chi-raq promoWhen I first tried to read Aristophanes’ Lysistrata,  I was not impressed with it, and consequently did not finish it.  I was  offended by the serious subject of war  being  handled with such frivolity.  As if men who do not engage in sex, also do not engage in war. Another point of contention about the play was that it portrayed men as mere animals whose aggressive tendencies could only be reigned in by a lack of sexual gratification.   And yet a more offensive aspect was the play’s argument that a woman could manipulate a man using her willingness to gratify  or not gratify his sexual desires. Her ability to appeal to his higher nature, that is, his intellect or his heart, by using her higher powers,  was minimized within the play. Furthermore, the play concealed the fact that women also could be swayed under the passion of the bloodlust. After all, Athena was a goddess of War. That meme, I suspect, did not emerge from a societal void. Overall,  this play was a commentary  about human male/female relationships which seem to say  these  relationships were guided only by sexual instincts.


Peace as a young woman exposed to the frustrated warriors

Nonetheless, I am excited about Spike Lee’s new movie Chi-Raq, because it, during these  times of the Black Lives Matter Movement, addresses something that the movement doesn’t talk about-the epidemic  crime in some African-American communities in the United States. I think the movie, whether intentionally or not intentionally will make the point that If Black Lives Matter, it has to matter within the African-American community as well.

I am not a great  fan of the low-brow satire that Aristophanes employs to make a case for Peace; however, in a secular world that has rejected Christ,  maybe this is one of the few devices to utilize which can  bring attention or create movement toward a balanced debate on the crime in African-American communities and the militarizing of police forces everywhere, not just in African-American communities.  And also we can make a argument to expose the criminality that is emerging and growing in middle class neighborhoods.  The truth is that militarization of police forces, as well as hyper-surveillance,  is a fact of life in predominately white communities as well, and to polarize groups about this issue is a way to keep them from uniting in order to effectively protest it. And it keeps us dumbed down to what is really going on internationally. So even though, I’m not a fan of Aristophanes, I’m interested enough about Spike Lee’s movie Chi-Raq to go see it, and not only to go and see it, but to watch as it hopefully inspires a dialogue that will bring some needed balance to the current civil rights movement between whites and blacks, and even perhaps erase the false flag situations that separate them.





Ukraine’s Separatists’ Manifestos Explained

Fascist terror in Ukraine, May 16, 2014

In our first interview published on April 16 in Marquetalia we reported that the way things were going, “the most likely scenario is not a civil war [in Ukraine] but perpetuated a genocide against ethnic minorities by foreign powers (including Russia) running while you look on the other side. ” Unfortunately, this prediction is confirmed by the facts that took place on May 2 Our goal in these lines is to provide the most accurate information possible about what actually happened in the regions against insurgency in Ukraine (understood in the sense that they oppose the insurrection Maidan and his government coup) and denounce the face of public opinion, particularly aware of the misinformation, as is the case since the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis has spread to the West readers.


We begin by replicating the intervention of representatives of several European countries to the UN Assembly at its session of that same May 2, who accused the activists of Donbass “terrorize the civilian population” and be infiltrated Russian troops supported by “rare demonstrators.” It would be difficult to be less informed or less misleading, because the resistance of the Donbass, whose members, there are called “volunteers” (opolchentsy) consists precisely of the same civilian population and anyone who has information knows first hand that the only terror that residents of Donbass is to see land the troops neo-Nazi militias Praviy Sektor, or according to their formalized version of the National Guard. When the presence of the Russian army, just remember that until the Admiral Finnish Georgij Alafuzoff, ex head of the military intelligence of Finland and Director of Intelligence of the General Staff of the European Union has recognized 15 Last April he considered it “unlikely”, according to our information, except perhaps Slavjansk, it is nonexistent.

“Terrorism” and double standard

Furious protests from the West, which at least give the caricature, do not bring anything other than highlighting the double standard that, according to what is usual in politics, especially in international politics, s’ apply in this case. And one wonders what differentiates taking public buildings, the installation of barricades or appropriation of police weapons during Maidan, where these actions were applauded, and in the southeastern regions (which we we refuse to qualify tendentiously “pro-Russian”) where these actions are condemned without appeal. The former, despite having used Molotov cocktails since January this year – that have not yet done so against the insurgents, – and later firearms, were encouraged and applauded every time from the West. The latter have only reacted after the coup in Kiev and who have not previously used the deadly combination, are called “terrorists” and all the Armed Forces of Ukraine and Western public opinion to excite against them. In summary, the means and circumstances which determine the use of the term prove irrelevant in itself and for those suitable for the party, in this case Berlin-Washington axis.

Concerning the classification of terrorism, it must also highlight the statements of the current Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov that on social networks, reported that “They ordered the terrorist groups to dress black and draw against the civil, mimicking the actions of the Ukrainian militia. I ask the citizens of Kramatorsk Slavjansk and not out on the streets and I ordered the commandos of the Ministry of Interior to end provocation. ” According to the information we have, the only group that could act this way (and by all indications and from what they have shown themselves capable in Maidan) is the Pravyi Sektor, neo-Nazi militias Private ultra nationalist parties of the extreme right of Trizub Iarosh and Svoboda Tiahnybok. They are also the only ones who can afford the kind of rifles used by snipers, except that such material was discovered and seized in a vehicle stopped in a traffic stop near Slavjansk night from April 19 to 20 at the beginning of the Easter period, an event that ended with a balance of five dead. The accusation by Avakov deliberately blurred, is well infiltrated the alleged Russian (whose presence we said could not be demonstrated in person), it is also the alleged “terrorists” and “separatists” Donbass but it would be better to read it as an excuse not least with the aim to cover our backs if ultimately the real terrorists, ie, militiamen Pravyi Sektor or their foreign collaborators (a possibility that we will discuss later ), come to take a stand and start murdering people.


The reaction in Transcarpathia

Before we worry about the areas that are the subject of the offensive of the junta, such as resistance movements have called the self-proclaimed government in Kiev (in comparison to the coup of 70 Latin American governments), it should be noted that the fascistic threat is felt not only in the south-eastern regions of Russian-speaking majority, but also in other regions. This is what happens in the far eastern region of the country, Transcarpathia (Zakarpastka Oblast ‘), in which there is a significant presence “ethnic” Ruthenians, Hungarians and Romanians, among others. Here, as in other regions, the ultra nationalist Ukrainian took control of the situation, occupying public buildings, and in a localized, regional government, against the will of the majority of the population coup. According to a recent survey, 80.8% of respondents support the initiative to hold the government Turchynov, the liberation of the occupied buildings: 80% think it should conduct an investigation against the attackers and participants regional putsch, and the same number requires that the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU Ukrainian KGB successor) suspend the prosecution of those so-called de facto authorities describe as “Ruthenian separatists.”

