It has been and will continue to be my policy to post documents on this blog even if I do not agree with them, as long as they are fact-based, logical and well written and they contribute to a more interesting analysis and discussion.
Dagmar Henn's piece definitely meet all these criteria and I am delighted to post it today.
As to those, especially in Germany, who might disagree with her, I invite them to send me a rebuttal which I will also post as long as it is substantive and contains absolutely no personal attacks on Henn or anybody else.
by Dagmar Henn
The EU-association contracts the Kiew Junta signed binds the Ukrainian economy to the zone of German hegemony (the EU is now completely submitted to German interests). Signing the IMF contract was an EU demand. So the economic trap that actually forces the junta towards exterior aggression (just to save their own skin) is not a US invention, but a German one...
Steinmeier, the German minister of exterior, was head of the chancellery and therefore coordinator of secret service activities from 1999 to 2005. So he was deeply involved in Kosovo already. Later he pushed the association of Ukraine to EU. He is neither innocent nor someone interested in peace. He was the first one to talk about "territorial integrity" immediately after the coup.
Everybody remembers that Nuland in her famous phone-call demanded Jazenjuk for government. Nearly everybody forgot that she also said "no Swoboda". It was Steinmeier who opened the door for Swoboda. And if US media are silent about ukrainian Nazis, German media are mute. Even though it should be much easier for a German journalist to recognize them than for an American.
Not only in this blog, also in Russian media (as far as I manage to decipher them through Google-Translator) Germany is seen as a US vassal that could be a potential ally. (Putin repeated this idea in a speech to various ambassadors). If this position is aimed at the German public, it might work as a propagandistic idea, but it doesn´t even reach this public (there is no German channel of RT until today). If it is aimed at German politics, it is based upon a flawed analysis. It might be possible to create a split between Germany and it´s european neighbours (after they have been sucked dry economically in the last years to stabilize German industry and German banks); it is wasted effort between Germany and the US, because this is complicity, not dependancy. Like it was in Jugoslawia - the US gets the military bases, Germany gets the colonies.. (and if you remember the role of Croatian fashists, guess where they were stored all those decades before their reuse? Yes, in Munich).
German political rhetoric rarely tells the truth. Ask the Greek about it, who got "saved". Nothing that is said can be trusted. It´s just the deeds that tell the truth. And if there were any serious intention from the German side to move from escalation to diplomacy, there would be a breach in the information blockade to legitimize it. There isn´t. Not the slightest one. Just once there was a single information that went through - when Bild, Germany´s most awful journal, wrote about PMCs in Ukraine. They referred to a source in the BND. I think that was some kind of internal retaliation for the fake OSCE-show.
The relative stability of German economy is based upon a consequent "beggar-thy-neighbour"-policy. It´s result is the transformation of the EU into a semi-colonial structure with just one political and economical center: Germany (and just think of Hollande no longe being allowed to phone without Merkel). But this structure is far from stable, because it ran out of neighbours that are not yet beggared, and the fundamental economical crisis is far from over. So both sides of this partnership in aggression share the same problem, and no trade balance with Russia can fill this gap. Both need a real destruction of real values on a large scale, and they need it soon.
When the Wehrmacht started losing in 1943, they tried to analyse their errors. They came to the conclusion that before they ever started a war against Russia again, they should take care to secure all of Europes economic potential under their control. So it is a bit spooky to see that exactly this has been achieved during the last years.
It´s impossible to prove how tight the connection between German authorities and the Ukrainian Nazis are. German archives are tightly closed; all the dirt accumulated since 1945 is still hidden. As the CIA documents are accessable, US acts are public, while German ones stay hidden... But there are strong indications that the worst parts of the Ukrainian forces are German puppets, not American (starting with Timoshenko and Klitschko, but continuing into the full Bandera spectrum). They don´t need to be controlled directly. They run like on a track into the right direction, as soon as they are called on stage.
Around Munich there were more Nazis in official positions and more Bandera exiles than ever reached the US. German secret service BND (located in Pullach, a few kilometers from Munich) never dropped the old connections and it was formed out of the same people that held those connections during the war. There was a Ukrainian exile government in Munich, residing in Zeppelinstraße, there still is a ukrianian university; Munich was the headquarter of the ukrainian terrorists after 1945.
Right from independence there was a strong German influence in Ukraine. 1992 the German embassy in Kiew employed more personel than all other western embassies together (including the American). While British and American government officials at that time warned of strengthening nationalist tendencies in ex-SU-countries, the German government did everything to do exactly that (not only in Ukraine, by the way, but also in the Baltic states and...). So a floor full of CIA agents in Kiew might be not a sign of US strength in this drama, but rather the opposite, an attempt to catch up with German connections.
There is one strange historic resonance in the list of ukrainian events. Up to the 9th of May everything followed a timetable that somehow aimed at a reversion of WWII (culminating in what would have happened in Mariupol, if local police hadn´t rebelled). This timetable was mainly based upon historical events in Ukraine. But there is one exception. The Odessa massacre has two historic resonances; but both are not placed in Ukraine, but in Germany. On May 2 1919 Munich was conquered by the counterrevolution , followed by several days of massacre with up to 3 000 victims; the bloodiest event in German interior politics until the Nazis came into power. And on May 2 1933 the Nazis stormed the buildings of the German unions. That might be a coincidence; but if it isn´t, it is a strong indication of a German mind behind it.
(German Nazis are obsessed with historic references. Do you know why the first Concentration Camp was built in Dachau? The Bavarian Red Army won a battle there early in 1919... they wanted to extinguish even the memory; and they succeeded)
And then there is the basic question - the whole story looks too much like an attempt to revert WWII not to be exactly that. Now why would the US be tempted to revert WWII that lay the base for their present position? No reason at all. The ones who want to revert this war are the ones that lost it.
Even the new scandal about this NSA-spy in BND won´t have any consequences, as the whole NSA story didn´t. And won´t. Why? Just imagine it were the other way round, Germany being the country eager for war - what would be the consequence in relation to the USA? They are needed as nuclear shield... so they would have to be involved one way or the other, even if it were an exclusively German plan.
I might be wrong. I would love to be wrong. But Russian strategy at the moment seems to be aimed at a split between Germany and the US, and if I´m right, this strategy is completely futile. I see no plan B. Not even a serious attempt to reach German public. It preoccupies me profoundly.
German governments like to talk of peace. Until 5:44 in the morning.