi was neo-con, liberal and Russian disinformation. I would hope the author will go into more detail in the future about the cultural and political impact of the Holodomor on modern Ukraine. This event must have been deeply suppressed. I can’t image the killing of millions in a small population won’t at some point become ‘unsuppressed’.

  12. nationalist's Gravatar nationalist
    June 7, 2014 - 6:16 pm | Permalink

    Protect your movement. It is precious.

  13. nationalist's Gravatar nationalist
    June 7, 2014 - 6:15 pm | Permalink

    Yikes. Just found another honey pot in this movement. It’s scary out there, guys. Do be careful. It can get pretty underworld-y. Jesus said “You will know them by their fruits”. Degenerate behavior photos, etc.. Somebody impersonating, I don’t know, Me…or you on the internet. Could really harm somebody. I forget how mean people can be.There are very bad folks out there. God love you all. Gotta go.

  14. Tudor's Gravatar Tudor
    June 7, 2014 - 1:53 pm | Permalink

    I will refer to issues concerning only Romania.
    The first map, Ukraine Nov. 1918 – Mar. 1919, incorrectly shows Romania as an aggressor.
    The region marked on the mentioned map as Bessarabiawas taken in 1812 from Moldova, a Romanian kingdom, by Russian Empire.
    The region marked on the mentioned map as Bukovina was taken in 1774 from Moldova, a Romanian kingdom, by Austrian Empire.
    Romania took them back in 1918 only to loose them again, Bukovina partially, in 1941 to USSR as a result of the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.
    Crimea was part of Moldova till XV centuries. In a letter sent to the Doge of Venice by Ștefan cel Mare, Prince of Moldavia, 1433-1504, asking for help, clearly says that if he is loosing Cetatea Albă and Chilia, fortresses menaced by ottomans, then he cannot regain Crimea, from tatars I belive.

  15. Winston Smith's Gravatar Winston Smith
    June 7, 2014 - 11:44 am | Permalink

    The article cleared up some of my thinking in this area! I believed, due to the great Alexander Dugin, that western Ukraine was European and eastern Ukraine was Russian. Now I know the Russians moved in after the Jews killed off the Ukrainians during the Holodomor of 1929-1932….

    I like Putin, but I’m well aware he has an intense propaganda machine that lies when it suits Russian interests. It suits the Russian to frame the anti-government movements as Nazis because it works within a pro-Russian tradition of imposing people who have an agenda against the state. The Russians beat the Nazis, right?

    Well, these guys fighting against the regime in Ukraine are Nazis — get them!

    Putin isn’t stupid. His propaganda campaign is designed to unite his people against the NWO. This article, however, was great! I look forward to part 2.

  16. Uncle Sam's Gravatar Uncle Sam
    June 7, 2014 - 9:59 am | Permalink

    This is not a struggle between Ukrainians and Russians, who are essentially the same people. The only major cultural difference are the languages, which in any case are mutually intelligible. What we are seeing in Ukraine today is the outward manifestation of a desire on the part of the Jewish controlled American government as well as Russophobes like Zbigniew Brzezinski to encircle Russia with the ultimate goal of breaking it up into smaller pieces. They believe that once they break that country up it would be far easier to take control of the broken up parts.
    Russia is the biggest obstacle to the realization of the New World Order run by private central bankers like Rockefeller and the Rothschilds. Brzezinski is of course Rockefeller’s mouthpiece.
    The Ukrainian people are mere pawns in all of this. The pity is that many of them do not see this and are blinded by historical grievances against the Russians. So fundamentally this is all about geopolitics— nothing more, nothing less.
    The Russians, on the other hand, at this time certainly, have not shown any desire for empire. Nor why would they. They are the only country in the world that could become an autarky, if they so choose.
    The problem is that Russians, as well as the Chinese and Iranians, who are also being targeted by the Rockefeller/ Rothschild combine, know perfectly well what is going on and will not allow it to succeed.

  17. ATBOTL's Gravatar ATBOTL
    June 7, 2014 - 9:38 am | Permalink

    The claim that all the people living in the “Ukrainian Republic”(that sort of existed for a year or two during the chaos after the revolution and before the Bolsheviks consolidated control over the former Russian empire) spoke the same language and had the same ethnic identity is highly, highly suspect. That map shows this Ukrainian nation occupying land that now belongs to every single one of its neighbors, land now lived on by people who are not Ukrainian and whose ancestors never called themselves Ukrainian.