Regional resistance rooted in the Carpathian Ruthenia Congress, which had already proclaimed in 2008 the Republic of Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia (Rus Podkarpatska), released a manifesto also disclosed on social networks, in which it requires government Kiev and its allies the application of the agreement in Geneva on April 17 last, the one that included the surrender of weapons by illegal paramilitary formations, the release of all illegally occupied government buildings and highways blocked, and amnesty for all political prisoners without offense of blood. We remember the demands from the “Junta” requesting that South Eastern activists perform the agreement unilaterally, since they do not feel concerned, denying the main reason for which the treaty for a moment, could disable the spiral of violence. In this regard, the Ruthenian resistance considers that the All-Ukrainian dialogue without the participation of the People’s Republic of Donetsk (Donetskaia Narodnaya Respublika) or the Republic of the Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia lack political sense.

In addition to exposing these general requirements, the manifest includes the following requirements for the case of Transcarpathia specifically: the immediate liberation of the occupied buildings in the area, the opening of criminal investigations against the attackers thereof, and be dropped prosecutions against “separatist Ruthenian” Disarmament in 17 application of article of the constitution of Ukraine, all illegal group, starting with Pravyi Sektor, recognitions Ruthenian as “ethnic Carpatho with political and cultural rights attached to the status of officially recognized ethnic group, the prohibition of SBU and other bodies of ethnic persecution Ruthenians and reprisals against them, and finally the presence of international observers to monitor the process.


Óblast of Zakarpatia (The Transcarpathia)

Óblast of Zakarpatia (The Transcarpathia)

The Donets basin undermine (Region Donbass)


Donets coal basin (Donbass Region)

The region considerada Donbass es el color of the zona rosa, pero las Fronteras oficiales de las regiones (Oblast) son las lineas de color negro.

The region is considered Donbass area rose color, but the official borders of the oblast (region) lines are black.

Events Odessa

On April 24, during the session of the meeting of the Regional Government of Odessa, the head of the Regional Directorate of the Ministry of Interior, Piotr Lutssiuk, tell members the need to leave the area to paramilitary groups, were maintained in Kiev without any control, and were sent by the new authorities in Odessa to get rid of them temporarily. According to reports Lutssiuk these groups (according to some sources, the reach 3OOO members) were established in the region 12 posts illegal traffic stop. Where stand guard by rotating, about 1500 people. In addition, the week before the session to which reference is made, the local police discovered a deposit of Odessa weapon belonging to Pravyi Sektor, which contained bullets, knives, clubs, bottles and Molotov cocktails packages explosive.

* The local media for their part, realized many conflicts that took place in positions of illegal checks between neo-Nazi militia and Odessa travelers or visitors to the city. From what was reported, first broke the windows of cars, abused travelers and demanded money to grant passage. Suddenly, the governor appointed by the illegal authorities of Kiev, Vladimir Nemirovsky, held a speech in defense of the said checks, which in his opinion, are necessary to monitor the activities of the police. (Sic!)

It is in this climate that took place the tragic events of May 2, having a history (in addition to the pre-mentioned influx of members Pravyi Sektor), on the one hand, the prior existence of an activist anti-Maidan camp Kulivovo Pole (a park in the center of the city), who had already suffered many attacks from both the police as radical nationalist elements, and secondly the convening a nationalist demonstration of supporters of radical ultra-nationalist factions of the two teams playing that day in Odessa Chernomorets local and Metallist of Járkov. At first it was assumed that these events would remain peaceful. In a video that shows the beginning of the walk you can see a well known “centurion” in Pravyi Sektor (Maidan in these groups were organized in groups of one hundred neo-Nazis -. NdT) coated with a bulletproof vest, talking with someone from the content of the conversation, it was assumed that the caller could be Avakov Minister himself, he deceives shamelessly saying that his “boys” were unarmed and himself was injured by a stone sent by the “separatists” although the latter two facts are contradicted by this video (prior to the start of the fighting) and those that were recorded during the assault of the building unions. There already among individuals dressed in camouflage outfits and armed with sticks and metal bars, one of the bodyguards of “centurion” in paramilitary uniform, told a police officer: “Do us a long way and we will our work. ” There is no doubt that the event has been planned as an organized attack.

Time for activists said Odésskaia Druzhina or Masnada Odesita (movements against-insurgents) camped at Kulikovo Pole, receiving news of this event, they were divided between those who thought it was better to stay peacefully in the camp and those who decided to leave the meeting (of the event) because they thought, and was right, that the real purpose of the march was a new and final assault on the camp. As well as 100 to 150 people remained in the camp, another group of 150, left to join the event, identified by ribbons of the Order of St. George which are used as hallmarks of the cons-insurgency (because they are associated with the victory over Nazi troops during the Second World War). This group, carrying sharp objects and in some cases protected by helmets and shields as riot use, has led to the demonstrators who had gathered on the square Sabórneia, which were busy shouting slogans ultra-nationalist fascist type Ukraiiny Slava! and shouting slogans against the moskaly (literally “Moscow” appellation expressing deep contempt in which the Ukrainian take Russian). Those who came of Kulikovo Pole is found there, in front of some 1,500 people, which is why, in clashes that followed, they were the worst part.

It was then that runs the most confusing part of the events for which the evidence is, it makes sense contradictory. Nationalist protesters accuse police of having acted in favor of “pro-Russian activists” defending by forming a human shield. Even so, both sides began to throw stones and mutually any launchable object that fell into their hands. This suggests that the police tried unsuccessfully to establish a cordon between the two groups, but that ended up being overwhelmed, she decided to stay away. However, in another video we see that the behavior of the police (some members wore red armbands, as some nationalists) is extremely disconcerting, because we can see the breaching in said cord, allowing passage one and the other groups that clashed.

