Search Results

Various media outlets are reporting that Joe Biden will nominate Victoria Nuland for the influential role of under secretary of state for political affairs.

JAMES CARDEN, jamescarden09@gmail.com
Carden is the executive editor of the American Committee for East-West Accord and founding editor thescrum.substack.com. He is also a former adviser to the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Commission.

He said today: “Victoria Nuland has had a long and storied career in the foreign service and for a long time was viewed with something like reverence by career officers. Nuland served as U.S. Ambassador to NATO and later was national security adviser to vice president Dick Cheney. After that, Nuland found herself on the ‘outs’ at the State Department during the early Obama years. But Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had other plans for Nuland, the well-connected wife of the neoconservative publicist Robert Kagan. Clinton, to the astonishment of many of the political appointees in Clinton’s orbit, plucked Nuland from the obscurity of her position at the Naval War College to become Clinton’s spokeswoman.

“This was the road back to influence and Nuland used it, quickly ascending to the position of assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs. It is from that post that she oversaw U.S. efforts to encourage a street coup in Kiev — going so far as to hand out cookies to anti-government protesters alongside the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. The February 2014 coup, undertaken by an alliance of pro-Western liberalizers and hardline anti-Semitic militants, resulted not in a more peaceful order, but in a civil war (in which both Russia and NATO funded and armed their proxies) that resulted in the loss of over 10,000 lives and the displacement of well over a million people from the Russophone east. After the coup, Nuland became an unwitting symbol of American heavy-handedness in the region when a call between her and Pyatt leaked in which they were seen to be hand-picking personnel for the new government in Ukraine. What would the EU think? ‘Fuck the EU,’ exclaimed Nuland, a diplomat.

“After the coup — violent and unnecessary, given that the deposed Ukrainian leader had agreed to an early peaceful transition at the ballot box, Nuland bragged at a conference sponsored by Chevron that: ‘Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance. … We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.’

“In the years following, we have ‘invested’ a great deal more money into Ukraine — for questionable returns. But the affair has not seemed to have clouded Nuland’s career prospects. Smart, well-connected, and well-liked, she, like many of her fellow neocons, seems to move from strength to strength in this town, never held to account for the damage they’ve caused. After her stint in the State Department ended (she was replaced in the early Trump years by the woefully unqualified neocon operative A. Wess Mitchell), Nuland took up what one can only assume were lucrative positions on the other side of the revolving door at the Center for a New American Security (where she served as CEO), the Boston Consulting Group and the Albright Stonebridge Group (from which, perhaps not coincidentally, her future boss, Biden’s nominee for deputy secretary of state, Wendy Sherman, hails).

“Her views on Russia and European affairs are well known. Less known, however, are her views on America’s role in the Middle East. Let’s hope that changes because in an article in Foreign Affairs earlier this year, Nuland lamented that the U.S., under Trump, ‘made both Putin’s and Assad’s lives easier by neutralizing a shared threat, the Islamic State, or, ISIS.’

“As Biden’s undersecretary of political affairs, Nuland would have immense influence over policy and personnel. Progressives in Congress and their partners in the media, think tank world and among grassroots activists should join forces with the growing caucus of anti-interventionist Republicans on the Hill and vigorously oppose this nomination.”

STEPHEN COHEN, sfc1 at nyu.edu
Available for a very limited number of interviews, Cohen is professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University. His books include Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold War. He recently wrote the piece “Distorting Russia: How the American Media Misrepresent Putin, Sochi and Ukraine” for The Nation.

Cohen said on CNN this weekend: “That so-called economic partnership that Yanukovych, the elected president of Ukraine did not sign, and that set off the streets — the protests in the streets in November, which led to this violence … that so-called economic agreement included military clauses which said that Ukraine, by signing this so-called civilization agreement had to abide by NATO military policy. This is what this is about from the Russian point of view, the ongoing western march towards post Soviet Russia. Putin had no choice, and he has no choice, and if you put him in the corner, you are going to see worse.” Also see second interview.

