You know, I’ve just about had enough of it. I’ve spent the entire morning arguing with some of our Western observers about how they insult our Armed Forces by ignoring them in favor of Azov, and about how Representative Conyers’ amendment is setting a precedent for denying military aid to Ukraine. Then I’ve spent the entire afternoon arguing with some of our Azov supporters about how they insult our Armed Forces by ignoring them in favor of Azov, and about how Representative Conyers’ amendment is setting a precendent for denying military aid to Ukraine. Then I got fed up and watched some Japanese cartoon, but not before insulting my opponents and telling them to go fellate a dog.
What some of my more reasonable subscribers had convinced me of, though, is the timing of Representative Conyers’ amendment, one that is mildly suspicious. Now, I’ve got nothing personal against Representative Conyers. In fact, I think he acted absolutely right in supporting his ideals, and that he is truly an admirable person and a veteran statesman. Unlike some people, I have no habit of accusing my opponents (insofar as this word applies to Rep. Conyers, who probably is not even aware of my existence) of being Kremlin shills; rather I always presume they acted out of their own accord. Yes, even the people who called me a fascist one year ago, which is why I’m so mad at them. But I digress. The problem here, though, is the time of the amendment. Azov’s wacky neo-Nazi hijinks were not, by any means, unknown or unpublicized. As I already mentioned previously, Western observers love Azov for pretty much the same reasons Kremlin media love Azov: that is, it lets them write sensational headlines about ‘Ukraine’s far right nationalistic threat’. Articles to that effect were all over Western media last summer. What I’m saying is that Rep. Conyers’ amendment could as well have come at an earlier time. Now, I’m not sure Rep. Conyers, or indeed most American congressmen, can tell the Azov
battalion REGIMENT from, say, the 79th Airborne Brigade. Or the Aidar battalion from the 24th Mechanized Brigade. Or I could list all of Ukrainian Army units taking part in the war, with some extra from the Navy (the 501st Naval Infantry), and the point would still stand. Clearly, then, someone brought to light the issue about Azov being neo-Nazis, which Rep. Conyers, a person of integrity that he is, immediately acted upon.
So what, you say? Azov is just one battalion REGIMENT, right? All other Ukrainian military units are still fair game for US to train and supply, are they not? Well, see, there is a catch. I’ve spoken many times on our government’s efforts to integrate Right Sector’s Volunteer Corps into the regular Armed Forces. I’m going to let you, my naїve Western readers, on a big secret: do you know how this ‘integration’ is conducted? By parceling Right Sector’s corps (actually 500 men or so, the number is highly irregular) among regular Army units, usually as company- or sometimes platoon-level detachments. Right Sector still raises a stink over it, but about half of them has already joined. For example, there is a company in the 79th Airborne Brigade, a company made of thus integrated Right Sector personnel.
Now imagine someone brings this information to our Representative Conyers, who, an admirable statesman that he is, immediately acts upon… by forbidding US training and supply to the 79th Brigade, Ukrainian Airborne Troops. Again, it would be hard to blame him. Then, for example, someone brings this information, only about, say, the 95th Airborne Brigade, to Representative Conyers again…
But why do that, you ask? Why parcel out Right Sector personnel out to regular military units? Why not dissolve them entirely? Is it not an example of the horrible Ukrainian government pandering to nationalist radicals? In this case, gimme five: I too think Right Sector shouldn’t exist, much less have a paramilitary wing of its own. I already wrote about how the government is trying to solve that question despite Right Sector’s opposition and the vocal minority that exists in Ukrainian society (known to my readers as ‘zradafaggots’, ‘zrada’ being Ukrainian for ‘betrayal’). But this Azov affair sends a pretty clear message, the message being that integration is not enough.
There is a problem with that.
We can’t just dissolve Right Sector, and not only because of the backlash; there is, actually, no legal reason to do so. We could not dissolve the Communist Party, despite many Communist Party members’ involvement in the initial Donbass insurgency; by that same token we cannot simply do away with Right Sector. We cannot jail Yarosh, because there is no legal reason to do so. We can maybe dissolve Azov – it is, unlike Right Sector, a regular National Guard unit which can thus be dissolved because of… reasons, but it will lead to a shitstorm of epic proportions, most likely including clashes with the police. Which is, I’m sorry, exactly what Russia wants. Russia wants instability in Ukraine. Russia wants riots in Kyiv’s streets – preferrably ones fueled by ‘radical nationalists’ Russian media is so obsessed about. Russia wants the Ukrainian government to collapse from societal pressure, championed by zradafaggots and zradafaggot MPs (Filatov, Semenchenko, Borislav Bereza, the list goes on). And, more importantly, Russia wants Western support for Ukraine to fail. Military support in particular.
This is where timing comes in. G7 has just met, and talk abounds of harsher sanctions to be imposed if Russia makes a move. European Parliament adopts a scathing resolution condemning Russia. Moreover, US Congress is set to authorize military aid to Ukraine, and there are signs that Europe also reconsiders that issue. Monetary aid to Ukraine is already authorized, and there is talk the next IMF tranche is set to go ahead in July even if debt restructuring talks fail (and guess who stalls that… yes, Russia, again). And then Representative Conyers blocks US training for Azov, thereby creating a precedent – a precedent which could block US training – or supplies – for all of Ukraine’s military.
Of course, the main target of this is not US support, but Ukraine. The issue is already creating backlash; Azov wasn’t on top of its popularity just before, but now people come to their defense. There is, again, talk of how America betrayed us and left us hanging. And this, in turn, does not help with support for the Ukrainian government, which is responsible for Ukraine’s foreign relations campaign and for the Minsk ceasefire, which is already viewed by some bloody idiots as ‘betrayal’.
The plan is insidious because there is no escape. Even if we somehow disband Azov without a shitstorm of epic proportions, the precedent still stands. If we don’t, the precedent remains. Either way, we lose.
This is really what gets me so riled up. This is what no one, neither Western observers nor zradafaggots, seem to understand. Western observers are just that, observers: they are not living in this country and are, for all their idealism, far removed from the issues on the ground; while zradafaggots will probably cream themselves if Russians conquer all of Ukraine, because it will give them more reasons to bitch and whine.
I’m not saying there is no issue. Azov is becoming more bark than bite, anyway, the Shyrokine affair being the surest sign. Authority figures, such as Interior Minister Avakov, are surprisingly silent on the matter: I can only hope Avakov is tearing Biletsky a new one for this debacle. But, thanks to Rep. Conyers and his amendment, the solution to this issue just became a lot more complex.
And I’m not offering any solutions. I’m simply saying that, at the moment, I don’t see one.
I’m sorry, but I’m not going to sacrifice my country for you to satisfy your idealism.
Which is exactly what will happen if we go by your solution.