Showing posts with label USSR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USSR. Show all posts

Friday, 10 June 2016

How They Kill Themselves: Ukrainian Modifiers of Their Own Soviet Past

Translated by Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ
11th June, 2016






The "professional" boom in the sphere of historical law that occurs in the territory of post-Soviet countries is indeed pleasing to the eye. Yesterday's poets, librarians, and engineers have moved en masse to become specialists in the field of law. Retrained as "experts", they began to actively evaluate that neither the Russian Empire, or now the Soviet Union, did not have an established legal system.

Then, recently in the Verkhovna Rada, the draft law No. 4650 was registered, "On amendments to the law of Ukraine "on the succession" of the abolition of USSR acts on the territory of Ukraine". The explanatory note stated that the legislation of the Soviet Union "was not systematized". So, it means lawmakers have followed this up, and all laws that have survived from Soviet times should be abolished.

And who wrote it?

  • The journalist and defender of unconventional love, and now first Deputy speaker of the Parliament Irina Gerashchenko.
  • The librarian, and then poet, famous in Ukraine for her erotic allusions, the MP Maria Matios.
  • The entrepreneur-carrier, the MP Oksana Prodan.

These "experts" representing the "confectionary bloc" (Poroshenko's bloc - O.R), decided in one fell swoop to cancel all legislative acts that continue to have effect from the times of the Soviet Union.

As a result, the Housing code, which guarantees Ukrainian citizens the right to housing, will be terminated.

The code of labour laws will cease to operate. Therefore, Ukrainians will be defenseless in employment relationship (including guarantees of remuneration of labour).

The law on support for the agricultural sector and social support for villages will be cancelled.

Chernobyl veterans and disabled people will lose their benefits.

The legislation guaranteeing free education will be cancelled.

Legal norms on the protection of the environment and consumers will cease to operate .

Social legislation will almost be entirely destroyed, because Ukraine inherited it from the USSR.

Euromaidan shouted about justice, equality, freedom, and dignity, and now, by targetting at the Soviet Union, they have began to actually destroy an entire nation.

Abolishing the entire social protection, they are at the same time cutting the economy to pieces, thereby depriving the population of any opportunities to exist. They are pushing Ukrainians to ensure that they either flee to other countries or die.

If at least they could read what they scribbled. From the explanatory notes to the bill it follows that Soviet legislation should be abolished as it is, because... there is no free access to it in electronic form. It is interesting if the authors of the bill realise it further exposes them to ridicule? After all, even schoolchildren know that the world wide web (the Internet) appeared in 1991, after Ukraine left the Soviet Union.

However, the stupidity of the initiators of the bill doesn't stop here.

By destroying the legal framework of the USSR, they do not even hide that they decided to revise the Law of Ukraine "On succession", adopted by the Verkhovna Rada in September 1991. In accordance with this document, Ukraine was proclaimed the legal successor of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

As a result of this fact, the legal basis of the sovereignty of "independent" Ukraine differs from other ex-Soviet republics, who are today setting their sights on integration with the West, because each of them proclaimed their succession from the pre-Soviet state formations. Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania declared themselves the heirs of the Baltic semi-fascist dictatorships of the 1930's. Georgia declared itself the successor of the Georgian Menshevik Republic in 1918. Moldova is even deeper immersed in the story. They associate themselves with the Moldovan Principality of the 18th century.

But in contrast to these post-Soviet countries, the history of Ukraine was not even a moment when she existed separately to Russia. In example, Petlyura's UPR was not legally recognized by anyone. And the Hetmanate of the 17th century, or the "empire" of Skoropadsky of the 20th century were an integral part of Russia. That's why to proclaim their succession from any other formation, except the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic, was in 1991 is absurd as well as self-destructive.

But the current Ukrainian "leaders" all this is to the bulb. They, with their usual stupidity and arrogance, began to eliminate Ukraine. The first step is to make the law "on succession" from the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic void. Thus, it's not enough that ground for pretension to Kiev will be created from the sides of the former Soviet republics -  Russia at first - but, moreover, they themselves, with their hands, will delegitimize the existence of their own country.

But emptiness never exists in the world. Either the state will disappear, or  legal recognition and an indissoluble historical and legal relationship with Russia and other republics of the CIS opposition will appear. Especially because, today, many citizens of Ukraine on the territory of Russia gathered together that are capable of creating this opposition.