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle is a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law. His books include Foundations of World Order (Duke University Press: 1999). He said today: “John Kerry is claiming to stand for international law and invokes the 1994 Budapest Agreement. Of course the U.S. has repeatedly violated international law, with the Iraq invasion (which Kerry voted for) and numerous other instances. But even in this case, if you examine the Victoria Nuland [assistant secretary of state] tape, it’s clear that the U.S. was plotting a coup in the Ukraine and a coup is what happened. So Russia is only the second country guilty of violating Ukrainian sovereignty and the Budapest Agreement in response to the previous violations by the Obama administration.”

[Audio on YouTube of Nuland with Geoffrey R. Pyatt, U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, determining which Ukrainian politicians should and should not be in government. At one point, Nuland talks about using UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon for her purposes rather than the EU, saying “fuck the EU.” Transcript.]

JOHN QUIGLEY, Quigley.2 at osu.edu
Professor emeritus of international law at Ohio State University, Quigley dealt with conflicts between Ukraine and Russia arising from the breakup of the USSR on behalf of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. He recently wrote the piece “Let Ukrainians Determine Their Own Fate.” He said today: “Crimea has a plausible claim to self-determination. U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power has suggested that the OSCE might play a monitoring role in Crimea. The OSCE, which is presently holding consultations about the situation in Ukraine, might be able to play a role in convincing the domestic parties at odds within Ukraine to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution of their differences. In particular, the OSCE might be able to oversee a process whereby Crimea’s status can be resolved.”

MIKHAIL BEZNOSOV, [in Kharkiv, Ukraine] mikhailb at email.arizona.edu
Beznosov received his PhD in political science from the University of Arizona, where he is an adjunct professor. Head of the governing board of the East-Ukrainian Society for International Studies, Beznosov is now an associate professor in sociology at Kharkiv National University. On an IPA news release last week, he raised concerns about Kiev revoking a language law and other moves seen as threatening to Russian speakers in the Ukraine.

NICOLAI PETRO, [in Ukraine] nnpetro at gmail.com, Skype: nicolaipetro
Professor of politics at the University of Rhode Island, Petro is currently a Fulbright research scholar in Ukraine. He recently wrote the piece “Ukraine’s Culture War” for the National Interest. Petro pointed to two additional myths: “Myth #1 — The East and South of Ukraine want to secede: The regions in the South and East that oppose the Maidan are not demanding to leave Ukraine. Faced with turmoil in Kiev, they seek a more formal recognition of their rights. A popular slogan at a recent anti-Maidan meeting in Kharkiv was ‘We are not separatists. We are federalists.’

“Even in Crimea, the government recently put in place by local ‘self-defense forces’ has asked only for a referendum, citing the need to guarantee its autonomy ‘under any changes in central authority or the Constitution of Ukraine.’ The referendum question in fact stipulates that Crimea ‘is part of Ukraine on the basis of agreements and accords.’

“In this context being ‘pro-Russian’ does not mean joining Russia. It means speaking, worshiping, and going to school in your own language, in your own country — Ukraine.

“Myth # 2 — Key posts in the new government have gone to pro-Western liberals and moderates: The new government does indeed contain several ministers without party affiliation. Of nineteen ministerial appointments, however, only two hail from the East and none from the South. This severely limits the government’s geographic appeal.

“A key ally of the government is the Svoboda party which the European Parliament condemned for its ‘racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic views’ (resolution of 13 December 2012). Today Svoboda holds key leadership positions in the parliament and law enforcement, four ministerial portfolios in the new government, and several appointed governorships.”

STEPHEN COHEN, sfc1 at nyu.edu
Available for a limited number of interviews, Cohen is professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University. His books include Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold War. He recently wrote the piece “Distorting Russia: How the American Media Misrepresent Putin, Sochi and Ukraine” for The Nation.

