I'm not sure why some people are insistent on doubling down that the US didn't play a role in Putin's invasion when they clearly did.
Aside from NATO provocation (which is well sourced and documented in this thread,) I've also pointed to the 2014 US-backed coup in Ukraine as a source of provocation:
The most critical events that have been airbrushed out of the West's political narrative are the violation of
agreements made by Western leaders at the end of the Cold War not to expand NATO into Eastern Europe, and the
U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine in February 2014. Western mainstream media accounts date the crisis in Ukraine back to Russia's
2014 reintegration of Crimea, and the decision by ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine to secede from Ukraine as the
Luhansk and
Donetsk People's Republics.
But these were not unprovoked actions. They were responses to the U.S.-backed coup, in which an armed mob led by the neo-Nazi Right Sector militia
stormed the Ukrainian parliament, forcing elected President Viktor Yanukovych and members of his party to flee for their lives. After the events of Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, that scenario should now be easier for Americans to understand.
The remaining members of parliament voted to form a new government, subverting the political transition and plans for a new election that Yanukovych had publicly
agreed to a day earlier, after meetings with the foreign ministers of France, Germany and Poland.
The U.S. role in managing the coup was exposed by a leaked 2014
audio recording of a conversation between Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and U.S. ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt as
they planned to sideline the European Union ("f*** the EU," as Nuland put it) and shoehorn in U.S. protégé Arseniy Yatsenyuk ("Yats") as Ukraine's prime minister.
At the end of the call, Pyatt told Nuland, "We want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing."
Nuland replied (verbatim): "So on that piece, Geoff, when I wrote the note, [Biden's national security advisor Jake] Sullivan's come back to me VFR [very quickly?], saying you need [Vice President] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an attaboy and to get the deets to stick. So Biden's willing."
It has never been explained why two senior State Department officials who were discussing a regime change in Ukraine looked to then-Vice President Biden to "midwife this thing," instead of their actual boss, Secretary of State John Kerry.
Now that the crisis over Ukraine has blown up with a vengeance during Biden's first year as president, the unanswered questions about his role in the 2014 coup have become more urgent and troubling. And why did Biden appoint Nuland to the
No. 4 position at the State Department, despite (or because of?) her critical role in triggering the disintegration of Ukraine and an eight-year- civil war that has killed at least 14,000 people?
Both of Nuland's hand-picked puppets in Ukraine, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk and President Petro Poroshenko, were soon mired in
corruption scandals. Yatsenyuk was forced to resign after two years and Poroshenko was outed in a tax evasion scandal
revealed in the Panama Papers. Ukraine remains the
poorest country in Europe, and one of the most corrupt.
The Ukrainian military had little enthusiasm for a civil war against its own people in eastern Ukraine, so the post-coup government formed new "
National Guard" units to assault the separatist republics. The infamous Azov Battalion drew its first recruits from the Right Sector militia and openly displays neo-Nazi symbols, yet has kept on receiving U.S.
arms and training, even after Congress explicitly cut off its U.S. funding in the 2018 defense appropriation bill.
Source:
In the rapidly worsening Ukraine fiasco, the U.S. is reaping exactly what it sowed | Salon.com
If people care about Ukraine's sovereignty and security like they claim, why would they not have the same level of contempt for the US as they do for Putin?
kyivindependent.com
