Before we start, it must be stressed, whilst we have kept to the factual structure of historic events surrounding Ukraine, additional interpretations and theories are ours, and do not constitute representation of provable fact. It is opinion and theory based commentary designed to encourage the reader to consider alternative interpretations to the presented western media portrayal of events.
The country we now call Ukraine had many centuries of history as part of Poland. The division of the area came in the 1772-1795 Partitions of Poland between the Russian Empire and the Austrian Empire (Hapsburgs). The Austro-Hungarian empire was successfully seeding the idea of Nationalism in the west of Ukraine, whilst Russia continued its influence of the people they called Little Russians in the north and east. With a tenuous independence declared in 1914 and the Ukrainian Soviet Republic administration formed, so continued the long wrangle between the larger states, dressed up as what was best for the Ukrainian people. The region became part of the USSR in 1922, towards the end of the Soviet Revolutions 1917-1923, with Ukrainians further hit by a deep grain famine, Holodomor, claimed to be man-made by the Soviet Bolsheviks, who viewed the wealthy land owners as ‘class enemies’. They were also purportedly responsible for the massacre of the Imperial Romanov family. It appears that many across the Soviet Unions faced with starvation, turned to eating human flesh, in an attempt to survive.
Ukraine continued to find themselves in the crossfire between the Russian influence and the empirical, then postwar European Union, but they seem to also have participated at an administrative level, gaining concessions from both sides. In 1941, when Nazi Germany invaded Ukraine, initially seen as liberators, leading some to collaborate with the aggressors and helping run concentration camps. The Ukrainian administration also hoped, by collaborating, that they would gain favour with the Nazi’s for continuation of their independent state. The Nazis had other ideas. Ukraine found itself at the centre of a battle between Nazi Germany and the Soviet military, leaving huge swathes of Ukraine destroyed.
Somehow from all of this, Ukraine SSR emerged from the war with more land into the area delineated by the Curzon Line, gaining 11 million people from a land transfer that was previously Polish territory. Taking advantage of the post war reorganisation of Europe, Ukraine became one of the founding members of the United Nations (UN) and was elected as member of the Security Council in 1948 and again in 1984. Further concessions were made by the Soviet Union in 1954 through the gifting of Crimea to the Ukraine. This was followed literally weeks later by the hijacking of a Black Sea Shipping Company commercial oil tanker in the Balintang Channel (Philippines) by the Republic of China.
The division between the USSR and the West with Ukraine as one of the chess pieces, continued through the second half of the 1900’s. The Soviet Union had been warring in Afghanistan from 1979, an area well known for it’s opium poppies, and in 2007 discovered to hold a trillion dollars worth of unmined Lithium and Gold reserves amongst other minerals. Reagan also pushed Saudia Arabia to reduce their oil prices, which further damaged the economic prosperity of the Soviet Union.
1990 saw the first of a series of potentially staged ‘revolutions’, the Revolution on Granite, where students in Kyiv rose up in response to the 331 seats gained by the Communists to the Ukrainian parliament – Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR. It had the hallmarks of most ‘student’ lead protests of the later half of 1900’s and early 21st Century. Set in a big square, with sit ins, ‘celebrations’, speeches by ‘visionaries’. The Ukrainian students had a number of quite sophisticated demands starting with the resignation of the Prime Minister Vitaliy Masol, the calling of new elections, nationalisation of Communist Party Property and the scrapping of a Union Treaty with Moscow. Elections were duly run again in 1991 and the ‘Independent’ candidate Leonid Kravchuk was elected Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada and effective first President of an independent Ukraine with a share of 61.6% of the vote. I feel it is no coincidence this ‘revolution’ was sparked just one year after the ‘fall’ of the Berlin Wall in 1989. At the same time President Gorbachev, a good friend of Margaret Thatcher and President Reagan, presided over withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1988, the dismantling of the USSR in 1990 and the end of the Cold War in 1991. Pockets of Russian sympathisers, with the increasing economic domination of the People’s Republic of China in the East, could not be allowed.
Again of no coincidence is the start of relations between Ukraine and NATO from 1992, however membership of NATO was not forthcoming due to continued tensions in Ukraine. This did not prevent three of the five Nuclear States, Russia, UK and US from signing The Budapest memorandum on Security Assurances for the decommissioning of Nuclear arms in Ukraine in 1994.
Was this decommissioning in direct response to the accident at the Nuclear Plant in Chernobyl on the 26th April 1986? The plant sits very close to the border with Belarus, a pro-Russian country. To the west is the Soviet (Cold War) installation of the Duga early-warning missile detection radar array. The exclusion zone provides a potentially strategic geographic division between the Belarusian border and the capital Kyiv through the Pripyat River Valley. This at the same time the West is working hard at deconstructing the hold Russia had on what was known as the Eastern Block, which Gorbachev was happily presiding over, despite the subsequent hardships Russia faced.