    The claim that modern Ukraine is based in the “Trypillian civilization” a probably non-Indo European culture that likely originated in the Near East and entered Europe during the neolithic era with the spread of agriculture is similarly suspect. It’s likely that modern Ukranians(and Europeans in general) are mostly descended from people who lived in Russia/Siberia 5,000 years and who displaced the folks from the “Trypillian civilization.” Ukraine has no more to do with “Trypillian civilization” than Germany has to do with the neolithic farmers from the Near East that occupied Germany 5,000 years ago.

    Ukrainian nationalists need to understand that as long as they are in anyway allied with or supported by NATO, the EU, globalists, neo-liberals etc. they will not get any support or sympathy from nationalists in the West. No amount of pleading or explaining will change that.

    I will go even further and say that many Eastern European nationalists are not really part of the same movement as white nationalists in the West are. We are fighting against third world immigration, the collapse of the middle class and other problems that don’t exist in Ukraine or most of Eastern Europe. We really have nothing in common with Ukrainian or Croatian nationalists. They live in homogenous white countries with no immigration where their own nationalism it is approved of and supported by the elites, if not to the extent that they would like.

    Russian nationalists on the other hand live in a multiethnic empire with immigration and long standing non-white minorities, that much more resembles our own societies(especially the USA) and their problems and struggles are easier to relate to. Putin’s moderately nationalist regime in Russia, one that puts Russians first, but doesn’t go for neo-nazi imagery or rioting mobs is very much like what most nationalists in the West would like to see in our own countries. We are also impressed by Russia’s current leaders deep understanding of the corrupting effects of things like feminism, the destruction of the family and the loss of masculinity. The political leaders of those E. European countries that are in the West’s orbit, many of whom are nationalists, have no interest in or understanding of such things. They are blindly following the West, cargo-cult style. What is especially inspiring about Russia to nationalists in the West is that after the USSR collapsed, Russia was ruled by the same alliance of aliens and traitors that rule our countries. Putin ousted those people and imposed sane policies.

    The way this conflict is being portrayed and used by the establishment here in the West is VERY reminiscent of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia during the 90’s. It’s the same divide and conquer strategy where some nationalisms are ignored or even praised while others are attacked. We will always sympathize with the people that our domestic enemies are attacking as “bad nationalists.” The exact same people in the US who supported Croatian and Bosnian and Albanian nationalism are now supporting Ukrainian nationalism. These are the exact same people in the US who are most in favor of open borders, multiculturalism and other anti-white policies. It’s uncanny how closely support for Ukrainian or Albanian nationalism among US politicians tracks with support for amnesty for illegal aliens and increased immigration. Nothing illustrates this better than the two leaders of those Republicans in Congress who want to amnesty illegals and throw open the borders, Lindsey Graham and John McCain. Both have been hysterically supportive of Ukrainian nationalists as they demand open borders here at home. They are the leaders on both issues.

    PS, Those who cannot be named have been the most fanatical supporters of Albanian/Bosnian/Croatian and now Ukrainian nationalism in the US media and politics. During the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia during the 90’s, the preponderance of certain names and faces in attacking Serbians was so glaring that even some of the unenlightened noticed. I think it’s no exaggeration to say that without the influence of these people, the USA would never have got involved in any of these conflicts.

  18. James Reinfeld's Gravatar James Reinfeld
    June 7, 2014 - 8:35 am | Permalink

    Pavlo Khomenko, your description of a fully formed and monolithic Ukrainian identity doesn’t square with the rule of the Jewish oligarchs that Russian-haters have put in power.

    To orient against fellow-white Russians and Russophile Ukrainians as enemies whose identities, claims and rights are denied and may be suppressed by violence, while tacitly accepting alien and hostile Jews as “us” and legitimate rulers, shows a national consciousness that isn’t fully or wisely formed.

    “Myth 1: Ukrainians don’t exist” is not what people are saying. Rather, it is denied that Jewish oligarchs, neocons such as Victoria Nuland, and Ukrainian Russophobes, mostly but not entirely based in the West, should get to define what “Ukrainian” is.

    (If you really want to hear the idea “‘Ukrainians’ do not exist” pressed with force, keep giving power to a Jewish ruling class, and let them institute non-white mass immigration. In time those wonderful people who told the world that “Palestinians do not exist” will say something similar about you.)