From there, we deduced that their intention was to heat the atmosphere so that hostilities derive themselves an assault on the camp city, but they were not well calculated is that the boiling point is reached so as rapidly with dramatic results. Confirm this view pictures of this same video in which we see the head of the Odessa Police mingled with the demonstrators and the disappearance of the red ribbon participants (these réapparaîtrons among the besiegers of the union house) when nationalist demonstrators finally will forward to Kulikovo Pole. Anyway, that admits no doubt, this is the subsequent passivity of security forces; which is one of the catalysts of the tragedy. *

In the heat of the action, the nationalists continued their opponents in the park and some of those who were there to camp, plus some passers unprejudiced, eventually taking refuge in the building trade unions, where they found themselves surrounded by protesters opposite sign. According to the testimony of one of them, as a result of spontaneous movements of the fighting, some of the “pro-Russian aggressors” took refuge in the building said the crossfire between Molotov cocktails. In one of the videos posted on the internet there are some images, confused at first sight, in which we see how a Molotov cocktail, supposedly started by a refugee in the building falls on an air conditioner, which would have caused the fire, giving the opportunity to speak nationalist self-immolation. According to the same release, the police remained on site and firefighters have accomplished their mission, while members of the “self Maidan” (ie those Pravyi Sektor) would have helped people escape the flames, defending blows furious fans.

However, multiple videos recorded more or less hidden camera during the assault, reveal a very different situation. Let’s start with the video as evidence mentioned by nationalist demonstrators there, it is obvious that the ground floor and the main door of the building are already burning when the Molotov cocktail was thrown. In addition, even not paying attention, we see perfectly that the trajectory of the bottle is not vertical but describes a parabola, in which it rotates several times on itself, to go crashing against the ‘air conditioning unit, which proves factually it was launched from the outside. In addition, the ubiquitous and almost omniscient internet we can find pictures of happy girls who pose as they prepare Molotov cocktails to Pravyi Sektor, photos they broadcast themselves on social networks, proud of their work in the service of the Ukrainian nation. In this sense there is not the slightest doubt that the building was burned by his attackers and that they have started fire doors reveals the intention of preventing the egress of occupants. In fact there is another video in which means one of the assailants shouting: “Look, we’ll burn the fucking fags in the building.”

In this same record, you can clearly hear the repeated blows fire and we see nationalist demonstrators, many of them in paramilitary uniforms including army helmets, armed with sticks and mostly wearing a mask. We also note says “centurion” in Pravyi Sektor (without any injury, for sure) that takes several shots with his pistol towards the ledge of the second floor where a besieged trying to flee the flames. without any of the besiegers help her, while new Molotov cocktails continually hit against the door and facade of the building and you hear one of the besieging tell someone trying to escape by windows. “Look! Take to refresh you! “Cry that clearly accompanied by the launch of another Molotov cocktail. This type of action explains why in some body building, have only the head and hands burned, and not the rest of the body. In another video have heard a woman calling for help from a window of the top floor, can after we see three nationalist protesters to lean out the window, wearing a Ukrainian flag. With the position of the window, the woman who cried was identified in photographs taken after the body of a pregnant woman, strangled with an electric wire, it is a worker unions who were on hand to perform maintenance. During this time, the police conspicuous by its absence, highlighted by the voice of the author of the shooting, which regularly refers to the besieged as “300 Spartans” in clear reference to those who fell face Persian defending the parade of Thermopylae. The riot police arrive only when some of the besieged began jumping from the burning building, indicating that it was in the vicinity, but did not dare intervene (or had orders not to do until the situation becomes quite unbearable. fairness to all, we must recognize that while the police and some of those who surrounded the building (of which there were people waiting more demonstrators) attempted to create a corridor to safely evacuate the besieged who came out of the building (security as most have been arrested on charges of terrorism, 69 of them were released the next day by the angry mob . NdT), while part of the besiegers continued to throw stones against the survivors, crying Slava Ukraiiny!. Operator video asking as they help those trying to get out and some protesters him answer “These dogs! Kiev, they beheaded activists and their bitch mother! “; This reference to the inhabitants of Odessa is an accusation that has no meaning, in addition to actually we do not see that anyone was beheaded Maidan, which shows the absolute and irrational hatred that made possible the tragedy.

All the circumstances, on the other hand are far from being highlighted. According to the testimony of several survivors, inside the building there could be had, not fifty victim recognized figure so far, but at least 200, seen at the beginning of the occupation, members have continued Pravyi Sektor “pro-Russian activists” and shot at several shots of them, which also explains the photos of corpses, many have head injuries by firearms. According to witnesses, several refugees were taken to the cellars where they were executed. ”

Consequently, the fire would not have been solely intended to do away with those who were surrounded in the building, but also to remove the traces of the murders were committed there. It is obvious that to shed light on what happened, should the intervention of a competent and neutral body, but the current Ukrainian authorities coup who celebrated so repeated the actions of their “patriotic” in this “counter-terrorism” will never allow a thorough investigation examining the details of the tragedy. For now, that feels able to do so can see the terrible images captured inside the building, as well as doubts, issues raised by the same concerning the sequence of events, about which we do not have competence necessary for us to pronounce, but it would be very enlightening to see challenged by someone qualified.

To all this we can add the recordings made by the besiegers at the entrance of the building after the fire is out, we see that loot corpses who laughs missals and miniature icons that some are in their pockets. To complete the picture, in the web pages pro-nationalist it was broadcast to refer to the dead derogatory designation of “centurie smoky” in clear and ironic against-designation of the “heavenly centurie” that is to say victims (martyrs in their terminology) actions Maidan. The statements made subjects of these events by opportunistic politicians like Yulia Timoshenko, where authentic ultra-nationalist fanatics as the member of Svoboda Irina Farion, do nothing but increase the climate of ethnic hatred pushing it exasperation as well as the release of the SBU on the presence of complement false “Russian provocateurs’ who are trying to” destabilize “Odessa, Donetsk and other Ukrainian cities offering illegitimate authorities arisen coup of 22 February and its armed bases, the right-wing ultra-nationalist militias, the excuse to unleash this wave of terror, including the potential victim is the entire population that does not share the ideal fascistic. Ultimately, it is an excuse to kill their own citizens.

