This is an attempt to look at the conflict from Russia's point of view. I suggest that the Russians see the Euromaidan protests as an existential threat, given the prominent role of the far right and the Neo-Nazis. This may not seem rational to us. However, Russia fought against a war of aggression by the Nazi Germans in World War II on Russian soil and lost over 20 million people. That war is still in living memory. There are many other far right groups on the rise throughout Europe, given the massive financial meltdowns.
So when Putin says that he wants to defend the Russian minorities, it has basis in reality, given the track record of hate groups around the world to engage in violence whenever given the motive and opportunity.
This crisis should serve as a warning for the US as well as Russia. We have nothing in common with far right or Nazi hate groups, no matter what the means are. We, too, fought to rid the world of Nazism during World War II. We chose to ally ourselves with Russia because Stalin, despite being a brutal mass murderer, was still the preferable alternative to Hitler. From here on out, there should be no place for any far right or Neo-Nazi groups in any future democracy movement we support. So while there were more peaceful alternatives to what Russia is doing that would have respected the sovereignty of Ukraine, our hands are not clean either.
First of all, Yanukovich was, in fact, legitimately elected. Independent observers said so at the time.
Observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) said there were no indications of serious fraud and described the vote as an "impressive display" of democracy. "For everyone in Ukraine this election was a victory," João Soares, president of the OSCE's parliamentary assembly, said.
With almost all votes counted, the Russian-leaning opposition leader, Viktor Yanukovych, had a clear 2.65% lead over Tymoshenko. So far, however, Tymoshenko has refused to recognise her opponent's victory, cancelling a press conference scheduled for this afternoon.
The OSCE hinted that Tymoshenko should admit defeat, noting that in any election there are "winners and losers. It is now time for the country's political leaders to listen to the people's verdict and make sure the transition of power is peaceful and constructive," Soares suggested.
It is important to note that not all the Ukrainian protestors are Neo-Nazi. There was growing discontent with Yanukovich's policies to the point where polls showed him losing to Yulia Timoshenko, who he had imprisoned following his victory.
Cory Welt of the Center for American Progress noted back in December two critical things. First of all, contrary to popular belief, aligning Ukraine with the EU, one of the key basis points of the protest, did not have popular support.
First, the protestors do not represent the people of Ukraine. They represent a constituency. Yanukovych may not be that popular, but the government still has its supporters, especially in the country’s eastern areas. Many Ukrainians would not like to see a change in government produced from the streets. Moreover, while polls indicate that association with the European Union enjoys more support than other options, including membership in the Russia-led Customs Union, it does not have the support of a majority of Ukrainians as Western media and government officials frequently report. This is not to say that detractors cannot be won over or pro-EU positions will not increase over time. But U.S. and European officials who speak in favor of Ukraine’s European choice should recognize they are choosing sides in a domestic debate.
Second, as Welt notes, many of the people demonstrating represented the extreme right elements.
Third, focusing on the Euromaidan’s European choice risks confusing geopolitics and geography with values. Ukrainians will not embrace liberal democracy, rule of law, and progressive values by choosing to be European. Many Ukrainians protesting in favor of EU association represent parties that constitute the extreme right elsewhere in Europe. And Ukrainians who have their doubts about EU association do not constitute a bloc of authoritarian-minded citizens. European and U.S. policymakers may believe that the best opportunity for Ukrainian democracy and good governance lies with the institutional reforms and economic linkages that EU association can provide, but they need to continue saying just that. It is past time to jettison the unproductive and ethnocentric language of European values versus Eurasian values—of West versus East.
He concludes:
But there’s more to it than that. A nontransparent deal with Russia made for short-term political gain sounds just like Yanukovych’s justification for imprisoning Tymoshenko. On top of the other questionable policy choices he has made, Yanukovych must worry that this most recent decision assures him a dose of reciprocal justice after leaving office.
If the Euromaidan has indeed lost steam, its supporters face real challenges in achieving their goals. It will not be easy to overthrow an increasingly authoritarian Yanukovych at the ballot box. Yanukovych is unlikely to grant clemency to Tymoshenko until after the 2015 election—unlike Russian President Vladimir Putin, who on December 20 unexpectedly freed Russia’s most famous prisoner, former oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky.
But the challenges are not insurmountable. It is time for Ukraine’s opposition to set its sights on 2015.
Overthrowing a legitimately elected leader, even one who was running the country into the ground as Welt describes, should have been accomplished at the ballot box. That would have been like if we had decided to overthrow the US government just because we were not happy with the reelection of George W. Bush in 2004.
As Max Blumenthal reports:
White supremacist banners and Confederate flags were draped inside Kiev’s occupied City Hall, and demonstrators have hoisted Nazi SS and white power symbols over a toppled memorial to V.I. Lenin. After Yanukovich fled his palatial estate by helicopter, EuroMaidan protesters destroyed a memorial to Ukrainians who died battling German occupation during World War II. Sieg heil salutes and the Nazi Wolfsangel symbol have become an increasingly common site in Maidan Square, and neo-Nazi forces have established “autonomous zones” in and around Kiev.
An Anarchist group called AntiFascist Union Ukraine attempted to join the Euromaidan demonstrations but found it difficult to avoid threats of violence and imprecations from the gangs of neo-Nazis roving the square. “They called the Anarchists things like Jews, blacks, Communists,” one of its members said. “There weren’t even any Communists, that was just an insult.”
And one of the three parties which was vying to overthrow the government has people who excused the Nazi war crimes:
One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” According to Per Anders Rudling, a leading academic expert on European neo-fascism, the self-described “socialist nationalist” Mykhalchyshyn is the main link between Svoboda’s official wing and neo-Nazi militias like Right Sector.
But despite the slap in the face at the sacrifices that our men made during World War II, in a rare display of bipartisan cooperation, Svoboda enjoys the support of both John McCain and Victoria Nuland:
Svoboda’s openly pro-Nazi politics have not deterred Senator John McCain from addressing a EuroMaidan rally alongside Tyahnybok, nor did it prevent Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland from enjoying a friendly meeting with the Svoboda leader this February. Eager to fend off accusations of anti-Semitism, the Svoboda leader recently hosted the Israeli Ambassador to Ukraine. “I would like to ask Israelis to also respect our patriotic feelings,” Tyahnybok has remarked. “Probably each party in the [Israeli] Knesset is nationalist. With God’s help, let it be this way for us too.”
In a leaked phone conversation with Geoffrey Pyatt, the US ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland revealed her wish for Tyahnybok to remain “on the outside,” but to consult with the US’s replacement for Yanukovich, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, “four times a week.” At a December 5, 2013 US-Ukraine Foundation Conference, Nuland boasted that the US had invested $5 billion to "build democratic skills and institutions" in Ukraine, though she did not offer any details.
We don't have all the answers to this conflict, but we do know this -- any solution to this crisis requires that the far right not be allowed anywhere near the reigns of power in Ukraine. And any solution requires Ukraine to pass anti-hate crime legislation and to aggressively crack down on any hate crimes against its Russian population.