The West opposes the people's will in the Crimea and is preparing sanctions for Russia
23 a year ago, 17 in March 1991, a referendum was held in the republics of the USSR on the question of the preservation of the Soviet Union. And now - almost a coincidence: March 16 2014 of the year in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea will be held a referendum in which residents will choose to join Russia or preserve the region within Ukraine. The new Ukrainian government and the “world community” represented by the United States, Britain, Germany and other liberal-democratic states were quick to unanimously declare the illegality of the future plebiscite and the non-recognition of its results. And this is despite the fact that the same Western champions of democracy and free expression of peoples on the planet previously recognized the Republic of Kosovo, South Sudan, and earlier, in the last century, they were frankly happy about how Yeltsin, Shushkevich and Kravchuk in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, contrary to the will Soviet people, expressed in a referendum 1991, destroyed the USSR.
On the cold December days of 1991, the West was loudly celebrating a victory in the Cold War. Still - the USSR, with whom they had fought for several decades, took it apart and broke up! And not just fell apart, but its fragments, despite the former adherence to the ideals of communism, took a pro-Western course! The White House drank sizzling champagne, including the fact that Gorbachev had a terrific successor, a glass of vodka cut-off-loosening the former great empire from all sides. Regulars of the Oval Office, experienced wolves of the Pentagon, employees of the State Department, workers of the CIA - no one thought that everything would happen so quickly that story It will literally turn over, that the Kremlin can be called the party that lost to the gallant America in the Cold War, and the capitalist system, which calls itself democratic, can now be recognized as the only true and boldly declared the “end of history” (which the cabinet idealist Fukuyama did).
And no one in the West somehow remembered the March referendum of the same 1991 of the year, in which more than 76% of Soviet citizens spoke in favor of preserving the USSR as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics. None of the rulers of the West - neither in the USA nor in Europe - did not object when December 8 in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, in the village of Viskuli, the heads of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, declared that the USSR was ceasing to exist, and they signed the Agreement on the establishment of the CIS for a snack. Gorbachev's belated squeak came from Moscow. But only who needed this self-styled "President of the USSR", if the USSR was declared non-existent! .. And the Americans rejoiced: after all, without their military intervention and even without reinforcement of propaganda, what they had ceased to dream was done.
Boris Yeltsin in Viskuly. Photo: Yuri Ivanov; http://www.kp.ru/daily/26027/2945620/
The decisions of the new "democrats" were approved in the USA. There was a historic call to Bush. Here is question to Gorbachev from "Komsomolskaya Pravda" from 13 December 1991: "On the eve of the signing of the agreement, did you know about it?" Answer: "He foresaw. I told Boris Nikolayevich: “My task is for you to sign the contract first,” then the Ukrainian issue can be solved. He said no. I was called by Shushkevich on the 8 number and said that they had already called Bush [the US president] that the agreement had been signed. It is a shame ... Shameful places ... Only then the president will be informed ... "
So what? What a shame? Shame is to be Gorbachev ... And in international democratic practice, it is customary to first report to the owner, and then inform the “local” about the fact.
A few days later, the agreement of Yeltsin, Shushkevich and Kravchuk was supported by the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR. December 12 was adopted by the Supreme Council of the RSFSR "On the denunciation of the Treaty on the formation of the USSR."
Later, 15 March 1996, the State Duma of the Russian Federation adopted two interesting resolutions: #156-II DG "On deepening the integration of the peoples united in the USSR, and repealing the Decree of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR of December 12," On Denunciation of the USSR Education Treaty " and No.1991-II DG "On legal force for the Russian Federation - Russia of the results of the USSR referendum 157 March 17 on the issue of preserving the USSR". The Belovezhsk agreements were denounced and noted that “the officials of the RSFSR who prepared, signed and ratified the decision to terminate the existence of the USSR, grossly violated the will of the peoples of Russia to preserve the USSR expressed in the USSR 1991 March referendum 17 of the year, as well as the Declaration of State Sovereignty Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, proclaiming the desire of the peoples of Russia to create a democratic state of law within the updated Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic. " After the appeal of the Federation Council 1991 of March 19, the State Duma adopted a resolution of 1996 on April 10 of the year No. 1996-II DG, where it abandoned its previous direct position, indicating the “political nature” of the document and the necessary “assessment of the situation”. In short, the State Duma has denied itself.