While recognizing the imprudence of the insurgency against Odessa (although it is possible that at the end the measure would not have been a better parade), it is clear that what happened in building Unions Odessa is a lynching in good and due form, which is totally unacceptable even if it had involved a genuine terrorist group, since the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial are among the most basic human rights. But it is clear that in the current situation in Ukraine, we are facing the most absolute contempt for them, let alone the rule of law. It is only in this way that we can understand that the Governor Nemirovsky has “passed” from his facebook page (!) an “edict” taking time same date of May 2, in which he told the against any law and any ethical principle that “Every action of the inhabitants of Odessa will be directed to the neutralization and detention of armed terrorists will be considered legal.” As was the fear the hunt is on.




The reaction in the south-eastern regions

April 7 against the insurgency of the Donetsk region proclaims the sovereignty of the People’s Republic of Donetsk (Donétskaia Narodnaya Respublika), which immediately allowed the Ukrainian government is accused of “separatist” anyone in this region s opposes such acts or which expresses the idea of ​​federalization of the country, even when it has nothing to do with the self-proclaimed sovereign republic, if not otherwise. With the pretext of the proclamation of the RPD, began the occupation by some against insurgents-building of the Administration and the entire population in the official rhetoric of the Kiev authorities immediately became “terrorist” forgetting similar actions in before the coup capital. The ship is easy and convenient; mix in the same pattern almost eleven million people without faires nuances, nor, above all, why bother to understand or, better yet, to take because it seems impossible that they do not realize account, despite the congenital blindness of nationalism everything on their side of the identity barrier would explain this aberrant situation.

The Kiev government, euphoric with the approval granted by the European Union and the United States, at the same time which he proceeded to the dismissal of Yanukovych, completely forgotten that he was a provisional government that which – although it was legitimate – the obligation to limit its functions to normal maintenance of the country and the preparation of presidential elections scheduled for May 25 The new authorities have not heard the southeast of the country, which you as they marched in Maidan, and was not a full support to its requirements, goals, motivations and actions, but because it will not be considered as a democratically elected government can be removed in this manner, nor thought the support of the West would come to be shameless or that once this product is the coup d’état they dare to interfere in regions where industrial activities are the economic base of the country, those who bring half of its GDP.

The first wave of indignation among the Russian-speaking population (which is not ethnically Russian, and even less by definition “pro-Russian”) took place when, instead of worrying about solving the serious economic problems facing the country, Rada or the Parliament, led by insurgent elements and under the threat of weapons of Pravyi Sektor, deleted the language law, which guaranteed a special status to the Russian spoken by the vast majority of people in these areas and that other minority languages ​​such as Hungarian, transcarpatien (but not Ruthenian considered a dialect of Ukrainian) or the Romanian-Moldovan Chernivtsi and Odessa. This decision, taken on February 23, was repudiated including the Commissioner of the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation European) in cases of ethnic minorities, who warned that such parliamentary initiative could worsen the situation in the country , above all in the regions in which the question of language is considered important. For his part, the spokesman of the Council of the Russian Federation, Valentine Matviienko, warned then that this decision would be the beginning of separatism in Ukraine. This subject in the eyes of many people in Europe, is not a sufficient reason for a confrontation like that happened. However, the Russian-speaking citizens of Ukraine at the beginning of Maidan received verbal and graphic signals ideological bias of the opposition which later became the provisional government. La symbolique fasciste qui apparaît sur les drapeaux, les peintures, les vêtements et les pancartes de beaucoup d’activistes de Maidán démentent les déclarations de cette opposition qui prétend agir au nom de toute l’Ukraine – et ce malgré la participation du parti ultra nationaliste Svoboda – et que son objectif serait d’unir toute l’Ukraine indépendamment de l’ethnie, dans une avancée vers des valeurs démocratiques. Malgré tout, les gens se sont armés de patience et ont attribué l’usage des slogans et emblèmes de type fasciste d’avantage à la ferveur patriotique de l’opposition qu’à ses véritables intentions d’exécuter le programme politique de Svoboda, dont le contenu pour quiconque connaît un peu l’histoire remonte au Munich de 1933 et au Lvov de 1942.

De toute façon, cela a été démenti, dès leur accès au pouvoir, par la dite abolition de la loi des langues et parce que le gouvernement provisoire au lieu de désarmer les unités paramilitaires néonazies de Pravyi Séktor, leur a permis pratiquement de contrôler les régions occidentales d’Ukraine, sans exiger qu’ils abandonnent les bâtiments occupés et, pour abonder dans ce sens, tente de les légaliser comme partie de la Garde Nationale, en une sorte d’éruption schizoïde qui prétend unir les unités militaires du Ministère de l’Intérieur du dissous Bérkut avec ses adversaires antérieurs dans les rues de Kiev. Conjointement à cette offensive, de manière tout à fait évidente pour qui connaît la situation de l’Ukraine, se produit la signature précipitée, sans autorité légale ou morale pour cela des sections politiques (Titre I et II) de l’accord contesté d’association de l’Ukraine et de l’Union Européenne, qui pour les mineurs et les ouvriers de l’industrie du Donbass signifierait (en cas d’application de sa partie économique) la fermeture des entreprises correspondantes et la perte de leur poste de travail, comme cela s’est produit en Espagne, dans des circonstances similaires lors de ce qui est appelé par euphémisme la « reconversion industrielle ».

Ainsi allèrent les choses, le 28 février, le leader de la contre-insurrection Pavel Gubarev comparaissait devant l’assemblée régional de Donetsk, appelant les députés a réagir face aux autorités putschistes de Kiev et à défendre la région de “la Junte” sans aucun résultat. Le premier mars, pendant une manifestation, la multitude à élu Gúbarev comme « gouverneur populaire », contre le gouverneur imposé par Kiev, l’oligarque Serguéi Taruta, mais le 6 mars il fut arrêté, accusé de « actions dirigées vers le changement forcé, et la vulnération de l’Ordre Constitutionnel ou assaut au pouvoir de l’état », ainsi que d’attentat contre l’unité et l’inaliénabilité de l’Ukraine », ce qui ne laisse pas d’être ironique venant d’un gouvernement coupable précisément de ces mêmes charges. Cette inculpation fut sans doute une des premières démonstrations du double standard employé depuis systématiquement par le nouveau gouvernement et un catalyseur pour le développement du mouvement de résistance à “la Junte”. D’un autre côté, Gubarev appelait à la fédéralisation de l’Ukraine et pas à la Sécession du Donbass, une opinion qui était encore majoritaire fin mars, selon une enquête réalisée entre le 16 et le31 de ce mois par Ukrainian Sociology Service, qui révèle que seulement 18% de la population des régions orientales est partisane d’une sécession. Cette proposition de fédéralisation, que propose pour la première fois le 30janvier de 2013 le député pour le parti des régions Vadim Kolesnichenko, fut la première tentative de la part de la population des régions sud-orientales d’offrir une sortie rationnelle et pacifique à la situation de la part de quelques citoyens qui pour des raisons expliquées lors de l’ entrevue citée au début de ces lignes, ne veulent pas en venir à faire partie de la Russie, ni être citoyens de seconde Zone dans leur propre pays.