This morning on Democracy Now! [video], Cohen cited “credible reports” that opposition forces are seizing weapons, raising the “possibility of civil war.” He warned of a new Cold War divided “right through the heart of Slavic civilization” with the prospect of war “for decades to come.” Cohen warns of the rise of fascist forces as “so-called moderates” lose control of the situation. He also argued that Western authorities bear real responsibility for events. He said President Obama has in effect rationalized the violence of the protesters. Cohen questioned what the U.S. government’s reaction would be to violent protests with molotov cocktails closing in on the Congress. He stated that many NGOs operating in Ukraine and elsewhere are actually political action groups. He also responded to the audio [on YouTube] of State Department official Victoria Nuland with Geoffrey R. Pyatt, U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, determining which Ukrainian politicians should and should not be in government. Cohen criticized the U.S. media for focusing on Nuland’s use of the word “fuck” while ignoring that top U.S. government officials were “to put it in blunt terms: plotting a coup d’état against the elected president of Ukraine.”

JOHN QUIGLEY, Quigley.2 at osu.edu
Professor emeritus of international law at Ohio State University, Quigley dealt with conflicts between Ukraine and Russia arising from the breakup of the USSR on behalf of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

NICOLAI PETRO, [in Ukraine] nnpetro at gmail.com, Skype: nicolaipetro
Professor of politics at the University of Rhode Island, Petro is currently a Fulbright research scholar in Ukraine. He recently wrote the piece “Ukraine’s Culture War” for the National Interest. Petro has also written a series of articles for OpEdnews.com, including “How the EU Can Bring Ukraine Into Europe.” He was just interviewed by The Real News. Petro made the following points today:

(1) “The political opposition … does not control the radicals in the street, so they are marginal interlocutors at best.

(2) “The radicals want a “new social order,” not just a new constitution or new parliament. They will continue violence against the ‘internal occupiers’ regardless of what the politicians agree to.

(3) “Martial law will lead to more deaths and violence, but it is hard to imagine how law and order can be restored without it. The radicals will just continue shooting.

(4) “EU and U.S. threats of sanctions are tantamount to demanding the government surrender to the radicals.

(5) “The best way out is for all parliamentary forces to unite to isolate the radicals (as per EU Parliament resolution of Nov, 13 2012). The parliamentary opposition, however, is afraid of the radicals, and still hopes to ride to power on their coat tails. If the government falls because of street protests, however, it is the nationalists, not the political opposition, who will dominate.

(6) “To force the political opposition to join with the government to suppress the radical nationalists, the EU and Russia must present a united front and insist on this together.”

BEN ARIS, editor at bne.eu, Skype: bpnaris
Based in Moscow, Aris is editor of Business New Europe. He said today: “It’s critical to understand the economics of the situation. Ukrainian hard currency reserves have dwindled from $35 to $17 billion — not enough to ensure the stability of the government. Ukraine is bankrupt. Under the terms of the EU offer of last year — which virtually nobody in the Western media seriously examined, the EU was offering $160 million per year for the next five years while just the bond repayments to IMF were greater than that. In contrast, Russia offered $15 billion in cash and immediately paid $3 billion. Another $3 billion was to be paid today but that was just suspended. Now [Ukrainian President Viktor] Yanukovych is indeed very corrupt, but it’s being reported as if he is some sort of Putin puppet — and somehow Putin ends up demonized on the cover of the Economist. Had Yanukovych accepted the EU deal, the country would have collapsed. The EU proposal also did things like limit Ukraine trade. Ukraine is becoming a larger exporter of eggs — one of its few successes — but the EU deal would have limited Ukraine’s export of eggs while allowing EU goods into Ukraine.

“Culturally, bear in mind that Kiev is where Slavs come from.

“I’m very sympathetic to the protesters. Yanukovych is corrupt and should be voted out in 2015. But we can’t just ignore the democratic process. U.S. officials were on the streets of Kiev handing out cookies to the demonstrators. Imagine if the Russian foreign minister was on the streets with Occupy Wall Street handing out cookies at Zuccotti Park.”