    A mature Ukrainian nation that insisted on an all-white, Ukrainian ruling class, that included Russophilia as legitimate, but that explicitly excluded non-white mass immigration, cultural subversion and economic exploitation, could live forever next to Russia.

    A Ukrainian “nation” defined by people that think Russians are the main “them”, that white-on-white violence is smart, and that the Ukrainian national identity will be safe with a foreign-backed Jewish ruling class, cannot secure a future for its children.

    I don’t think a proposed definition of the “national spirit” of a white nation that’s so ill-formed that it excludes a secure future for the nations’s white children can be legitimate.

    Finally, why should whites in other countries support a proposed “Ukrainian” identity that is opposed to the shared interests of whites (which includes Russians) and that stands, in effect, for Jewish rule? What’s in it for us, to agree that this is what “Ukrainian” must be?

  19. June 7, 2014 - 7:45 am | Permalink

    Congratulations on the informative piece Mr. Khomenko. While we may all in Europe, especially nationalist parties, admire Putin’s stance on some traditional values, since Peter the Great Russia hasn’t hided her bearish hegemonic appetites bent on swallowing up smaller nations in the vicinity – in the name of some abstract ( Christian Orthodox , pan- Slavic) universalism , communism notwithstanding. The real issue today for all Europeans and White Americans is to decipher the prime enemy vs friend. Or to put it differently in regard to the current Ukrainian crisis: who benefits from incessant historical quarrels between and amidst Europeans? I guess we partly know the answer. Regards. Tom Sunic

  20. Askold's Gravatar Askold
    June 7, 2014 - 3:17 am | Permalink

    And one more detail most of ideology of the so called “Ukranian nationalists” is just irrational russophoby, hate of everything Russian. So irrational and so russophobic that there are many jokes (sometimes cruel) about it even in the Ukraine itself. Author of the above mentioned article made a reference to another “investigation” where such a passage can be found :”…even the whitest of Russians, to the extent that he thinks of himself as a Russian, is committed to a trans-racial identity, an identity whose racial “substratum” includes not just European, but also Mongoloid and Near Eastern (e.g., Caucasian) elements, as well as mixtures of all three.” This is completely false statement. In the Russian mind there are and always was very strong sense of national (in European sense of this word e.g. Racial, genetic as oppose to “new World” sense of state or land of birth) identification and national pride, without however fear or hate to other nations (perhaps because of strong role of Christian values in Russian National mindset). During communist years it was and still under pressure from “internationalism” ideology but anybody interested in the topic can easily find numerous confirmations of this point of view from Russian folklore and articles on “National pride of the Great Russians” (I guess even Lenin wrote article on this topic-obviously full of harsh critique, and this trend is still very alive among Moscow jewish TV, radio, other mass media and journalists) to the history of for example “Aufbau” movement of white Russian emigrants ( such as Shabelskiy-Borkh, Feodor Vinberg, Gen. Biskupskiy) in Munich, Germany in 1920’s. Alfred Rosenberg, and other future statesmen of the Third Reich were close to this group and learned something first hand from the shared experience of its members, in regard of jewish role in so called “Russian revolution”.