Cependant, à cause du rejet par l’assemblée régionale des propositions de Gubarev et ensuite de sa détention, les manifestations à Donetsk ont commencé et elles ont grandi. Alors la Rada, alors que la sécession de la Crimée s’était déjà produite, adopta immédiatement une posture d’extrême agressivité et le 13mars, elle changea la loi électorale pour l’élection présidentielle, à laquelle fut ajoutée une clause : « La Commission Électorale centrale est obligée d’établir les résultats des élections présidentielles indépendamment de la quantité de districts électoraux dans lesquels les élections ont été menées à leur terme », autrement dit, elle élimine la nullité des élections faute de quorum, à manoeuvre grossière au sujet de laquelle tout commentaire serait superflu. De surcroît, l’amendement suivant a été adopté “Si les élections ne sont pas menées à leur terme dans certains districts électoraux, les résultats des votes au jour des élections pour le Président de l’Ukraine s’établiront à partir des résultats des autres districts électoraux”. Il a également été établi que « le jour même des élections ne pourront être célébré aucun référendum ni de l’état, ni locaux ». Le fondement de ces modifications légales est constitué par la sécession non reconnue de la Crimée, où il y a près d’un million d’électeur, et aussi la possibilité d’un boycott électoral dans les régions du sud-est, en plus d’offrir la possibilité de manipuler les résultats électoraux, cherchant des excuses pour invalider les votes « inconvenants » de districts déterminés, sans avoir à recommencer les élections. Ces dispositions furent suivie d’action de protestation qui dans certains cas se sont terminées par l’occupation de bâtiments officiels, en prenant précisément comme modèle celles qui furent menées lors du Maidán, mais à la différence de ces dernières, celle-ci furent taxées de « séparatistes », en application de la morale de double standard. D’autre part, ces accusations semblent pouvoir s’enraciner dans la profusion de symbolique pro-russe parmi la contre-insurrection sud-orientale. Pour comprendre ce phénomène il faut comprendre que malgré que les autorités de Kiev et leurs médias affins, le nient constamment, le schéma de leurs actions révèle l’application du programme de l’extrême-droite nationaliste ukrainienne, c’est pourquoi dans les dites région on l’appelle « la Junte » et ses actions sont considérés quasi unanimement comme fascistes. Dans la mémoire collective de ces régions, fortement affectées par l’occupation nazie, la libération elle-même est associée de manière indélébile à l’armée soviétique (de là l’emploi mentionné du ruban de Saint-Georges, l’unique décoration tsariste reconnue par le régime soviétique). A son tour, l’armée russe est considérée de manière plus ou moins consciente, comme son héritière. De là l’adoption d’une symbolique qui, quoique dans certains cas elle corresponde réellement à une volonté séparatiste, pour la majorité des gens, elle exprime seulement un principe, son profond sentiment antifasciste.

L’“opération antiterroriste” du Donbass

Le 13 avril, les autorités de Kiev ont annoncé le lancement de l’opération antiterroriste contre les régions du Sud-est, après la prise le 12 avril, de la mairie de Slaviansk par la contre-insurrection. Avant de poursuivre, il est indispensable de se demander : de quel terrorisme sommes-nous en train de parler ? Jusqu’à ce moment, dans les dits territoire, il n’y avait pas eu de prises d’otages, aucune explosion n’avait été provoquée, ou séquestration, il n’y avait pas eu de morts, sauf celle du porte-parole de Svoboda dans le Donbass, causée par un coup de poing au cours d’un affrontement entre des activistes pro et contre Maidán. Il est clair donc, que parler dans ce cas de terrorisme c’est simplement avoir recours au mot magique qui au moins depuis le 11 septembre, justifie en occident n’importe quelle classe de violation de droits.

De fait, le premier affrontement de la population civile avec les unités de l’armée s’est produit le 17 avril, quand les gens, surpris face à la grande affluence de véhicules militaires sur les routes se placèrent face à une colonne de tanks. Avec les débuts de cette opération, la population civile, qui fondamentalement était restée tranquille, par pure inertie, même si son opinion coïncidait avec celle de activistes commença à s’alarmer, d’autant plus que tout le monde savait que les troupes ne peuvent être mobilisées sans la déclaration préalable de l’état d’urgence. En plus, les troupes qui tenaient mobilisées avaient leurs quartiers à Dnepropetrovsk, elles étaient basiquement composées par les recrues originaires de la région de Donetsk, Lugansk et Jarkov. Les gens se rendaient compte que le gouvernement, au lieu d’agir ponctuellement contre les occupants de certains bâtiments généraux, envoyait directement l’armée, dont on ne savait pas comment elle allait agir.

Ainsi, malgré ce qu’affirmait le gouvernement de Kiev, les gens qui sont sortis pour arrêter les chars n’étaient ni armés, ni achetés par personne, il ne s’agissait pas non plus de Russes infiltrés ou d’agents à la solde de Moscou. Quelle serait la réaction de n’importe quelle population du monde que son gouvernement déclarerait « terroriste » dans son ensemble et le lendemain lui enverrait l’armée ? Faut-il supposer que quelqu’un les a achetés pour qu’ils tentent de faire quelque chose ? Les gens qui ne voulaient pas que cela dégénère en conflit sanglant sont sortis, hommes, femmes, enfants, désarmés et le visage à découvert, pour demander aux militaires qu’ils partent de là. Dans certains cas, comme à Kramatorsk, le 16 avril, les soldats, qui n’avaient aucune idée d’où on les envoyait ni de qui les envoyaient, se sont indignés et sont passés à la contre-insurrection. Dans d’autres cas, les soldats, sans présenter de résistance et pour démontrer qu’ils n’allaient pas entreprendre d’action militaire, ont démonté leurs armes, confiant à leur commandant les verrous. Dans certains cas, les gens s’en sont allés avec des caisses de munitions qu’ils ont remises à la police. Nous ne pouvons pas non plus garantir qu’il n’y ait pas eu des cas dans lesquels les contre-insurgés ont conservé les armes réquisitionnées, mais nous ne l’avons pas constaté, parmi des centaines d’enregistrements et commentaires qu’il y a sur internet au sujet des événements. Les uniques affrontements ont eu lieu durant cette première phase de l’ « opération anti-terroristes », ce sont produits aux barrages routiers (presque tous sans armes et à visage découvert) pour éviter la venue des commandos paramilitaires de Pravyi Séktor. Quand leurs troupes étaient détectées, le feu était mis au pneumatiques de la barricade pour aviser les groupes d’autodéfense, qui, eux oui, étaient armés. C’est ce qui s’est produit dans l’escarmouche de la nuit du 19 au 20 avril près de Slaviansk, qui fut le plus grave des événements jusque là.