On Wednesday, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh published the piece “How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline” on Substack.

On Thursday, Sam Husseini questioned State Department spokesperson Ned Price about the story, see video and transcript: “State Dept. Denies Latest Allegations that U.S. Government Blew up Nord Stream,” also on Substack.

The Nord Stream pipeline had provided Russian natural gas to Germany. Many current and former U.S. officials had called for their destruction prior to the bombing.

BRYCE GREENE, greenebj@iu.edu, @TheGreeneBJ

Greene wrote “U.S. Media’s Intellectual No-Fly-Zone on U.S. Culpability in Nord Stream Attack” and other pieces related to the Ukraine war for the media watch group FAIR.

Greene said today: “Two days ago, legendary reporter Seymour Hersh released a detailed article about U.S. involvement in the Nord Stream 2 pipeline explosion last September. Based on a source with knowledge of the matter, Hersh alleges that the U.S., in conjunction with the Norwegian armed forces, planted and detonated the explosives that damaged the pipelines.

“This is significant given the ongoing mystery surrounding the attack. While U.S. media and government officials were quick to point at Russia, critics have cited the U.S.’s long-standing opposition to the pipeline as reason to suspect U.S. involvement. In early 2022, both Victoria Nuland and Joe Biden made direct statements about shutting down Nord Stream 2 in the context of a Russian invasion. Additionally, both Nuland and Blinken publicly expressed explicit satisfaction at the pipelines’ demise.

“Seymour Hersh’s reporting, while unconfirmed by other sources, does provide an explanation for U.S. behavior and is in line with stated U.S. objectives of cutting Germany off of Russian gas. It also gives operational details. When asked about the reporting, State Department spokesperson Ned Price denied what was in the report and claimed that Hersh was not a credible source.”

Greene’s past pieces for FAIR include “Under Musk, Twitter Continues to Promote U.S. Propaganda Networks,” “Calling Russia’s Attack ‘Unprovoked’ Lets U.S. Off the Hook” and “What You Should Really Know About Ukraine.”

Sam Husseini is an independent journalist and senior analyst at IPA.

On Jan. 27 of this year, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland stated: “If Russia invades Ukraine,

one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.” See video. (In January 2021, IPA published the news release: “Biden Nominating Victoria ‘F*ck the EU’ Nuland.”)

On Feb. 22, Biden said: “And because of Russia’s actions, we’ve worked with Germany to ensure Nord Stream 2 will not — as I promised — will not move forward.”

DAVE DeCAMP, davedecamp@protonmail.com, @DecampDave
DeCamp is news editor for Antiwar.com and host of “Antiwar News With Dave DeCamp.” He just wrote the piece “Explosions Cause Major Damage to Both Nord Stream Pipelines,” which states: “European officials on Tues
day said massive leaks in the Nord Stream natural gas pipelines that were caused by explosions were likely the result of sabotage, raising questions on who the culprit might be.

“The Nord Stream pipelines connect Russia to Germany via the Baltic Sea. Russia recently stopped shipping gas through Nord Stream 1 indefinitely, and the construction of Nord Stream 2 has been completed, but the pipeline has never been fully operational as Berlin suspended the project after Russia invaded Ukraine.

“Two leaks were discovered in Nord Stream 1, and one leak was discovered in Nord Stream 2 after the operator reported a sudden drop in pressure overnight Monday. While neither pipeline has been delivering to Europe, both contain gas under pressure.

“Two underwater explosions were recorded earlier on Monday near the Danish island of Bornholm in the Baltic Sea, which is where the leaks occurred. Nord Stream AG, the operator of the pipelines, said it was not possible to estimate when the damage could be fixed.

“EU, Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish officials all said the damage was likely caused by a deliberate attack. Over in Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that sabotage could not be ruled out.

“Radek Sikorski, a former Polish foreign minister and current Member of European Parliament, suggested on Twitter that Washington was behind the attack. He posted a picture on Twitter of the disturbance in the water caused by the leaks and wrote, ‘Thank you, USA.’