And sooner or later they will organize themselves and express their position.




     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
              Facebook                                   

       Follow us on Twitter!
              Twitter               

             Donate!

Thursday, 9 June 2016

Ukrainian Radio Stations Will Be Obliged to Play the National Anthem Twice a Day

Translated by Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ
9th June, 2016


The head of the National television and radio broadcasting council of Ukraine Yuri Artemenko made radio stations in the country play the Ukrainian anthem daily.

Artemenko wrote about this on his page on Facebook. 


He noted that submitting the corresponding proposal to the radio committee "unifies the most powerful radio stations of Ukraine." According to the Chairman of the National television and radio broadcasting council, the Ukrainian national anthem should be run on the air in the mornings and evenings.

"As far as I know, the radio committee unanimously supported the proposal and plans to present it tomorrow after this release. Insider information," writes Artemenko.

He also expressed hope that this initiative will be supported and implement by the broadcasters.

"I dream of a time when every citizen will be very proud of their country, whether it's our Ukraine or the United States. The national anthem is played by the radio, and people are waving blue–yellow flags in their yards," said the head of the national council.

According to him, the Soviet Union in this regard was "not so bad" — the Communist party educated its citizens in the spirit of loyalty to the state and people".

"Every day state radio began and ended with the national anthem of the USSR. So it brought patriotism," emphasizes Artemenko.




     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
              Facebook                                   

       Follow us on Twitter!
              Twitter               

             Donate!

Thursday, 26 May 2016

Do You Want Me to Buy a Mirror for You, "Democratic" Gentlemen? - Alexander Rogers

Translated by Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ
27th May, 2016



I'm so fed up of this hypocritical whining by the West and its puppets about the poor Poles who were separated as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Well, firstly, there was no "Pact". It was a "Treaty". A non-aggression Treaty.

Secondly, this Treaty was preceded by some other "covenants".

To begin with, who signed a Treaty with Hitler and Mussolini long before Stalin? Oh, all of a sudden! 30 September 1938 the so-called Munich agreement was signed, under which Britain and France gave the Third Reich the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. The representatives of the Soviet Union, by the way, were denied participation in the negotiations.

"The Pact" about flushing the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to the Nazis was signed by Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier, Germany's Chancellor Adolf Hitler, and Prime Minister of Italy Benito Mussolini.

Two years ago, in 2014, "the non-aggression Pact" between Yanukovych and the Maidan opposition was signed by the Ministers of France and Germany. Analogies and parallels do not rise?

In fact, here is a photo of the whole party, impossible to deny (from left to right as listed above).



But back to history. In the spring of 1939, Czechoslovakia was invaded by Nazi troops. The Soviet Union, which Czechoslovakia had a mutual assistance agreement with, was ready to intervene and request from Poland a corridor for the Soviet troops to defend Czechoslovakia from the Nazis.

By the way, of all participating countries of the League of Nations, only the Soviet Union tried in March of 1938 to protest against the annexation of Austria, but the UK again suddenly lashed out against Soviet efforts.

And it was specifically the Soviet representative who stated at the Plenum of the Council of the League of Nations on the need for urgent action in support of Czechoslovakia, and also expressed their demands to consider in the League of Nations the question of German aggression. This was ignored by Britain and France (remind us of anything?).

Moreover, the Soviet government made a statement to the Polish government that any attempt of the latter to occupy a part of Czechoslovakia automatically cancels the non-aggression Treaty between the USSR and Poland.

And then Poland refused the Soviet Union the right of passage for the Soviet army. So much so, that the Polish Ambassador in Paris, Lukasiewicz, assured the US Ambassador to France - Bullitt - that Poland would immediately declare war on the USSR if she tries to send troops through Polish territory to aid Czechoslovakia, and if Soviet planes appear over Poland on the way into Czechoslovakia, they will immediately be attacked by Polish aviation.

Instead of helping the Czechs, Poland invaded Czechoslovakia and captured the Cieszyn region (the Soviet Union then had all rights to declare war on Poland). In fact, Poland divided Czechoslovakia with the Third Reich, in what was a preliminary agreement between the Polish Foreign Minister Jozef Beck and Foreign Minister of the Third Reich - the notorious Ribbentrop.

The so-called "Covenant of Beck-Ribbentrop Pact". What happened? Pilsudski is worse than Hitler?

Here he is, by the way, together with Goebbels.