Face à l’échec de cette première offensive, le gouvernement de Kiev, déclarant qu’il ne lancerait pas les troupes contre la population, a renforcé la Garde Nationale avec l’équipement de l’armée et a commencé à organiser des groupes irréguliers qui normalement s’identifient comme Pravyi Sektor, quoique en réalité on ait aucune certitude quand à leur composition réelle. De fait, de nombreux témoins signalent que parmi eux on a détecté des participants étrangers qui parlent en anglais et en polonais, et des rumeurs circulent concernant le recrutement des mercenaires de l’entreprise internationale Greystone, mais il n’y a pas de preuves avérées de cela. Ce qui est confirmé, oui, c’est que le gouverneur de Dnepropetrovosk, Igor Kolomoiskyi, forme à ses frais une unité de volontaires pour combattre les « séparatistes ».

Une fois ses effectifs réorganisés, le gouvernement de Kiev a décidé de lancer une seconde et puissante offensive le 2 mai passé. Alors que les gens du village de Adréievka , situé entre Kramatorsk et Slaviansk, conscients de ce que le même jour à Slaviansk les contre-insurgés livraient de durs combats contre la Garde Nationale et « compagnie », décidèrent d’arrêter une colonne de véhicules blindés qui se dirigeait vers une colline où se trouve la tour de la télévision, qui n’était pas en soi l’objectif, mais la position même, vu qu’elle est un des rares lieu en hauteur ou pouvait être ‘installé l’artillerie, tant visant Slaviansk que visant les quartiers ruraux de Kramatorsk. De fait, ce fut déjà une position importante et disputée pour cette raison, lors des batailles de la Seconde Guerre Mondiale. Depuis les premières heures de la matinée jusqu’au crépuscule, la majorité de la population de Andréievka, complétement désarmée, a tenté de convaincre les effectifs de la Garde nationale de se retirer, alors qu’eux répondaient qu’ils venaient uniquement pour les terroristes, à quoi les habitants répondaient que les uniques terroristes qu’eux connaissaient sont ceux de Pravyi Séktor et le gouvernement putschiste ukrainien, et que les gardes feraient mieux de retourner à Kiev pour la nettoyer des nazis armés qui se baladent dans les rues, alors qu’ici, c’est-à-dire dans le Donbass, il y a seulement des gens normaux, qui veulent qu’on respecte leur droits. Pendant ce temps, les gens amenaient de l’eau pour donner à boire aux gardes, vu que, il faut le faire remarquer, les autorités de Kiev ne se sont pas préoccupées d’assurer le ravitaillement de leurs propres troupes. Cela c’était déjà produit lors de la première d’offensive, pendant laquelle les « séparatistes » et les « terroristes » ont du alimenter (par charité pour le dire ainsi) les troupes envoyées de Dnepropetrovsk.

Quand au crépuscule, les gardes décidèrent de faire demi tour, les habitants leurs demandèrent de remettre leurs armes, pour garantir contre le risque d’une attaque dans le dos. Et ils proposèrent en échange, pour ne pas qu’ils soient accusés d’avoir déposé les armes de vider les chargeurs en tirant en l’air. A ce moment, alors qu’il faisait déjà sombre, quelqu’un lança un feu de Bengale faisant du bruit et de la lumière (de ceux qui faisaient partie de l’équipement de la Garde, et on n’a pas constaté qu’il y en avait entre les main de la contre-insurrection), ce à quoi dans la multitude quelqu’un répondit en lançant un cocktail Molotov, en plus, à ce moment, on voit apparaître un garde avec une blessure au cou, ce qui a provoqué la réaction des autres gardes qui ont ouvert le feu. A partir d’ici les versions divergent. Selon le commandant de la garde nationale, les terroristes étaient cachés dans la multitude d’où ils tiraient à la kalachnikov (ce dont nous constatons que c’est faux), avec pour résultat deux gardes morts et aucun civil. sD’après les habitants, ceux qui ont provoqué l’affrontement, ce furent les « commissaires politiques » incorporés à cette colonne. Selon Viacheslav Ponomariov, le leader de la résistance de Slaviansk, il y a eu 15 morts, parmi lesquels 4 militaires et 11 civils, plus des dizaines de blessés. D’après son communiqué ceux qui ont commencé à tirer, ce furent plusieurs radicaux d’un groupe de Pravyi Sektor qui faisaient partie de la colonne, qui ont tiré quand ils ont vu qu’elle allait se replier.

Cet affrontement peut être considéré comme déterminant, parce que jusqu’à ce moment la contre-insurrection appliquait la politique de ne pas tirer contre les membres des forces de sécurité de l’état, en partant du principe qu’elles étaient en service commandé, et de ne le faire que contre des unités paramilitaires. Cependant, en conséquence de cet affrontement, les soldats et les membres de la garde nationale ont été avertis que cette immunité a été suspendue. Cet affrontement a aussi initié les attaques des troupes régulières contre la population, celle-là même qu’ils étaient supposés venir défendre contre les « terroristes ». En parallèle, les habitants de Slaviansk et Kramatorsk ont dénoncé les actions indiscriminées des francs-tireurs, parmi les victimes desquels on trouve par exemple Iuliia Izotova, une aide sanitaire abattue d’un tir dans le dos pendant qu’elle tentait de s’aligner d’une escarmouche à un poste de contrôle de la route dans lequel elle travaillait comme infirmière volontaire.