  21. Askold's Gravatar Askold
    June 7, 2014 - 1:39 am | Permalink

    Well, this article is potpourri of new “Ukranian ideology” or, better be said “new Ukranian mythology” formed in Galichina (few most western parts of modern “ukranian” territory, that was formerly parts of Austro-Hungarian and Polish states and retain anti-Russian ideological overtones of that states). Unfortunathely, author dont mention such a wide spreaded among “new ukranian nationalists ” view that Jesus Christ along with Julius Ceasar and virtually everybody else in mankind history were in fact “Ukranians” and latine language as well as sanscrit are just derivative of “ukranian langage”. It might sounds crazy, but in fact, these are ideas of today’s “ukranian nationalists”! And these are just small extention of idea of Trilol’eand Kurgan cultures as “ukranian”. The word “ukraine” means “on tht border” in Russian langage and this part of Russia, that called ,”Ukraine” should be called “Little Russia” or “Malorossia”. It occupies approx. 1/3 central part of “modern ukraine” and consists of regions of Vinnitza, Zhitomir, Khmelnitzkiy, Kiev, Chernigov, Cherkassy, Sumy, Poltava (see reduced map here . Other big part of the modern “ukranian” territory is actually 8 or 9 regions of the New Russia or “NovoRossia” that was reunited to Russian state in XVIII century, when these lands didnt know any “ukranian” population on them and consists of regions of Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Donetzk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporozh’e, Kirovograd, Odessa, Nikolaev. As for Kievan Rus-this was initial Russian state, until capital, due to mongol invasion was moved to the North, first to Vladimir (this period is kniwn as Voadimir Rus) and later on to Moscow, then to Sankt Petersburg and after 1917 again to Moscow. So, this article consisted of (in my view) 70% of facts turned upside down, 20% frankly false or half-true statements (and a half-true is still a lie)like mention of december 1991 referendum, when, after collaps of USSR in august 1991, Ukranian SSR ( by the way formed in its actual frontiers by communist regime and Lenin, Trotzkiy and Khruschev personally-see the map here get its sudden “independence” much as a result of a personal conflict between Gorbachev and Yeltzin and proclaimed it 23 of August 1991. Question on december 1991 referendum was:”do you recognize proclamation of independence of Ukraine?” As a matter of fact people answered yes, because sush an act was proclaimed earlier in August, even without they consent. But 6 month earlier, in March 1991, on referendum about future of Soviet Union more than 73%of population of Ukranian Republic did choose to live in USSR and agains independence. So almost everything in this article is at least questionable, not to say false. But it is typical ideological mix from Galichina and unfortunathely this mythology became state accepted since 1991 on territory of “Ukraine. And by the way earlier comment of Mike Yankovoy, whose parents were from Vinnitza ( western part of Malorossia and still identified themselfes as Russians). So did most of the population of “Ucraine” before WWI and brutal genocide of Russian speaking/self concious population in first concntration camps of Talergof and Teresin. Posterior encouragments of Galitchina’s nationalistic and fiercely anti-Russian sentiments by Austro-Hungary first, then by Poland and then by Hitler’s Germany resulted in almost complete extermination or exile people self identified as Russians or Rusins/Malorussians from these western areas of the country.

  22. Kyra Marat's Gravatar Kyra Marat
    June 7, 2014 - 1:23 am | Permalink

    Ukrainian nationalism is admirable and so is its quest to be independent. But it is not strong enough to be economically independent nor to dictate its own rules. It will always be exploited by some power. At one time Poland, at another time Russia and now the West. While the land mass of Ukraine is huge compared to the smaller Balkan countries, it is broke economically and morally. It has to look for protection from either Russia or the West. If it chooses the West, Putin will not be pleased. If it chooses Russia, the West will not be pleased. It is the same place theoretically as when it chose Germany over Russia during World War II. It is between Scylla and Charybdis.

  23. John's Gravatar John
    June 7, 2014 - 1:04 am | Permalink

    It seems Ukranians, like most Europeans, are not too smart about politics. They cannot identify their enemies or what is expedient but rather dwell on ancient history. Between becoming a Jewish dominated puppet state of NATO or a vassal of Russia; that is the choice. So-called Ukranian nationalists are choosing to be a Jew-ruled puppet state of NATO. Nationalists indeed.

  24. nedd's Gravatar nedd
    June 6, 2014 - 10:13 pm | Permalink

    The paragraph that drives it home:

    “The politically incorrect reality is that the division of modern Ukraine is largely a result of the Holodomor 1932–1933 famine. This genocide specifically targeted Ukrainians and Ukrainian cultural presence in the part of Ukraine that was then part of the Soviet Union: Eastern Ukraine, as well as areas where mostly Ukrainians lived that are now part of Russia, like the Kuban region. There is no division between Ukrainians. There is a division between Ukrainians and the descendants of those whom the Soviet government moved to Eastern Ukraine to replace the murdered Ukrainians. We are all well aware that the famine itself was not committed by Russians. Yet, the population of the region was nevertheless largely changed from Ukrainians to Russians.”

    Last time I checked my mathematical skills, ten million is a larger number than six million. And yet here we are back at square one with victoria nudelman attacking Ukraine (again) from the other side of the world as a jewish neo-con. History repeats itself…

  25. ex pat's Gravatar ex pat
    June 6, 2014 - 10:10 pm | Permalink

    I just want to add to this. I am an American but I owned a business in Ukraine during the period of the Orange Revolution and I am married to a Ukrainian.

