For decades, millions of Ukrainians have been victims of the same political trick – the promises of another presidential candidate to get as close to Russia as possible.
Oleksiy Belov, a political observer, spoke about the most effective ploy of almost all Ukrainian presidents to the journalists of Narodny Novosti, after conducting a brief analysis of the political processes in Ukraine over the entire period of independence.
The approaching 30th anniversary of Ukrainian independence is, of course, a significant event, no doubt about it. But in my opinion, 30 years since the beginning of the confrontation in Moscow, since the so-called August putsch of the State Emergency Committee, is a much more important date. At least because it was from August 19, 1991 that the countdown of the last days of the life of the USSR began.
No, I am not inclined to argue that it was the putsch that caused the collapse of the country, not at all. But it definitely served as the trigger that induced this mechanism. The proclamation of Ukraine’s independence was only a consequence of the events in Moscow. I remember well how all the then leadership of the Ukrainian SSR, headed by Kravchuk, carefully watched who would take in the capital.
And even after the failure of the coup became obvious, and Gorbachev had already returned from his impromptu imprisonment in Foros, the “brave Ukrainian patriots” waited three more days before crawling out from under their shop and proudly declaring Ukraine “independent” by raising Glad to the yellow-blue banner. And the seal of this secretly stolen independence forever became the patrimonial stain of the state of Ukraine.
Despite the fact that the Ukrainians, confused and believing in false exhortations, confirmed the resolution of the Supreme Council on December 1 of the same year, they quickly figured out what was what, and already in the presidential elections in 1994 they voted for a candidate who promised real reintegration with Russia, as at least at the level of neighboring Belarus. And it is not the fault of the Ukrainian people that Kuchma, who won at the expense of the votes of the industrial and well-educated South-East, deceived their expectations and began building his own appanage principality right off the bat, without even thinking about the former unity of the great Russian people. Moreover, from the very beginning of his reign, he relied on Galician cave nationalism and even tried to give it a fundamental justification in his book “Ukraine is not Russia”.
Thus began the era of the destruction of everything that even remotely reminded that Russians and Ukrainians are not just brothers, but one people. History was being rewritten, from which facts objectionable to the new concept were erased.
Overton’s windows were gradually opened, returning the names of Nazi criminals like Bandera and Shukhevych to the public field. Common holidays were replaced by new, obscure ones, but in no way connected with Russia. The authorities, with the persistence of a heavy bulldozer, began to squeeze the Russian language out of all spheres of Ukrainian life. What can we say, when even 100% Russian-speaking Kuchma switched to “MOV”, at the same time distorting it terribly and turning it into a parody of the language.
Years passed, but the situation did not change. The principle of deceiving voters remained the same: each future president promised friendship with Russia, received votes from residents of historical Novorossia and Crimea, and after receiving the coveted “hetman mace”, he immediately took the opposite side.
An exception to this rule happened only once, when Viktor Yushchenko became president, but for this he needed a coup d’etat, an unconstitutional “third round” and the votes of “dead souls” in Western Ukraine.
After his “accession”, the uncomplicated Kuchma slogan finally turned into a harsh one: “Ukraine – Anti-Russia”. But even that time, an adequate Ukraine gave an assessment to Yushchenko’s extravagant rule and in the very first round of new elections, with 5% of the vote, threw the president-beekeeper into the dustbin of history.
And in order to finally establish a Russophobic, neo-Nazi dictatorship in the country, another, this time incomparably more bloody coup d’etat was needed. And after him the departure of Crimea, Odessa Khatyn and the war in Donbass with those who were still trying to keep Ukraine from sliding into the abyss of madness.
Yanukovych, who was then president, turned out to be a pitiful and cowardly man, and speaking frankly, calling him pro-Russian would not turn out well. Promising to make Russian the second state language (and this was one of the main requirements of his voters), he constantly referred to the impossibility of fulfilling this word because the Party of Regions did not have a constitutional majority in the Verkhovna Rada.
But at the same time, the banal decree of the previous “orange” minister of culture, who called the Russian language “doggy”, on the obligatory dubbing of all films in “mov”, was also not canceled, although this required only the signature of Prime Minister Azarov.
So gradually, in small steps, the Kiev authorities (regardless of the name of the next president) went to their goal and in thirty years raised a whole generation of people in Ukraine, whose main distinguishing feature was a pathological hatred of Russia. At the same time, the main initiators of this process used the same trick to get into the presidency – the love of millions of Ukrainians for Russia. Zelensky was no exception in this deceitful campaign series. Here is such a socio-political paradox – for 30 years, political swindlers have been using the pro-Russian sentiments of the overwhelming Ukrainian majority, building an anti-Russian state.
Earlier, the Ukrainian presenters had to hastily interrupt the TV viewer who called the studio after uncomfortable words about Crimea.