And in the third photo, there is Polish Minister Beck. Oh, who is he with? Is it Adolf? Can't be! This is a photoshop! The Kremlin's propaganda!


So what is it, citizens? Is the head of Poland Mościcki is the same as Hitler? Is the British Prime Minister Chamberlain the same as Hitler? Is Prime Minister of France the same as Hitler? Or all of them are even worse than Hitler, as liberals broadcast to us about Stalin (Poland, too, by the way, had their own concentration camps, for example in Bereza Kartuska)?

Isn't it Horace Wilson - the adviser to the British Prime Minister - who said that "Germany and England are the two pillars that support the world order against the destructive pressure of Bolshevism"? And they and Hitler were kissing each other on the lips? And with smooching!

It turns out that capitalist ideology (liberal, democratic, whatever) is equal to Nazism? You need to strongly condemn the British monarchy for cooperating with the Nazis? Where are the democratic public looking? It's time to hold the damned hypocrites accountable for concluding the contract with Hitler!

Do you want me to buy a mirror for you, "Democratic" gentlemen?

P.S. I must admit that in this situation Winston Churchill, who specifically on this occasion said "England was offered a choice between war and dishonor. She chose dishonor and will got war", looks dignified.


     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
              Facebook                                   

       Follow us on Twitter!
              Twitter               

             Donate!

Friday, 8 April 2016

U.S Prepared Hitler for War With the USSR (Part 21)

Translated by Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ
8th April, 2016



Part 1 Part 2  / Part 3  / Part 4 / Part 5 / Part 6 / Part 7 / Part 8 Part 9 / Part 10 / Part 11 / Part 12 / Part 13 / Part 14 / Part 15 / Part 16 / Part 17 / Part 18 / Part 19 / Part 20

The website of the TV channel "Tvzvezda" has published a series of articles on the great Patriotic war of 1941-1945 by writer Leonid Maslovsky, based on his book "Russkaya Pravda", published in 2011.

In his opinion articles, Maslovsky reveals "the myths of the imaginary foe, Russia, and the events of the great Patriotic war, showing the greatness of our Victory." The author notes that in his articles he is going to "show the US' unhelpful role in West Germany's preparations for war with the USSR".


Kharkiv slaughter: How "brilliant leader" Khrushchev killed thousands of soldiers

The balance of forces on the Soviet-German front by May 1942 was as follows: the Red Army had 5.1 million people (without air defense forces and the Navy), almost 3,900 tanks, 44,900 guns and mortars, and about 2,200 combat aircraft.

The Nazi army had 6.2 million people, 3,229 tanks and assault guns, 57,000 guns and mortars, and 3395 combat aircraft. Please note: Germany and allies had 1.1 million more soldiers and officers compared to our ground forces. The superiority in the number of German & ally troops remained from the first day of the war until 1943.

But already in the summer of 1943 the number of troops of the Red Army exceeded the number of German troops by 1.8 million people. And some people say that the armies of the USSR lost more troops than Germany and its allies!


In the summer of 1942, Germany had superior guns and aircraft. We had a slight superiority in tanks, but light tanks still constituted a large proportion of our units.

The largest grouping of German troops (more than 70 divisions) was in the Moscow area. On May 1st, 1942, 217 divisions operated on the Soviet-German front (German numbers were approximately twice as high as the divisions of the Soviet armed forces) and 20 brigades of the enemy, that is, about 80% of all the land forces of Germany and its allies, as well as three of the five German air fleets. In connection with this fact, the Stavka did not move their troops from the West to the South-West direction.

And whatever may be said, in my opinion, this was the right decision, like the decision to place strategic reserves in the area of Tula, Voronezh, Stalingrad, and Saratov.

More of our energy and resources were focused on the southwest and West. Ultimately, such a distribution of forces led to the defeat of the German, or rather European army, and it was therefore inappropriate to speak about the wrong distribution of our troops by the summer of 1942. It is through this distribution of troops that we had the opportunity in November to gather sufficient strength to defeat the enemy at Stalingrad, and were able to replenish our troops during defensive battles.




While the Germans were engaged in Kerch, the commander of the southwestern front, S.K Timoshenko, came to the Stavka with a proposal to conduct a major offensive at Kharkov, and sent a plan of operations. S.K Timoshenko and N. Khrushchev insisted on the implementation of the plan. Stalin agreed to conduct operations with forces of the southwestern front involving troops of the southern front. In this instance, our intelligence once again performed badly, and Timoshenko did not know that the Germans, on May 18th, had prepared "Operation Fridericus-1" to eliminate the Barvenkovsky protrusion so that the area could be used as a place to concentrate troops for the upcoming attack to the East. 