    Some the myths above are only partly untrue. For one, trying to frame the debate in terms of Western contexts in any way completely misses the point. I applaud the attempts to rebut this context. But in rebutting this context, the article has to still uses that framework. It may be because I was in the south of Ukraine which was mostly Russian speaking so that sense, I was exposed to different view point than the east and west Ukrainian divide on display in most western articles.

    Partial Rebuttal to Myth 1
    Ukrainian have do have a self identity but it isn’t completely separate from Russian identity and the is a closeness and undoubted shared experience cultural heritage between these people. To put this in more western terms. Imagine if the South won their independence in the Civil War. There is a real difference between northern and southern culture. But are these strongly different people? Both share a common mixed European ancestry and fought together in the American revolution etc.

    Many of the elder people I met in Ukraine would have liked to see a return of the Soviet System as they felt (despite stories of the Holodomor and some ongoing oppression by Soviet Authorities) that there was a better life, better access to jobs and better access to education and healthcare. These people had valid points because what came after the Soviet Union has been decidedly worse. And if you talk to a Ukrainian about the first cosmonauts – they will take credit as much as a Russian. They would both be right as there was little to no ethnic divide under the Soviet System after Stalin and both were simply Soviet citizens at the time. But the connection reaches back farther and deep, in literature, the arts and culture. Ukrainian feel separate from Russian but my wife who is ethnically Ukrainian take offense at hostile stereotypes made about Russians as an offense against her.

    However, in agreement with the sentiment you expressing, most westerners often just assume my wife is Russian after she explicitly states that she is Ukrainian and ask her about Russian politics and culture as if there was no difference at all. You don’t get the politics questions so much now as the difference is starkly in the news now. But frankly it’s isn’t off the mark to ask her about cultural figures like Puskin etc. as they are a shared heritage.

    Moreover, Ukrainians outside the western Ukraine, do have much of a strong tie to their nationality and if given a choice would very happily, and I mean VERY HAPPILY, leave Ukraine to become German or Canadian or American – wherever they can go that is not Ukraine. This doesn’t lend itself to strong ethnic identity.

    Slight rebuttal to Myth 2
    This correct in that there is no real religious divide. But it’s more because no one is seriously religious. Communism effectively killed religion throughout Ukraine and it has never fully recovered. The only strong religious communities that I found were in the mountain farms of the Carpathian Mountains. While Catholic – it is very unlike western Catholicism and most it’s own thing.

    Rebuttal to Myth 3
    Nazi’s of Western Ukraine are without a doubt very real. However the Banderas groups and others would remain a fringe outlying groups, similar to Neo-Nazi’s and skinheads in the U.S. if it were not for vast amount of money and American sponsorship. Frankly I also wonder if Russian intelligence had a hand in “helping” the U.S. connect with these groups knowing it would undermine the government created by the American Coup as it also works extraordinarily well for Russian propaganda purposes.

    It is certainly true that vast majority of nationalists are not Nazis but they are being led by real fascists who do identify (although not outright any more) with Nazi sentiments.

    Also, there are still many older people still alive today in Ukraine that lived through the Nazi occupation. Even more that heard stories of that They all knew of Ukrainian that joined with the Nazis to oppress them and they all know these Nazi sympathizer primarily came from the west. This feeling of western Ukraine be riddled with Nazis is felt by people throughout Ukraine and Russia.

    In truth as I said above, the Nazi types are somewhat a minority of the Western Ukraine. But the government aligning with these groups so forthrightly has let Russian propoganda and social media spin out to knew heights on the Nazi threat. Most Ukrainians likely understand the people in Lviv and such mostly don’t support these groups. And of course there is direct evidence of this – see this link of Lviv citizens protesting the drafting of their men and boy into Ukraine military (note turn on CC for subtitles):

    And frankly who drops artillery on their own people? People are known by their actions. Call them what you will but “nationalists” in Kiev government are Nazis in their actions.

    However, if you are talking about the local movements arising in the East – these are true nationalist movements of people seeking self determination. I don’t think either the U.S. or Russia saw the ferocity that these people would have in banding together and rising up.

    Partial rebuttal to Myth 4
    Again the general sentiment here is correct although I think it misses some of the roots of the issue.

