Sunday 25th of September 2022

NATO always pushing ukraine and zelensky for civil war…...

In the winter of 2015, The Minsk Peace Agreements became the sole possible means to reaching a lasting diplomatic resolution to the conflict in the Donbass. Why were the agreements necessary? What were their main points? Why did they fail to bear fruit and secure peace, and who was responsible?





On 24 February 2014, one day after the illegal ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in a Western-backed coup, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Chairman Didier Burkhalter proposed the creation of a contact group of representatives of the OSCE, Russia and Ukraine, aimed at resolving the Ukrainian crisis and providing “support for Ukraine in overcoming its transition period”.


In June of that year, after the eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Lugansk became ensnared in a hot war between local independence-supporting militias and Ukrainian troops sent to crush the resistance, the contact group held its first meeting in Kiev.


On 20 June, then-newly elected President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko proposed a peace plan, saying that his priorities included ensuring the ‘safety’ of the residents of southeastern Ukraine, as well as a ceasefire. As weeks passed, as Kiev and representatives of the newly-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics held talks, Ukrainian troops continued their advance deep into militia-held territory, engaging in heavy artillery and mortar shelling, air attacks and attacks on cities, towns and villages in the Donbass region.


Minsk: Origins


Intense fighting continued, and on 31 July, the Belarusian capital of Minsk hosted a meeting with a ‘Ukraine-OSCE-Russia-DPR’ format in which the parties agreed to a prisoner exchange, measures to secure the Russian-Ukrainian border, and a ceasefire in the area around the crash site of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17.


Two weeks after that, contact group negotiators met in Kiev to discuss the logistics of Russian humanitarian aid to the Donbass. By mid-August, Ukrainian forces had taken control of major Donbass cities, including Mariupol, Slavyansk, Artemovsk, and Kramatorsk, and partially encircled the cities of Donetsk and Lugansk themselves. In counterattacks, Donetsk and Lugansk militia forces managed to partially push back Ukrainian forces, and to cause substantial losses in manpower and weapons.


On 1 September, Minsk hosted a second meeting of the contact group.


On 3 September, Russian President Vladimir Putin presented a seven-point peace plan, calling for an immediate ceasefire, the deployment of international observers to monitor the truce, the release of all prisoners, the creation of corridors for the evacuation of refugees and the delivery of humanitarian aid, and assistance to rebuild Donetsk and Lugansk. “I believe that a final agreement between the authorities in Kiev and southeastern Ukraine can be reached and cemented during a meeting of the contact group on 5 September,” Putin said.


Poroshenko immediately dismissed the plan, calling it an “attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of the international community ahead of the NATO summit and an attempt to avert the European Union’s inevitable decision to unleash a new wave of sanctions against Russia”.


On 5 September, the contact group met again in Minsk, hammering out a peace deal by taking account of both the Ukrainian and Russian presidents’ proposals. The plan included an immediate ceasefire, OSCE monitoring, special self-governance status for the Donbass region, the release of all hostages and prisoners of war, and measures to improve the humanitarian situation.


On 14 September, the protocol was signed by representatives of the OSCE, Russia, Ukraine and the leaders of the Donbass republics. Russia entrenched itself as a guarantor of the peace deal, but not a direct participant in the conflict.



Minsk II


Notwithstanding the terms of the agreement, battles continued to rage. In January 2015, bloody clashes were fought for the Donetsk Airport, and Ukrainian forces were threatened with encirclement and liquidation in the area of Debaltsevo in the Donetsk People’s Republic.


The Minsk Protocol obliged the parties to remove heavy weaponry from the line of contact. However, Kiev and Donbass forces saw their obligations differently, with the militias deeming Ukrainian forces to be trapped inside their territory, while Kiev called for a ceasefire and insisted that its forces were not encircled.


On 12 February 2015, the leaders of the Normandy Four contact group of Russia, Ukraine, Germany and France met in Minsk to sign a new, 13-point plan. The agreement, known as Minsk II, succeeded Minsk I, and Russia, Germany and France would continue to insist on its implementation for the next 7 years.



Devil is in the Details


The Minsk Agreements called for a ceasefire and the withdrawal of forces from the contact line buffer zone, banned the deployment of heavy weaponry in this zone, and required an immediate exchange of prisoners according the principle of “all for all”.