“In another tweet, Sikorski, who is married to American journalist Anne Applebaum, described his view that the U.S. was responsible as a ‘hypothesis.’ He also celebrated the attack, saying that ‘$20 billion of scrap metal lies at the bottom of the sea, another cost to Russia of its criminal decision to invade Ukraine.'” The New York Times, Washington Post and Guardian all ran stories indicating Russia was responsible, all of which ignored Sikorski’s comments.

DeCamp continued: “According to a report from Germany’s Der Spiegel, the U.S. had foreknowledge of a possible attack on the pipelines. Citing unnamed sources, Spiegel reported that the German government received a tip over the summer from the CIA that Nord Stream could be attacked, and Berlin assumed both pipelines could be targeted.

“The Nord Stream pipeline has long been in the crosshairs of Washington and the U.S. had tried to stop its construction by imposing sanctions. Before Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, President Biden [on Feb. 7] said the U.S. would ‘bring an end’ to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.”

Pres. Biden: “If Russia invades…then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”

Reporter: “But how will you do that, exactly, since…the project is in Germany’s control?”
Biden: “I promise you, we will be able to do it.” See video.

DeCamp also noted: “Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Tuesday commented on the attacks on the pipelines, saying the damage was in nobody’s interest. ‘There are initial reports indicating that this may be the result of an attack or some kind of sabotage, but these are initial reports and we haven’t confirmed that yet,’ he said. ‘But if it is confirmed, that’s clearly in no one’s interest.’

“Ukraine accused Russia of being behind the incident, but Moscow has little reason to attack the pipelines. Earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that if Europe wanted gas, it could open Nord Stream 2. ‘The bottom line is, if you have an urge, if it’s so hard for you, just lift the sanctions on Nord Stream 2, which is 55 billion cubic meters of gas per year, just push the button and everything will get going,’ he said.

“The attacks on Nord Stream coincided with the inauguration of the Baltic Pipe, another natural gas pipeline that will carry gas from Norway through Denmark to Poland. ‘The era of Russian domination of gas is coming to an end, an era marked by blackmail, threats and coercion,’ Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said at a ceremony for the pipeline, which the EU says should start transporting gas on Oct. 1.”

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, David Zupan

September 28, 2022

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Tony Blinken is traveling to Ukraine with Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland.

KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL, kat@thenation.com, or via Ricky D’Ambrose, rdambrose@thenation.com, @KatrinaNation
Editorial Director and Publisher of The Nation magazine, Katrina vanden Heuvel recently wrote for the Washington Post: “The successful campaign to block Matthew Rojansky’s appointment is ominous for Biden’s Russia policy”: “When a new administration comes to Washington, the flowery rhetoric and springtime promises are often less revealing than who is put where to run the place. That’s why many of Washington’s most scurrilous campaigns are backstage fights over potential appointments. And that’s why the successful campaign to block the appointment of Matthew Rojansky as Russia director on the National Security Council is not only a sad reflection of the poisonous state of the debate on Russian policy today, but also an ominous sign for Biden’s foreign policy going forward. …

“Rojansky’s tempered realism is at odds with the strident consensus of the foreign policy establishment. The foreign policy ‘blob’ sees Russia as weak and paints Putin as the devil. They call Russia’s SolarWinds hack an ‘act of war,’ when intelligence experts describe it as ‘reconnaissance and espionage of the sort the U.S. itself excels at.’ They seem intent on extending the U.S. commitment to Ukraine, writing a check that the American people have no intention of backing. New sanctions on Russia are shortsighted and are likely to drive Moscow still further toward Beijing. The result is a self-reinforcing spiral of tensions and hostile postures strengthening hawks on both sides. For the Biden administration, Rojansky’s sensible perspectives would provide a necessary balance to voices such as Victoria Nuland, the hawkish new undersecretary of state for political affairs.