    Not only is there not a strong divide between East and West Ukraine, as I mentioned above, there is not a strong divide between Russia and Ukraine. Frankly Russia and the EU have big reasons to cooperate and were growing closer until only a few months ago. The whole idea of pro-EU or Pro-Russia side of Ukraine is idea thrust upon Ukraine by western media. It was only a few short months ago when there was no fighting, no second cold war, none of this animosity. Neither Russia, the EU or general Ukrainians gain from this; only American globalists. Ukrainians aren’t as naive as westerners put asleep by the media. Every Ukrainian has a family member or friend living or working in Russia and vice versa. As the video I linked about, the people are not ready to fight for the criminal government.

    Ukrainians for the most part abhor the Kiev government before and after the Coup. In this way more than any other, they are united. It’s only these small fascist minorities given tons of money and arms that support the government at all. The one thing all Ukrainians know is that they’ve been completely disenfranchised. This was well known before the coup and more so after. There were real stirring in the orange revolution. But everyone over say 22 knows how that worked out. There were few dupes this time and most of the protestors were paid to be there. It doesn’t matter where someone lives in Ukraine, everyone knows the government was criminal before and even more criminal now. The difference is now they are being pushed to fight because of this purposeful split to try to drive Ukrainians away for Russia where it has always been at peace and in an economic partnership. Before, the criminal regimes did not have such a heavy hand and there was essential and open border with a free trade zone between Russia and Ukraine. Now what choice do the people have when their livelihoods which strongly depend on Russian trade have been cut off.

    There is real reason to believe the rising up in east will spread. The huge desertions in the army and sentiment in the video above regarding the lack of will of the Ukrainians to fight each other show the real weakness of the current government which will likely not last until the end of the year as it has absolutely no popular support.

  26. nationalist's Gravatar nationalist
    June 6, 2014 - 8:49 pm | Permalink

    Mr. Someday, you are masterful. You are on the upper end of the bell curve.

  27. Clou's Gravatar Clou
    June 6, 2014 - 7:39 pm | Permalink

    So what about the Soros&co who have quite openly admitted financing the intervention in Ukraine ?

  28. Mike Yankovoy's Gravatar Mike Yankovoy
    June 6, 2014 - 5:30 pm | Permalink

    thank you for this thought provoking article. I am American and have difficulty with integrating 13th century history with today.
    My grandparents were from Eastern Vinnitsya, near Uman and were Kulaks who emigrated to the U.S. just before WW1. While clearly living in today’s Ukraine, they strongly idenitifedas Russians and went to great lenghts to differentiate themselves from the Galicians /Ukrainians. They were members of the Russian Orthodox Church and not any Ukrainian Church, Orthodox or Uniate. I grew up in an ethnic American neighborhood with many Galicians. My grandparents and parents could not understand the Galicians. They spoke a language very foreign to my family. Yet my family spoke Ukrainian and not Russian. The whole concept of being Ukrainian was “foreign” to them.
    When I think of Russian boundaries, I think of the waterways that formed the trade routes from the Baltic to the Black Sea and Caspian Sea. The Ukraine to me is really the “Wild Fields” in the Southeast. Ironically, Galciia has been the hotbed of Ukrainian nationalism and from my standpoint, not really part of historical Ukraine.
    I think trying to consolidate the history of Galicia (Eastern Poland) and the Wild Fields is a bit of a stretch. There was much more interaction and history between the peoples of the Dneiper river, both north and South than there was between peoples of the Dneiper and say the Dneister . This was so even in the Mongol period as People moved north out of the Kiev region.

    Best Regards

  29. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    June 6, 2014 - 4:55 pm | Permalink

    Presumably, Ukrainian Patriots would wish their country to be independent, and not another cog in the NATO machine. If Ukraine had retained nuclear weapons (as Mearsheimer proposed) it would have the capacity to defend itself without NATO. What has got Ukraine into this mess is listening to the likes of Radosław Sikorski, Poland’s foreign minister, who is married to Anne Applebaum .

    Applebaum in the Washington Post:

    Indeed, on the same day that Ukrainians voted for “European values” — and almost exactly a quarter-century after the Poles voted for “European values” — another landmark, landslide election propelled an unusually virulent group of anti-Europeans into prominence. Millions of French citizens voted the National Front, an anti-European party with anti-Semitic roots, to the top of France’s European parliamentary election list. A few days earlier, millions of British voters opted for the U.K. Independence Party (UKIP), another anti-European organization composed of a charismatic leader, Nigel Farage, and a strange coalition of cranks, cheats and open racists. Dutch, Danish, Italian, Austrian and Hungarian voters sent similarly inclined candidates to the European Parliament, so much so that they may be able to form a full-fledged far-right voting bloc.