The agreements also called for Kiev to carry out political reforms, including amending the constitution to include the concept of decentralisation and the granting of special status to the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk. The Donbass states were required to hold local elections, after which Kiev could begin to gradually restore its control over the border.





The OSCE, which formed a special Joint Centre on Control and Coordination (JCCC) in the conflict zone in September 2014, was tasked with monitoring the implementation of the 13-point Minsk II plan, but factually had little to do except observe the ceasefire regime while it dragged its feet on implementing the agreement’s political mandates.


On 19 December 2019, Russia was forced to end its personnel’s involvement in the JCCC due to efforts by the Ukrainian side to hamper their work.





In nearly 8 years, the parties to the agreement managed to achieve success in only one of the agreement’s 13 points – the exchange of prisoners of war. The Donbass republics and Minsk’s Russian guarantors accused Kiev of illegally absorbing settlements in the buffer zone and deploying heavy weaponry, as well as the regular shelling of settlements.


Kiev argued that it would need to take control of the Donbass’s border with Russia before local elections in the Donbass could be held. In 2015, Ukraine’s parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, approved a law on the Donbass’s special status, but tied its implementation to the local elections, in direct contravention of Minsk’s terms.




Steinmeier Formula


In 2019, participants of the contact group approved the so-called Steinmeier Formula, named after the German foreign minister at the time, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, and aimed at giving the implementation of the Minsk peace plan a much-needed boost. The document proposed the implementation of the 2015 law on granting the Donbass special status after the OSCE recognised local elections there. In addition, it proposed to again have both sides pull back their forces from the line of contact.


Freshly elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky initially expressed support for the proposal, but when pressured by ultra-right radicals, Petro Poroshenko’s allies, and other political forces which had gathered in the streets of Kiev for mass protests, he backed down, preventing the formula’s implementation.



Minsk Breaks Down


Zelensky sought to continue the observation of Minsk’s terms, but failed. On November 2019, fighters from the neo-Nazi Azov Regiment stationed within the village of Zolotoe in Lugansk region not only refused to pull back their weapons, but threatened to increase their numbers.


In 2020, Kiev’s rhetoric took a sharp turn. The Ukrainian government began to insist on the need to revise the Minsk deal. Authorities were unsatisfied with the conditions of the agreement requiring Donbass’s border with Russia to be returned to Kiev’s control only after local elections in Donetsk and Lugansk were held. President Zelensky proposed a new approach to the pullback of forces from the line of contact according to a sectoral principle, instead of across the entire line.




What Changed in 2020?


In December 2020, Zelensky told Ukrainian media that he would personally prefer to scrap the Minsk Agreements, but was unable to do so for fear that European countries might lift sanctions against Russia and the leaders of the unrecognsed Donbass republics. It was too early to speak of an alternative ‘Plan B’, he said.


In 2021, several more meetings of representatives of the Normandy Format were held, but no progress was made. By the beginning of December, the diplomatic path toward resolving the conflict reached a dead end, and the military escalation of the situation along the line of contact began.







They call them the Angels of Donbass and have erected a monument in their memory in Donetsk. It is poignant, unbearable, and filled with a pain reminiscent to that of Beslan and the children killed by the Nazis during World War II.


According to the United Nations, over 13,000 people had fallen victim to the violence in the region as of July 2021, with more than a hundred children perishing and thousands physically and emotionally traumatised.




See also: too much of a good thing……. 



teaching children to hate…...

The psychological warfare front in Ukraine was opened decades ago, but the distortion of history became a key strategy after the 2014 Maidan coup. Western consultants distributed budgets in a diversified manner. Information strategies directed at children became a key focus of their work, regardless of the harm caused to children’s psyche.


'Invincilble Ants' by Larisa Nitsoy is a national bestseller – a brightly coloured book with good printwork and printed on quality paper telling the story of an ‘invincible ant’. The book is meant for children ages five and up.




Grandfather, let’s take away the weapons from the ants. Why should children learn about such things? We are a peaceful people. Why should they shoot?”

“When I was young”, the old ant said, “we were attacked by enemies”.

“What enemies grandfather? When was this?”