All these years, the West has been in euphoria. What is there "denunciation"! What is there "grossly violated the will"! In 90's inspired by Zbignev Brzezinski, he described his vision of a new, insignificant Russia: “... Russia, which until recently was the creator of the great territorial power and leader of the ideological bloc of satellite states, whose territory stretched all the way to the center of Europe and even one time to the South China Sea, turned into anxious a nation-state that does not have free geographical access to the outside world and is potentially vulnerable in the face of weakening conflicts with its neighbors in the western, southern and exact flanks. Only uninhabitable and inaccessible northern expanses, almost constantly ice-bound and covered with snow, seem to be safe in geopolitical terms. ”
In short, the real snow-icy democracy. The legality of the decision of the Belovezhskaya Trinity and the corresponding Duma decrees did not in the least interest the West, to whom the collapse of the USSR was beneficial. The bipolar world collapsed; henceforth, the United States could single-handedly fuel the planet.
Unhappy with the collapse of the USSR at that time were only countries that did not abandon the socialist path of development, including China. The Chinese leadership undertook a series of effective measures to defend its own system: it declared a fight against liberal-bourgeois "elements", stepped up socialist propaganda, stated that the Soviet Union collapsed as a result of the negative influence of Western intelligence services, as well as the internal "fifth column" (pro-Western forces, implementing the will of external - overseas - capitalists). And China is now on horseback, and where is Russia now? Oil gas trades?
On the falling wave of Gorbachev's Soviet “perestroika”, at the end of 1980, Yugoslavia began to seethe, which Slobodan Milosevic managed from 1988 onwards. In 1989, a referendum was held in Serbia, which approved a new constitution that curtailed the autonomy of national territories. Kosovo Albanians boycotted the referendum. In 1991, the Republic of Kosovo was proclaimed. A referendum on independence (illegal) and presidential elections were held. Albania recognized the first (and only at that time) independence of Kazakhstan. Armed detachments were later formed in the province, later united into the so-called “Kosovo Liberation Army”. The war began "liberators" with the police, and then with the army. In 1999, NATO intervened in the situation. On the basis of UN Security Council Resolution No. 1244 of 10 June 1999, the region was taken over by the UN. Tens of thousands of Serbs from Kosovo were actually under the control of the Albanian authorities.
17 February 2008, the Albanian regional authorities declared independence from Serbia and the creation of the Republic of Kosovo. During relevant hearings at the United Nations International Court of Justice in 2010, the US administration stated that the secession of Kosovo complies with international legal norms, and the declaration of independence is an expression of the will of the “Kosovo people”. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton explained to the world community, how to behave: “We urge all countries to leave behind the issue of the status of Kosovo and act constructively in support of peace and stability in the Balkans. We urge countries that have not yet done so to recognize Kosovo. ”
The chairman of the International Court of Justice Hisashi Owada was able to formulate the necessary thesis in one phrase: “Based on the above, the court concludes that international law does not prohibit the proclamation of independence, and thus the proclamation of independence of Kosovo 17 February 2008, does not contradict international law”. The court decision immediately greeted in the EU.
Earlier, in July 2009, the United States submitted a comment on Kosovo to the UN International Court of Justice. Washington saidthat “the legal principle of territorial integrity does not prevent non-state entities from declaring their independence by peaceful means”.
Thus, the recognition of the independence of the region did even without a legal referendum! However, later, 14-15 February 2012, a referendum on the recognition of the authorities of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo was still held - but only in Northern Kosovo, where Serbs live mostly. The question was put to that referendum: “Do you recognize the authorities of the so-called Republic of Kosovo?” “No” answered 99,74% of voters. The West, of course, did not recognize the outcome of this plebiscite. Gerard Gallucci, a US diplomat to the United Nations, said that this referendum is not legitimate. The EU did not support the referendum because, said Maya Kosyancic, a spokeswoman for Catherine Ashton, the Kosovo Serb problem cannot be solved in this way.