The pro-Russia and Nationalist (read Europhile) split continued with the 2004 Orange Revolution, the Ukrainian Colour Revolution, again focused around an election, this time between Viktor Yushchenko (favourite with the US Bush administration) and Viktor Yanukovych. Sited again in Maidan Square in Kyiv. The vote had initially shown a win by Yanukovych who till 2002 was the Governor of Donestk Oblast, one of the regions close to Russia and just last week declared an independent state by Vladimir Putin. The ‘revolutionaries’ forced a recount, which found in favour of Viktor Yushchenko, 52% to Yanukovych’s 44%.
Yushchenko, disturbingly, had suffered dioxin poisoning, a component of Agent Orange, during his 2004 campaign, later found to be an assassination attempt but by whom was unclear. He was taken to Austria for treatment. The poisoning left him disfigured, changing his appearance dramatically. After the Salisbury Poisonings in the UK April 2018, Yushchenko spoke out to the BBC about the danger Russia posed to the West. Did Russia really do it, or was it a carefully calculated move by certain factions to engender sympathy towards a preferred candidate? Did Yushchenko even survive the attack or was he replaced?
During 2008-2012, Vladimir Putin, ex President and now Prime Minister of Russia, underwent a dramatic transformation of his own, as seen in this article. He returned to the Presidency in 2012 after the threat of a Russian Colour Revolution was subverted by Medvedev, the favoured candidate, recommending Putin run for Presidential office.
Just two years after Putin returned to Russian presidency, the Ukrainian Revolution of Dignity or Maidan Revolution followed. This was in response to the now elected Yanukovych’s, refusal to sign the Ukraine – EU Association Agreement, designed to bring Ukraine closer to the EU politically and economically. The revolution pushed for removal of Yanukovych via impeachment, driving him out of Kyiv, to be replaced with an interim President, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. The interim encumbent duly signed the EU agreement and radically restructured the Ukrainian administration, purging it of officials with ties to Russia, as well as the Armed Forces pulling Ukraine ever close to NATO. Great unrest from both pro EU and pro Russia sides led to the War in Donbass 2014, and Donetsk and Luhanska being declared People’s Republics. The Crimean Crisis also came to a head, leading to Russia claiming Crimea. This week the Russian Ambassador to Ireland spoke out about the crimes committed in the Donbass region in this interview. The UN claimed that up to 1.5 million people were displaced by the unrest during this period, including 200,000 people who apparently fled to Russia.
The political wranglings between the EU and Russia over the status of Ukraine and the independence of its various regions continued. In the meantime, Ukraine’s gold and foreign exchange reserves were steadily depleting, as was its GDP due to the collapse in global commodity and metal prices. Given the increasing ties with the EU, one would have thought their position in the global economy, being a nation rich in reserves of metals and other minerals, would have been beneficial.
In January 2016 Ukraine signed the DCFTA (Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area) with the EU, which also allowed citizens visa free entry in to the Shengen area for 90 days out of 180. Further administrative movement away from Russia was made in May 2018 when Ukraine terminated their participation in the Commonwealth of Independent States, an organisation set up after the dissolution of the USSR which brought 12 states from the old Soviet Union and Asia together under one accord. Ukraine, whilst they ratified the agreement for the creation of this organisation, they failed to sign the charter which would have made them members of this Commonwealth, being only an associate state since 2005. This was followed by the creation in May 2021 of an Association Trio between Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, all countries interested in becoming part of the EU.
Strategically, is it any wonder that Belarus is thinking of sending troops to aid Russian troops in their incursions in to Ukraine? They are also the subject of sanctions by the international community. Russia’s route of entry to seize Chernobyl was likely through Belarus. This site, of supposed high radioactive fallout, has oddly flourished in the years since the explosion. It is also suggested that the Duga array to the west of Chernobyl was not for early warning of approaching missiles but instead a weather manipulation array. Which is true? Given that the west decommissioned many of the Nuclear sites in Ukraine, I would hazard a guess that it possibly had a dual function if not exclusively for the detection of incoming missiles. It seems that the exclusion zone, which included this array, may well have been to disadvantage Russia. It is also possible that Chernobyl had acquired some other function prior to, or after its decommissioning. Quite what we are unsure of.
The pipelines running through Ukraine from Russia are of strategic concern. The Soyuz pipeline comes from Kazakhstan which shares its eastern border with Western China. It runs through the narrowest point of Southern Russia in to the Donbass region of Eastern Ukraine, where the two now independent states of Luhansk and Donetsk sit.
The Brotherhood pipeline also runs through the North eastern border of Ukraine to join the Soyuz pipeline before it enters Slovakia to be piped on through Austria. The hold of the Ukrainian part of Gazprom pipelines over the Gas crisis is perhaps overstated however, in that the total gas to run through this pipeline fell from 80bcm in 2014 to 37.5bcm in 2021 of the total 142 bcm run through to Europe. The reduction was already very marked before this current crisis erupted. Alternative pipelines run through Belarus, which must now carry the equivalent of over 100bcm to Europe. In response to sanctions over the Belarusian border issues allowing apparent influx to migrant camps of Iraqi, Syrian and Yemeni people to form on the Polish border, Belarus has now threatened to cut off gas deliveries to the EU. A significant media reported stand off occurring between this pro-Russian nation and the EU as well, apparently affecting gas prices to EU nations.