“Upon taking office, Biden promised a ‘foreign policy for the middle class,’ tacitly acknowledging that the debacles of the past decades have badly served all but the few. Keeping that promise requires profound rethinking. By reversing some of Donald Trump’s most egregious follies — returning to the Paris climate accord and the WHO, ending the Muslim ban, beginning negotiations to return to the Iran nuclear deal, extending the START nuclear accord with Russia — Biden has taken the first steps. Recalibrating our relations to Russia — and reducing the tensions around Ukraine and the Russian border — surely must be part of that effort. Getting that right will be much harder if sensible experts such as Rojansky have no place in the administration.”

Katrina vanden Heuvel is vice-president of the American Committee for U.S.-Russia Accord, a group interested in an informed dialogue about improving U.S.-Russia relations. The group recently participated in a talk organized by the Committee for the Republic (see background on the group) on the critical issues confronting U.S.-Russian relations, see video.

STEPHEN COHEN, sfc1 at nyu.edu
Available for a limited number of interviews, Cohen is professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University. His books include Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold War.

He just wrote the piece “Distorting Russia How the American Media Misrepresent Putin, Sochi and Ukraine” for The Nation, which states: “The most crucial media omission is Moscow’s reasonable conviction that the struggle for Ukraine is yet another chapter in the West’s ongoing, U.S.-led march toward post-Soviet Russia, which began in the 1990s with NATO’s eastward expansion and continued with U.S.-funded NGO political activities inside Russia, a U.S.-NATO military outpost in Georgia and missile-defense installations near Russia. Whether this longstanding Washington-Brussels policy is wise or reckless, it — not Putin’s December financial offer to save Ukraine’s collapsing economy — is deceitful. The EU’s ‘civilizational’ proposal, for example, includes ‘security policy’ provisions, almost never reported, that would apparently subordinate Ukraine to NATO.

“Any doubts about the Obama administration’s real intentions in Ukraine should have been dispelled by the recently revealed taped conversation between a top State Department official, Victoria Nuland, and the U.S. ambassador in Kiev. The media predictably focused on the source of the ‘leak’ and on Nuland’s verbal ‘gaffe’ — ‘Fuck the EU.’ But the essential revelation was that high-level U.S. officials were plotting to ‘midwife’ a new, anti-Russian Ukrainian government by ousting or neutralizing its democratically elected president — that is, a coup.” [Audio of Nuland with Geoffrey R. Pyatt, U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, determining which Ukrainian politicians should and should not be in government and deciding to use the UN, rather than the EU, for their purposes.]

NICOLAI PETRO, [in Ukraine] nnpetro at gmail.com, Skype: nicolaipetro
Professor of politics at the University of Rhode Island, Petro is currently a Fulbright research scholar in Ukraine. He recently wrote the piece “Ukraine’s Culture War” for The National Interest, which states: “Rather than trying to pick a ‘winner’ out of the murky waters of Ukrainian politics, a better strategy would be to support the conciliation process itself. … Such a conciliation process could be further helped by unconditional, a priori international support for whatever it agrees to. This point is vital to convince average Ukrainians that the decisions resulting from such a gathering are indeed the independent choice of the entire Ukrainian people, and not just the victory of one faction, inevitably ‘backed by outside forces,’ over another. Only support offered jointly by the EU and Russia (or CIS [Commonwealth of Independent States]) cannot be so easily dismissed.”

Petro has also written a series of articles for OpEdnews.com, including “How the EU Can Bring Ukraine Into Europe.”

JOHN QUIGLEY, Quigley.2 at osu.edu
Professor emeritus of international law at Ohio State University,Quigley dealt with conflicts between Ukraine and Russia arising from the breakup of the USSR on behalf of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. He said today: “The Department of State is trying to influence Ukraine to side with the West. It is trying to shape the form of a possible new government in Ukraine. While the State Department depicts these efforts as reconciliation, they constitute interference in internal affairs. These efforts provide justification to Russia for trying to turn events in Ukraine in the way it would prefer.”