Regarding the independence of Kosovo, the position of one more person who diligently plays the western violin in Kiev is interesting. This is the head of the current Ukrainian government Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Western violin is his unchanged instrument. This man, being the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, in July 2007 supported Kosovo’s desire for independence: “The problem of Kosovo is very complex, but in any case, the final solution is complete sovereignty. The question is how to achieve it. ”
Today, this American protégé (protege of Mrs. Nuland), apparently forgetting how he once hotly supported the “final decision”, and “in any case,” does not even oppose the independence of the Crimea, but against the people's will.
And there is also a historically recent example of Sudan and South Sudan. In January, 2011 held a referendum on independence from Sudan in South Sudan. International organizations, including the UN, helped to prepare the referendum. According to official data, 98,83% of the referendum participants voted for the independence of South Sudan. 9 July 2011 was proclaimed the creation of a new state. Even before this date, the West approved the collapse of Sudan: February 5 UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon praised the outcome of the independence referendum; February 7 EU Head of Diplomacy Catherine Ashton welcomed the final results of the plebiscite; British Prime Minister David Cameron also welcomed the official announcement of the results of the plebiscite; President Barack Obama congratulated the people of South Sudan on the success of the referendum and independence.
And suddenly - stop the car. As soon as the Crimea began to speak about their will, the EU and the USA instantly forgot about their former democratic principles. “Illegitimate! Illegally! ”Shouted the Western press.
The United States said it did not recognize the results of the referendum in the Crimea. The White House Press Officer, Jay Karni (the same one that worked during the late perestroika and Yeltsin time in Moscow as a correspondent for Time magazine and wrote about the “reforms” of Boris Nikolayevich before 1993) сказал: “The referendum will not be legal under the Ukrainian constitution and, accordingly, will not be recognized by the United States, our allies and partners.”
Here is how! This is a public signal from the White House to the "allies" and "partners"! And the "partners" were not slow in making the appropriate statements.
British Prime Minister Cameron spoke with the President of the United States and confirmedthat the authorities of the United Kingdom do not recognize not only the legitimacy of the referendum in the Crimea, but also any attempts by Russia to legitimize it.
In a telephone conversation Angela Merkel made it clear Vladimir Putin, that Germany considers the forthcoming referendum illegitimate. The Chancellor stated, as if imitating Obama, that holding a popular vote contradicts the Constitution of Ukraine.
At the meeting of the UN Security Council on the situation in Ukraine, the representative of France to the UN, Gerard Aro, spoke. is he said: “If Russia annexes Crimea, it will be very serious. This will entail a lot of consequences in international relations. Some of them have already been discussed at the last meeting of the Council of Europe. There was a call to the Russians: “We want negotiations, we are in favor of a political decision. Please do not exacerbate the crisis. ”
Turkey is against the referendum - this satellite of the West. Recep Tayyip Erdogan considers the referendum on the status of Crimea illegal. According to the press service of the German Embassy in Ukraine, Merkel and Erdogan talked about this on the phone. In the message it is said: “Both heads of government share the assessment that the development of events in Ukraine, and in particular in the Crimea, is of particular concern. They share the common opinion that the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political unity of Ukraine must be protected without fail. They are also unanimous in the fact that the risk of confrontation in the Crimea should be eliminated, and the planned… on March 16 March referendum is extremely dubious and illegal. ”
There are enough examples. No one recalls the Washington comment from 2009 of the year, stating that "the legal principle of territorial integrity does not prevent non-state entities from declaring their independence by peaceful means." And no one quotes the UN court decision of 2010 on Kosovo, according to which “international law does not prohibit proclaiming independence”.
11 March at a briefing in Washington, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki journalist "Voices of America" asked how the US looks at the comparison of the referendum on the status of the Crimea with the American war of independence. Psaki replied that this "was quite a few years ago," and that the American administration does not agree with such comparisons. Why do not agree, the representative of the State Department did not specify.