Hoping for an equal balance of forces and means, which there was in the beginning of the offensive, our troops went into the thick of the forthcoming summer offensive of the German armies. Upon the delivery of the report of the General Staff on 17th May, 1942, Stalin proposed to stop the offensive due to the impact of the Germans from the South. Timoshenko and Khrushchev assured that the situation in the South would be back to normal soon. On May 18th, Stalin again spoke with Timoshenko and again received soothing assurances.



Only in the evening of 18th May did Timoshenko and Khrushchev raise the alarm and began to demand the cessation of the offensive. Stalin was outraged. They demanded an end to the offensive for the same reasons that Stalin had just warned them. At the time, they objected and continued the attack, and on the evening of May 18th, began to speak the words of Stalin on their behalf. After a few hours, Stalin gave permission for the cessation of the offensive on Kharkov, realizing that it was too late.

On May 19th, the impact grouping of our troops advancing on Kharkov was stopped by Timoshenko. As a result of the irresponsible offensive, the three armies in the South and South-Western fronts suffered heavy casualties. The impact troops of the southwestern front were surrounded. Forces from the 32nd army rescued 22,000 people from the encirclement. Part of the soldiers and commanders managed to break through in small groups and go to the eastern bank of the northern Donets.

Timoshenko and Khrushchev should have been prosecuted, but they got off lightly. Stalin took the blame because he was the one who allowed the attack on Kharkov to begin.

In mid-June, the South-Western front, under the blows of the German troops, were twice forced to retreat and withdraw across the river Oskol. The Kharkov battle lasted from the 12th to the 29th of May, 1942. The defeat at Kharkov, and then in Crimea showed that by the summer of 1942 the Germans once again became stronger than us.

As a result, we did not dislodge the Germans from Kharkov, and the Germans pushed us out of the Barvenkovsky protrusion, and we lost an important operational bridgehead on the northern Donets. The troops of the southwestern and southern fronts suffered heavy losses in manpower and equipment. Our historians do not analyse these events, and write that, according to German military command, in the battles at Kharkov the Germans captured 240,000 prisoners.



The analysis shows that the German command never in all of the war told the truth about the number of our prisoners that were captured. And if you believe them, then in 1941 the Germans captured all surviving officers and soldiers of the Red Army. In fact, our army only managed to grind the fresh German division and army coming and going from Europe. England and the United States calmly watched as we bled in the fight. In their favour was the fact that the Germans did not shed any less blood than us, and November 19th, 1942, more so than us.

The number of our soldiers and officers captured in Kharkov is greatly exaggerated. The Germans actually indicate not the number taken prisoner, and their calculations exaggerated the initial number of staff of our armies advancing on Kharkiv. Here the 6th army and task force of the Southwest front, coming from the Barvenkovsky protrusion, and also the 28th army's secondary attack of Kharkov from the district of Volchansk, struck the main blow. Germans included in number of prisoners also the numbers of the 9th army of the Southern front holding the defence from the South near where the 57th army held the defence.

German data is not true, because first of all, not all but part of forces of the three armies were surrounded (according to Vasilevsky and our historians, they were all surrounded by impact troops); secondly, our troops after the German attack for nearly two weeks fought fierce battles and had large losses; thirdly, some of our officers and soldiers came from the environment and therefore the number of Germans taken prisoner by our military may not have exceeded 20,000 people. Thousands of people taken into captivity is a lot.

I think that along with the dead, we lost about 80,000 people in this battle. We must remember that at that time our army had a strength of much (often almost double) below what was authorized. In my opinion, regardless of whether we would keep the defense of the Barvenkovsky protrusion or, as actually happened, we began the offensive on Kharkov, in any case, we would have crumbled and would have left a foothold, because our troops, exhausted from fighting in the offensive that liberated hundreds of thousands of square meters of his native land, was in need of rest, replenishment of men, and ammunition and equipment. After losing the battle of Kharkov, we had lost the bridgehead on the Northern Donets - Barvenkovsky protrusion.