Could the migrant crisis that was amassing at the Belarus/Polish boarder have been connected to a diversion of trafficking victims through that territory, knowing that Ukraine was about to face underground incursions through Hungary and Moldova? This can clearly be seen by heatspots across these two countries, moving over the border on the day that various Media outlets announced that Russia was going to invade Ukraine from the North and East. All the way back in 2011 the question of Human trafficking was raised in relation to Ukraine, though we thinking likely understated at the time. Was the reduction of gas going through Ukraine in direct response to the threat of this action? It is also peculiar that the increase of gas running through Belarus should coincide with the significant increase in migrants amassing at their border to Poland.
Could it be that trafficking has been taking place through the tunnels dug for the gas pipelines, and that allied forces, including Russian military, diverted much of the gas from Ukraine in preparation for this incursion, allowing them to cut off routes of entry and exit from the underground safely? Ukraine are also stating that they will cut of the routes for migrants. Could they mean both over and underground? Where you cut off one route, another one appears however. It then is perhaps no coincidence that the Nordstream 2 pipeline, which arrives from Russia directly in to Germany (not yet transferring gas) has been put on hold by the German Chancellor.
In this context it is interesting to note that the pipeline through Kazakhstan (see map above), which runs through to China, diverts north through Russia and down in to Belarus. If this is a trafficking and migration access route it is a significant diversion. If the Nordstream 2 were part of this network, its opening would have significantly reduced the distance of travel to arrive directly in Germany. As stated earlier, we are proposing theories, rather than proven facts, but it does seem to make some sense.
This casts Ukraine’s fixed agreement of $2.66 per 1000 cubic metres per 100k of gas transfer fee, just for the Soyuz pipeline transit through Ukraine (1567k), in a very different light. For this gas transit pipeline alone they would take $1.1 billion a year. If certain companies have been allowing an extra stream of revenue through gas pipelines, it is hardly surprising that Ukraine could negotiate heavily on their transit tariff. It is also not surprising that, with the contracting of a Belarusian company entirely dependent on Gazprom’s revenue, that the $1.75 per 100 m3 per 100k has prompted the shifting of gas transfer further north.
Taking this theory further, the Ukrainian gas transfer system is owned by the Ukrainian Government and managed by the company Ukrtransgaz. The Dashava–Kyiv, Kursk–Kyiv, Shebelinka–Kyiv, Kyiv–Western border pipeline all, as their names imply, run through Kyiv. We have seen significant indication of underground heatspots in the west and south Ukraine, particularly either side North West and South East of the Dashava gas terminal. Above ground we have also heard of incursions by the Russians in to Kyiv from the norther border (Chernobyl exclusion zone), and to the east.
Perhaps the Evergreen cargo container in the Suez Canal was a distraction. It is possible that it forced traffickers to push through these alternative routes, and thus expose themselves. This article claims that the migrants are brought in on planes to Minsk and bused 250k to the polish boarder. Do we really think 100s of thousands of migrants and trafficked minors are shipped either by plane or in containers? Perhaps that was back then when these pipeline routes were not stretching the full length of the Eurasian continent, but this is now. Or do we really think they walk the whole distance from their various points of departure camps at various borders in the EU or USA? Is the sudden above ground reports of floods of economic migrants because the routes through the underground are in the process of being cut off?
Then there is the question of what happens to them along the way. Do they all end up at the final destination of western Europe, or are some co-opted for other projects? Remember the blood plasma fractionating company mentioned on Twitter this week? That is just one company. We have no idea how many more there are like this in Ukraine, and other countries around the world.
Turkey, today, is apparently preparing to shut the Bosphorus Strait to Russian military. Another coincidence that the Strait is currently the hub of development for oil and gas pipelines from and to Turkey. The South Stream and Blue Stream gas pipelines meet over the Bosphorus. There is no escape.
As the Nancy Pelosi character clumsily stated last week, Ukraine is now surrounded. By Crimea to the south, underground escape routes cut off to the west, the shoreline at Odessa, Belarus to the north and Russia to the north and east and no potentially the Bosphorus. Russia have made a request for emergency medical assistance, including pediatric surgeons.
The people fighting the Russian troops, and in the underground, are not civilian Ukrainians, and seem to care little for the havoc they create above and below ground, as they may not care much for the potentially vast numbers of trafficked people who have been transported across their borders. For further reading visit these links one and two for historic articles on human trafficking and Ukraine.
Should we stand for the people of Ukraine? Yes we should. We should support the true people of Ukraine. Not the puppets installed to keep supply lines open for gas and everything else that has been hidden below the surface.
Exposure is everything.
Yeah, for me seems one more incursion of alliance armies against the bastards of the Deep State Cabal, for sure, all the looks of it.