Jen Psaki. Photo: France Press Agency
Supported by the West, Kiev declares that only decisions made at a general Ukrainian referendum are valid. Verkhovna Rada Chairman Oleksandr Turchynov, Acting President of Ukraine, call the decision on the referendum "illegitimate and void"
Well, Yatsenyuk. is he сказал in Brussels: “Crimea was, is and will be an integral part of Ukraine. We ask and urge the Russian government to return its military to the barracks, not to support the illegitimate so-called Crimean government and start negotiations for a peaceful settlement. In the event of further escalation, the Ukrainian military will act in accordance with the constitution and laws. ”
Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Photo: ITAR-TASS, Zurab Javakhadze
Thus, the United States, the European Union, and the protégés of the West in Kiev turned against democracy — against the one they supposedly cherish and cultivate everywhere. Why? The answer lies on the surface: what is beneficial for the West is democratic; which is unprofitable, it is "illegitimate." As a result, the West takes the opposite decisions, without embarrassing and even condemning those who re-read this extraordinary democracy. Yatsenyuk approves of a split in the former Yugoslavia, because the West wants it, but Yatsenyuk does not accept the referendum in the Crimea, because, again, the West, which does not want to strengthen Russia, wants it. And to begin the premiership with the split of the country is somehow not from the hand ...
In the meantime, the pressure of the “world community” is intensifying on Russia, to put it the same decadent West. World imperialism, which opened its mouth to Ukraine and wants to swallow it entirely, does not shy away from any methods - up to hacker attacks.
On the website of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe 11 March, it was reported that the Crimean referendum in its current form is contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine and should be considered illegal. About it said in Bern, Swiss Foreign Minister and OSCE Chairman Didier Burkhalter. At the same time, the chairman ruled out the possibility of OSCE monitoring of the March 16 referendum.
The statement about the illegality of the referendum and the exclusion of the possibility of observing the OSCE serves as a sauce for democracy. The same day, in Vienna, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Dunja Mijatović expressed concern the newest requirement for cable operators of Ukraine to suspend the broadcasting of some Russian television channels. The point is that just March 11 of the National Television and Radio Broadcasting Council of Ukraine demanded that cable network operators suspend the broadcasting of the channels Russia 24, ORT, RTR Planeta and NTV-Mir. “I repeat my appeal to the authorities not to initiate such repressive measures,” Miyatović said. - Banning TV programs without a legal basis is a form of censorship; national security issues should not be used to the detriment of media freedom. ”
In parallel with the Crimean "ignore" by the OSCE, Western democratizers are processing Russia. Here they go the other way.
Lower House of Congress took resolution supporting the idea of imposing sanctions against Russia. 402 member voted in favor of the adoption, only seven against. Last week, the document was approved by members of the US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs. "The resolution condemns the violation of the sovereignty of Ukraine and calls for the imposition of sanctions against senior Russian officials, state banks and other state bodies," the committee said earlier. At the same time, the US Senate approved a resolution calling for Barack Obama to introduce targeted economic sanctions against Russia. Finally, the senators want to exclude Russia from G8, and they also suggest that FIFA reconsider the decision to hold the World Cup in 2018 in Russia.
In parallel with the sanctions against Russia are working in Europe. Wound up here - Mr. Cameron. In London, a list of senior officials associated with the Russian government, whose assets in the West will be frozen, is already being compiled. The stated reason for "freezing": the entry of Russian troops into the territory of Crimea. Writes "BBC", sanctions will be announced at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels on March 17, unless Vladimir Putin agrees to start negotiations with the government of Ukraine. BBC also notes that US President Barack Obama has already ordered the freezing of the holdings of persons related to the violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
In addition, the Crimea is attacked. For now - hackers. 11 March in the media information appearedthat the site of the Crimean "Referendum 2014" was attacked by hackers from the USA and Ukraine. Now the resource has resumed work at the new address. This was reported by the Crimean media, referring to the management of information policy of the Council of Ministers of the ARC. According to the Crimean activists involved in the maintenance of the resource, "the site has undergone massive attacks from the United States and from the territory of Ukraine."
Incidentally, on the referendum site posted the results of a telephone survey of public opinion. The survey was conducted by employees of the Crimean Republican Institute for Political and Sociological Research 8-10 in March 2014 in the Crimea and Sevastopol, it was attended by 1300 people, including 300 residents of Sevastopol. The margin of error does not exceed 2,6%.
Screenshot from http://referendum2014.ru/
About the referendum in the Crimea and Sevastopol know 99% of respondents. 92% of residents of these territories are going to express their opinion on March 16. 77% of respondents plan to vote for the entry of the Crimea into Russia. Only 8% of respondents suggest voting for the restoration of the validity of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea from 1992. On the question of whether Sevastopol should become part of the Russian Federation as a subject, 85% of city residents are ready to give a positive answer. All 6% of respondents reacted negatively to this offer.
Information