The Supreme command needed larger reserves for planning offensive operations. Therefore, the General Staff did not plan any major offensive operations in the summer of 1942. But against the German forces, surpassing the Red Army by 1.1 million people, we could not hold the defense on the direction of the main attack for long, and were forced to retreat under the threat of encirclement.

It was impossible to compensate for the missing numbers with the number of artillery, aircraft, and other weapons, as evacation operations has only just started to operate at full capacity, and the military industry of Europe was superior to the military industry of the Soviet Union.



And the threat of encirclement was real. "On June 28th, the Nazi group forces of Colonel-General Weichs went on the offensive from the areas East of Kursk. The Nazi command counted on this attack and blows from Volchansk to Voronezh to surround and destroy the troops of the Bryansk front, covering the Voronezh direction, and then turning to the South, with an additional impact near Slavyansk, to destroy the troops of the southwestern and southern fronts, and to open the way to the Volga and the North Caucasus," writes A.M Vasilevsky.

The commanders of these fronts were, respectively, F.I Golikov, S.K Timoshenko, and Malinovsky. In the future, the Bryansk front was divided into two: Bryansk and Voronezh. On 14.07.1942, Lieutenant-General N. F. Vatutin was appointed the commander of the Voronezh front.

During the decision on the choice of the front commander, Vatutin worked as Deputy Chief of the General Staff. All candidates who Vasilevsky, with Vatutin, offered the post of commander of the Voronezh front, Stalin assigned. "All of a sudden Nikolai Fedorovich stood up (says the chief of the General staff A. M. Vasilevsky) and said:

"Comrade Stalin! Assign me as commander of the Voronezh front.

"You?"And Stalin raised his eyebrows.

"I supported Vatutin, although was sorry to let him go from the General Staff."

Stalin paused, looked at me and said:

"Okay. If comrade Vasilevsky agrees with you, I don't mind."

So N.F Vatutin was the commander of the Voronezh, then southwest front, which, subordinated to the main force of our troops, defeated the Germans at Stalingrad.

The problem of the destruction of the three fronts was entrusted to the German group of the "South" armies, which was later divided into two groups of armies: "B", under the command of field Marshal F. Bock, and "A" - under the command of field Marshal V. Liszt. They had distinguished themselves by their atrocities in Yugoslavia and Greece.

The Stavka, if necessary, reinforce the troops of these fronts, and because of this, as well as the skilful actions of the General Staff and the commanders of the Soviet troops, the Germans were unable to achieve their goals in the environment and the destruction of the divisions, corps, and armies of our fronts. Under fighting our troops departed to the East.

This is just how K.K Rokossovsky, on July 5th, 1942, was appointed to his post as commander of the 16th army force commander of the Bryansk front, one of the battles in the Voronezh direction: "On the land where the battles were part of the 5th tank army, the situation was deteriorating: the enemy continued to advance. It was necessary to urgently bring new strength. We decided to push the front line with the reserve 7th armored corps under the command of P.A Rotmistrov.

While at an observation post in the area where the events were unfolding, you could see the whole course of the battle. Flat, open terrain contributed to this. Fighting with our departing units and those who were pressing on their opponent were clearly visible. Enemy tanks could be seen in small groups on a broad front, taking cannon fire, mainly intervalic in nature.

German infantry was moving behind them, lying from time to time and taking continuous automatic fire. In the distance, on the horizon, through the thick clouds of dust, the movement of new columns of tanks and other vehicles were observed.

Our anti-tank artillery quite accurately beat the advancing tanks of the enemy. Where possible it changed positions and immediately opened fire, slowing the enemy advance and covering our departing infantry, which also fought back with machine-gun and mortar fire. The withdrawal had an organized character. But it was obvious that, entering into battle with their main force, approaching from the depths, the enemy will easily crush our units.

However, by this time part of the 7th tank corps arrived. Before our eyes, the corps turned and resolutely marched towards the main tank forces of the enemy, hitting them with all our batteries, including the artillery and tank corps. Particularly effective were the "Katyusha" volleys.

The battlefield was shrouded in clouds of dust. Through them shone a dim flash of gunfire and shell explosions. In many places pillars of black smoke soared from burning enemy vehicles. Our infantry rallied and, together with tanks, rushed to the enemy. The enemy could not resist this fierce and swift attack. After heavy losses, they withdrew.