Réflexion finale

No us ne prétendons pas que notre version soit absolument indiscutable ni que nous disposons de suffisamment d’information pour détenir la vérité, d’autant plus que dans tout conflit chaque partie à sa propre vérité qui n’est pas toujours dénuée de fondement. Cependant, il est clair qu’en mettant l’information dans la balance la partie qui coule dans ce cas, c’est la version des autorités de Kiev, et de ses partisans qui, avec l’intervention et l’aide pour le moins complaisante de l’Occident, diffuse une vision pour le moins partiale, quand elle n’est pas totalement fallacieuse, de la plus grande partie des événements d’Ukraine, afin de justifier ses actes, qui sont eux terroristes, contre ceux de ses propres concitoyens qui ne sont pas disposés à se soumettre à un gouvernement putschiste d’inspiration néonazie, soutenu par la « dialectique des poings et des pistolets »  

Ganna Goncharova et Alberto Montaner

Sources en espagnol :

Terror fascista en Ucrania

Traduction Anne Wolff

Ganna Goncharova est ukrainienne, socialiste, elle est née à Kramatorsk dans la région du Donbass en 1972 dans une famille de membres du parti communiste de l’Union Soviétique (PCUS). Son grand-père maternel et son père dirigeaient des organisations du parti dans les universités où ils étaient professeurs. Elle fut membre du Komsomol dès 1986 jusqu’en 1991. Elle obtint la double licence en ingénierie et économie à l’Académie de l’État du Donbass et obtint ensuite un master en Direction d’Entreprises. Pendant un temps elle travailla comme gestionnaire économique à divers postes de l’administration publique ukrainienne et comme auditeur des comptes de l’état. Ensuite elle s’est incorporée à l’entreprise privée et a travaillé comme directrice financière. Après avoir épousé en 2009Alberto Montaner Frutos , professeur à l’Université de Zaragoza elle est venue vivre en Espagne. Grande connaisseuse de la réalité politique de son pays, détenant de l’information de première main, elle s’exprime à ce sujet dans deux entrevues avec | Artículos para la réflexion políticace texte-ci est chronologiquement le deuxième, s’il traite des derniers événements (avec le décalage de traduction), il nous donne aussi une vision qui associe une bonne connaissance du terrain et nous aide à mieux comprendre qui sont les gens en contre-insurrection en Ukraine, pourquoi et contre quoi – le fascisme – ils se sont levés, pour l’immense majorité, à visage découvert et sans armes, à cette connaissance profonde de la réalité ukrainienne et aux information de première main dont dispose l’auteure est associé un travail d’analyse, une compilation de centaines de documents, de enregistrements vidéo, blogs, commentaires de la récente et tragique actualité de l’Ukraine…


Copyright © 2014

the Religious Politics of Identity

he Religious Politics of Identity

April 12, 2013 at 12:46pm


“Peace is the integrity and health of the soul, to lose peace is to lose spiritual health”

—St. John Kronstadt

An often unexamined subject in American Politics as it pertains to Orthodox Christians is the relationship between identity, religiosity, and politics, and how it affects the way we Orthodox react to political-religious events in the United States and abroad. I think the key problem is that American Orthodox Christians ie, Othodox Christians in the United States do not  understand the Christian role of identity in the United States, and how it is different in the Orthodox tradition within other cultures nor how that difference shapes how we respond and react to political-religious events, such as the acceptance or non-acceptance of homosexuality, or abortion, the just war,  or  co-habitiation before marriage just to name a few.

For Orthodox Christians the fundamental identity is Christ.  How we relate to all of humanity is predicated on the purity, sincerity, and loyalty to that identity since as a Christian we understand morals and justice and by extension human behaviour in relation to these in as far as how they relate to the source of these which is Christ Himself,  God, and the Holy Spirit.  We are Christians, who possess the entirety of the Christian Faith which is expressed in our Orthodox Worship, Traditions, and Doctrines, which has not changed since the beginning of Time, which God Himself created. We understand ourselves to be the microcosm of the Universe, and we understand the conditions by which we have come to be such a race of creatures in need of the salvific grace of the Holy Trinity, and specifically of the God-man, Christ.  We are Christians, thus we have a Christian ethic that is superior to the American, Democratic, Republican, Liberatarism, Tea-Partism, women, children, black, chicano, labour whatever rights movements ie whatever the fractious, pluralistic polity may think of as a platform to settle materialistic scores.  Nonetheless, as Christians we are to  repulse the world privily and publically and we are to Love Our Neighbour as Ourselves, first loving God with All our Heart, Soul, Strength and Mind.

We are not to judge and we are not to subscribe to the modernist credo of relativity. We are the salt of the earth, and perhaps we cry salty tears due to our imperfections. Often we are a work in progress in the sight of those who search diligently for our imperfections and by these imperfections we may even be a stumbling block to others but the Psalmist does say that blessed is the man whose sins are covered by the Lord and the key to that state of blessedness is repentance.  Repentance is a state of being the modernist, revisionist world with it’s preoccupation with self and self actualization-lacks.

Yet there is something about the American way of life, even in terms of its credo of the pursuit of wealth, happiness and equality, that we Orthodox as United States citizens have a difficult time of confronting, and perhaps because we have been lulled by the folksy saying “God, mom and apple pie, and a false reprensentation of our history. The truth is that The American way of Life came into being as an Enlightenment experiment, as an  nation that was to be ruled solely by reason and the  precedents set by man himself, with man as the abiding archetypical image; the Church was not to interfere in the affairs of the State, nor in theory was the state to interfere in the affairs of the Church.  However, by this precedent one could see that it was never meant that the United States was to be a Christian State, nor has it ever been that as an American Christian, one would believe in Christ the same way one’s fellow citizen of the United States believed.  Perhaps it can be said that the first plurality of the United States was the Religious Christian plurality, which by patriotic extension,  this polity called themselves in an effort to gain social unity, Americans.