“Ordinary enemies! Ant lions. They were our neighbours, and always looked upon us with envy, and eventually got up and attacked us.”

- Excerpt From Larisa Nitsoy's 'Invisible Ants'

The little ants are taught to shoot, with the main character – a tiny tot ant, always carrying a machine gun with him. Because the ‘enemies’ are always nearby.

For children just a little bit older, there is ‘Insurgent ABCs’, a primer for the alphabet, and ‘The Adventures of Alarmik and His Friends’.


The task of creating nationalist and militaristic literature for younger schoolchildren fell on Oleh Vitvitsky, a famous local children’s writer. He created a whole series of books about the adventures of ‘Alarmik’ (from the German and English word ‘alarm’). Alarmik is a sympathetic and loveable hero for children – a little fighter of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) (the fascist paramilitary force which fought the Red Army and murdered tens of thousands of Poles and Jews during World War II). He is also a young follower of Stepan Bandera – founder of the fascist Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists, which established the UPA in 1942.


Alarmik is an unconditionally positive hero who always wins, who destroys all enemies to Ukrainians, first and foremost his main enemy – an emperor by the name of Liliputin.

Vitvitsky has expressed great pride in his work and doesn’t hide the fact that his books have openly manipulative objectives.


“I am a candidate of historical sciences, so I approached this task as a historian”, he said in an interview in 2014. “Analysing my own search for role models, I realised that a vacuum had formed when it comes to new literary heroes for our children… On the borderline between being a historian and a father, I got the idea of offering children Alarmik – a Ukrainian superhero, a young UPA trumpeter, who became the main character of the ‘Insurgent ABCs’. The book contains fictional characters, like Adolfik – it’s clear who he is associated with, and Liliputin too. Medvechukovych is a cross between [opposition politician Viktor] Medvedchuk and [former Ukrainian President Viktor] Yanukovych.”


Each letter of the ‘Insurgent ABCs’ is illustrated by a word associated with the history and ideology of the UPA.


"Muscovy is the khanate of fear,

Massacres and masks of the Mausoleum.

There Liliputin is the emperor,

Medvechukovych is the local lackey.

Alarmik will put on a Mazepinka, [a hat worn by Ukrainian Sich Riflemen]

He will load his maschinengewehr [German for ‘machinegun’] and finka, [slang for Finnish knife],

For the avenger knows that the days will come,

When Medvechukovych and Liliputin,

Just like in his own time Vatutin*,

Will fall into the hands of the insurgents."

*Nikolai Vatutin, was a Red Army general who took part in the liberation of Ukraine from the Nazis. He was killed by UPA fighters in April 1944 in Kiev.

- Excerpt from Oleh Vitvitsky's 'Insurgent ABCs'

For junior secondary students too there is an entire series of books with a similar bent. This includes the children’s book ‘Return From the War’ from 2018, the debut work by Ukrainian television channel 1+1 special correspondent Natalya Nagorna. From its first pages, children are told about the ‘heroes of the Maidan’, among them the Right Sector, a radical political and paramilitary neo-Nazi group whose activities are banned in Russia. The book presents the recent history of Ukraine, or rather, its ‘correct’ version, in an engrossing, journalistic style.


Some topics are covered in comic form, and this is not surprising, given the cultural code subscribed to by the experts and project curators involved. It’s likely that child psychologists have worked on developing the structure and message of some of these works in an effort to form stable fears at the level of the subconscious.


For example, in the comic ‘Confrontation: Red Terror’, the idea is instilled that the Russian military has orders to kidnap Ukrainian children.



Dialogue between the characters in 'Confrontation: Red Terror':

"Leave the adults behind. The main thing is to take all the children.

Permit me to ask a question, Comrade Commissar.

Go Ahead!

Why are we taking the children? There was no such order from the Kremlin.

These half-wits from the Kremlin want to rebuild the empire by plundering small neighbouring countries. It is the thinking of highwaymen.

I will build a real Great EMPIRE! From the Baltic to the sands of China, from the Black Sea to the Barents Sea. I will conquer the entire world!

These children will serve as my ruthless army. And their children will grow up loyal to the empire and will praise their torturers. This is true riches!

And who could achieve such a thing?

Only someone who is not human."















FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!