Enemy aircraft, except for certain aircraft, almost did not participate in combat. Nor did our aircraft. All our attempts to build on the progress in this area did not produce results. But the offensive was repelled. In these battles, the commander of the 5th Panzer army, General Lizyukov, was killed (tank units, aviation, and the Generals went on the attack). He was moving in the combat formation of one of the connections. To inspire tankmen, the general rushed forth in his KV tank, rushed into an arrangement of the opponent and laid down his life." The Germans were rapidly advancing, which was facilitated by the superiority in forces and natural conditions of the region.

On 6th July, 1942, street fighting began for Voronezh, in which Soviet troops held the left side of the city and the bridgehead on the right Bank. Nazi occupiers had driven out all the civilian population of the captured parts of Voronezh, destroyed over 2,000 people, who were executed on the outskirts of the city in Pishchane and more than 500 wounded and sick who were in the city hospital.




     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
              Facebook                                   

       Follow us on Twitter!
              Twitter               

             Donate!

Thursday, 7 April 2016

Strategically important Transcarpathia demands autonomy from Ukraine

April 8, 2016 - 
Katehon



In the latest event in the collapse of Ukraine, Deputies of the Legislative Assembly of Transcarpathia have demanded autonomy from the Ukrainian nationalist state. MPs demanded that the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, and Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada Volodymyr Groysman grant autonomy to the region. The statement was adopted at the plenary session of the local parliament.
"We demand the recognition of Transcarpathia as a special self-governing administrative territory. The necessary amendments to the Constitution of the country must be made without delay", - the document says.
Stalin's Gift
Transcarpathia is the region that was last to join Ukraine. It was a part of Hungary, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and then Czechoslovakia until 1945, when Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin incorporated it into the Soviet Ukraine after World War II. Representatives of local communities (Orthodox congress of Carpathian Ruthenia, headed by Archimandrite Kabaljuk and Professor Lintur) asked him to include it in the USSR as an independent republic. This proposal was rejected by the Soviet leadership.

Special people
Most of the region's population is Carpatho Rusyns who consider themselves separate people to the Ukrainians. Rusyns as an ethnic minority are recognized in Hungary, Serbia, Slovakia, and Romania. There is a major Ruthenian diaspora in the US. The Ukrainian government has consistently pursued a policy of Ukrainization of the local population. However, the region has a strong desire for autonomy and independence. Besides Rusyns in Transcarpathia, there is a large Hungarian community living there, and a smaller Romanian one.

Hungarian factor
Neighboring Hungary supports the push for autonomy by Rusyns and Hungarians living in Transcarpathia. The "Jobbik - For a Better Hungary" party is the most active in this regard. They call on the Hungarian leadership to protect the interests of the Hungarian minority and Rusyns that are historically associated with Hungary. Jobbik MPs Márton Gyöngyösi and Adrienn Szaniszló participated as observers in the elections in Donetsk and Lugansk. In the context of the weakening of the Ukrainian state, Hungary cannot stand by and will strengthen their influence in the Carpathian region, including supporting the movement for autonomy. This is entirely in line with the national interests of Hungary.

Economic factor
The main cross-border trade flow between Ukraine and Europe goes through the Carpathians: both legal and illegal; smuggling is thriving in the region. Much of this criminal business is in the hands of the local Baloga clan, one of whom formerly headed the administration of Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko. Representatives of local oligarchic structures are also interested in autonomy from Kiev.

From an economic and geopolitical point of view, a small Carpathian region is of strategic importance for Ukraine. Within this region are the key gas pipelines through which Russian fuel is delivered to Europe. Therefore, Ukraine will have to salvage control of the region at any cost. At the same time it is an important trump card for the local elites and the supporters of independence. Europe is also interested in controlling this pipeline system.

Who's next?
Transcarpathia is not the only region of Ukraine that could demand autonomy. Ukraine is an artificial country made by the Soviets from disparate pieces cut out from different states. Strong separatist tendencies can be found in the Odessa region (Southern Bessarabia), which is home to a large Romanian (Moldovan) community. The Chernivtsi region is home to a large number of many who are also displeased with the rule of nationalists and oligarchs in modern Ukraine. Both regions were part of Romania in past. Unsuccessful European integration of Ukraine, corruption, the collapse of the state, rampant Ukrainian nationalism, chauvinism, and xenophobia all contribute to the revival of pro-Romanian sympathies in these regions. One should not forget about the eastern regions of the country that are populated mainly by ethnic Russians.

     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
              Facebook                                   

       Follow us on Twitter!
              Twitter               

             Donate!