    Not only do the leaders of these two parties reject “European values,” they also have gone out of their way to declare their solidarity with a man who symbolizes everything that Poles and Ukrainians have been trying to escape. During a trip to Moscow, Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Front, declared her admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “patriotism.” UKIP’s Farage has also named Putin as the world leader he “most admires.”Le Pen and Farage aren’t alone in admiring the Russian “model” — corruption, media manipulation, disregard for borders and the rule of law, all included. What Ukraine is desperate to escape, in other words, Europe’s far right is now desperate to become

  30. nationalist's Gravatar nationalist
    June 6, 2014 - 4:44 pm | Permalink

    This article is wonderful. I wish you Ukrainian Patriots well. Ukrainians have been the ill used people. I hope their ship has finally come in. Be careful.

  31. nationalist's Gravatar nationalist
    June 6, 2014 - 4:34 pm | Permalink

    There is so much false opposition in the various nationalist movements and of course, those opposing them and the Palestinian movement and others- all jew and allies. Honey pots. I am very afraid for the Ukrainian Patriots and us all. I feel like we are watching a train wreck. I feel like we are all being set up.

  32. Someday's Gravatar Someday
    June 6, 2014 - 4:30 pm | Permalink

    A BBC interview with former adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Prof Sergey Karaganov made it clear what the problem is. ‘Karaganov: Ukraine will ‘never’ be in Nato’

    That is the problem for Russia and the cause of all this, not minorities, language, or ethnic – religious divisions, which are probably no more in Ukraine than in any sizable country. It is not a case of paranoia. No Russian leader of any political stripe could not remain passive while the Ukraine became part of a hostile alliance. Did the US stand for the Sandinista regime cosying up to the USS regime or unleash an army of mercenaries against Nicaragua?

    Mearsheimer in NYT:

    The taproot of the current crisis is NATO expansion and Washington’s commitment to move Ukraine out of Moscow’s orbit and integrate it into the West. The Russians have intensely disliked but tolerated substantial NATO expansion, including the accession of Poland and the Baltic countries. But when NATO announced in 2008 that Georgia and Ukraine “will become members of NATO,” Russia drew a line in the sand. Georgia and Ukraine are not just states in Russia’s neighborhood; they are on its doorstep. Indeed, Russia’s forceful response in its August 2008 war with Georgia was driven in large part by Moscow’s desire to prevent Georgia from joining NATO and integrating into the West.

    Fast forward to last November, when it seemed that President Viktor F. Yanukovych would sign an agreement with the European Union that was designed to deepen Ukraine’s integration with the West and greatly reduce Moscow’s influence there. Mr. Putin offered Ukraine a better deal in response, which Mr. Yanukovych accepted. That decision led to protests in western Ukraine, where there is strong pro-Western sentiment and much hostility to Moscow.

    The Obama administration then made a fatal mistake by backing the protesters, which helped escalate the crisis and eventually led to the toppling of Mr. Yanukovych. A pro-Western government then took over in Kiev. The United States ambassador to Ukraine, who had been encouraging the protesters, proclaimed it “a day for the history books.”

  33. Rosa's Gravatar Rosa
    June 6, 2014 - 4:17 pm | Permalink

    And all that thanks to Communism. But the “Absolute Evil” is another one…
    In 2012 they were hosting the Football European Championships together with Poland so to underline the new amity with the old landlords…
    All this picture, however, still lacks a player. Perhaps in the next chapters.
    As for the Kurgan hypothesis, it is just so, an hypothesis

  34. Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
    June 6, 2014 - 3:46 pm | Permalink

    A good background essay. But, one has to ask where the ‘Trypillian Civilization’ existed 3-4,000 years ago when what is now Ukraine, was inhabited by Bronze Age, Indo-European Scythians, and later by Sarmatians and Alans? And, later still, about 2,000 years ago, when the area was inhabited by the Goths? The Pontic Steppe region was, of course, the original home of the ‘Kurgan culture’, or, as it is perhaps better understood, the ancestral home of the ancient Aryans, who were likely put in migratory motion by the Black Sea Flood of around 7-8,000 years ago. That original ethnic exodus (by the race that invented the wheel and domesticated the horse, among many other accomplishments) led, over time, to the evolution of the different Indo-European languages and ethnicities.

Comments are closed.