For an Orthodox Christian, I think, one must understand this reality: the heterodox were here in the United States before the Orthodox, and it existed here as a plurality.  In contrast, in Orthodox countries, there was One Faith, One Belief, One Form of Worship, One Doctrine, One Tradition, whereby the heterodox was a heretical minority vigourously confronted with pamphlets by comtemporaneous Holy Church Fathers, and anathemas.  Here in the United States, the heterodox are a plural majority, and the Orthodox, with its entirety of grace, and its fullness of praxis, is a minority. Thus the socio-political values of the Orthodox in relation to the heterodox-although there is a superficial confluence, which is in terms of degree and substance-is rooted in Christ ie, Christ the God-man who is  the source of its societal moral codes, the source of its reasons for justice, the source code for every aspect of individual and personal behaviour relating to the salvific mission of Christ to save His people. The social unity of the Orthodox Christian is understood by the image of all being members of the body of Christ. The whole structure of society was based on this hierarchical and yet equalizing image. In contrast, in  the United States in particular, with its plural heterodox religiosity, the identity of the United States citizen is American.

Thus in Orthodox countries its indigenous cultures have been transformed, transcended to Christianity in such a way that each individual within that redeemed culture aspires to put on Christ, and the understanding of what that means is universal, and singular.  In Western countries, and particularly in the United States, each person has inherited the religious-plurality position to practice the faith as he or she as an individual sees fit, with or without the guidance of the Church or even the Bible. Thus this introduces a duality, and in the duality of public and private, sacred and secular life, a fractious state of the individual is fostered and encouraged. One acts one way in public, for the common good, and another in private, for the personal good. The conflict is an accepted evil in modern day politics. In such a state, the image of man and of God is a fractured reality, and in such a state, God becomes just another segment of society to be governed by the state. In such a state, God is a subjected to the state, rather than the state being subjected to God.  Thus in the modern times we that the lack of an  identity with Christ on His terms have embraced an  identity of man with himself  to the extent that Christ now must conform to this  image of man. Yet the society based on this practice,  as it is practice in the West and in the Untied States is fractured.  There is no unified Christian Ethic which is absolute. Christ has become a relativistic image, a meme as Dawkins would put it, useful to advance competing political agendas.

In these days, we as American Christians, fundamentalist even, are learning that Christ has been useful to an enlightenment state as a way to manipulate the people into a state of apostasy against Christ.  The anti-Christ mask is now torn away, or is tearing away, and the people are caught, attending to the sacred in a state of ignorant defiance, engaging in the parallel modern mystery cults of the modern age, which introduces strange doctrines and sacrifices to the many unsuspecting seekers of the True Christ.  We believed that our private lives would protect us from the private lives of others, who believed differently than we do.  In truth this was a comfortable fiction we accepted in return for the material gains we felt we needed to survive.  We even told ourselves that we were exceptional,  manifesting a destiny to spread our anti-Christian plurality to other nations, and this destiny was given us by God….a useful fiction to those who wanted to justify the materialistic striving for earthly security, and  to justify our unjust wars.  Sadly, too late, We are learning that the personal is political, and it can transform a society, a culture.

Certainly when we, as American converts come into the Orthodox Church, we are trying to retain that sense of knowing God in the sacred and the secular sense, where privily there is no separation of Church and State, in as far as how we identify and how our behaviour conforms to that identity, the Truth, the Person, ie Christ the God-man. We must also understand that the heterodox lost the fullness of this sense in 1054, with the beginning of the schism, and the schism begot other schisms creating the fractious image of man, each sliver trying to make Christ conform to the broken shards of that broken image, the various shards which in defiance trys to illumine the world with their own particular  darkened eyes, and really in service to anti-Christ. We imagine America the good, and are confused that the United States supports regimes that kill Christians abroad.  In this case we comfort ourselves with the term realpolitick, or collatoral damage.  We blame one man for anti-Christian behaviours and actions, refusing to confront the pattern of anti-Christian political behaviours since the beginning of the American experiment.  I think American Orthodox must come to an understanding of this, they must ask themselves why they feel such a strong need to co-opt Orthodoxy into their sense of exceptionalism and manifest destiny. The desire to Americanize Orthodoxy is an attempt to preserve that false sense of exceptionalism, an expression of demonic pride expressed in the national conscious and a justification for trying to dominate the world, as well as  the sacred lives of citizens both within its national bounderies and abroad. We want to make Orthodoxy American, we demand that the Old Ortodox countries follow our lead; and we fail to see that our lead is leading mankind into the ravine.  The United States is a plurality, an image of the fractured man; it is a plurality by nature which has always by its very nature been antagonistic to God, and only using God as a meme to advance worldy, unGodly goals.  Now, openly, the United States rejects God in the name of Democracy.

As the state of affairs exist today, I believe many United States citizens are in a state of shock.  We have been compromised, since when in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries  the acceptance of the parallel existence of the modern mystery cults, the freemasons to name one such cult, became a tolerated reality.  Does this scenario not remind you of the mystery cults of Ancient Rome or Greece?  These are the trends that a pluralistic society allowed to coexist and thrive along side the overt pluralistic society, in which a secret anti-Christian unity was formed, alongside this pluralistic heterodox Christian society, and the results of their work is evident in the reality of the modernist, post-Christian world that now confronts us as we begin to seek the True Christ. This is the world that the heterodox churches themselves, in support of such secret societies, helped to create. In a way, they are the midwives of all the modernistic developments of the current age.

Orthodox Christians must educate themselves to the reality of the plural society, and its fractious characteristics, and must with an Orthodox mind set see the anti-Christian patterns of foreign policy and domestic policy of the West and in particular the United States, and act with intelligence and love for all of our neighbours to address this. We must also divorce ourselves from the fiction that we are an exceptional nation state that has a manifest destiny to spread democracy, and that only our way of being democratic has relevance.

We must acknowledge the religious politics of identity as it is parlayed in secular discourse, and in religious discourse and not allow it to sully the sacred discourse of the Orthodox revelation.  We must recognise the difference between an identity with the God-man, and the identity with man, the two ways that Religious Praxis and  identiy is entered into. One way leads to salvation, to the supranatural, the other to a grounding in the material and to eternal lost.

In conclusion, We need to question and identify the American values that we bring to the Orthodox way of life, and see if these values conforms with Way of Life that the Archetype of our Lives, our chief identity,  commands of us as Orthodox Christians. We need to understand that Orthodoxy trandscends nation states secular identities without insulting those cultures and countries with a tradition of the Orthodox Faith, and the martyrs to prove it, as a witness to us, the novices in the Faith.  Only by doing this will we be able to with understanding and love assist our Orthodox Christians globally and domestically, and better deal with the politics of an apostasizing society that has by its very actions have declared war on our new found Faith.

xenia lynn teresa williams

My favorite Icon of Christ