As is already well known, referendums were held in the LPR and DPR as well as in Kherson and Zaporozhye regions from September 23 to 27 on the issue of giving up belonging to Ukraine and becoming part of the Russian Federation. They were monitored by a large number of foreign observers who confirmed the free will of the inhabitants of these regions and compliance with all the norms of international law and the UN Charter. The ceremony of accepting the new territories into Russia was held on September 30 in the St George’s Hall of the Grand Kremlin Palace, where Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the respective treaties with the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions with the participation of the heads of these territories and representatives of the Russian legislative and executive authorities as well as the Russian public.
The foreign ministers of the G7 countries (the USA, Germany, France, the UK, Italy, Canada and Japan), as well as a number of other states allied to Washington, rushed to say that they would never recognize the results of the referendums held in the DPR, LPR, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions and their accession to Russia. One of these countries was Turkey, despite its actively developing multifaceted relations with Russia in recent years.
The reasons for these actions of Moscow’s opponents lie on the surface, as their policies and actions over the last three decades have been aimed at infringing on Russia’s interests and activities as much as possible. After all, it was they, under US auspices, who reinforced anti-Russian sentiments in Ukraine, using, among other things, the revival of Nazi ideology in that country. And when, over the past eight years, the Kiev regime they had created has pursued a policy of genocide against the Russian-speaking population of eastern Ukraine, regularly bombing towns in Donbas with the active support of NATO weapons and military advisors, and destroying thousands of civilians in the eastern regions, it was these countries that demonstratively ignored the violations of international standards and human rights of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine at the UN and in other international fora.
In this regard, one wonders what the US, Israel, or the likes of France and Britain would do if similar acts of outright terror and genocide were carried out against their fellow citizens in other countries? Was it not under the slogan of “threatening Americans” that the US and its Western allies launched armed aggressions in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and remained in these countries as occupiers for many years as a result? So why are there now not only curses from the West, but also harsh sanctions because of Moscow’s similar actions to protect the Russian-speaking population of eastern Ukraine from Kiev’s blatantly Nazi actions and threats against the security of the Russian Federation and its citizens?
The fact that these provocative actions against Russia by the US and its NATO allies in Ukraine were a pre-planned Western operation is no longer hidden by anyone, including the perpetrators of such actions.
For example, the other day, former Swiss intelligence officer and NATO advisor Colonel Jacques Baud confirmed in an interview with Grayzone that the US had deliberately instigated the conflict in Ukraine in order to destroy Russia’s economy. As he emphasized, the West does not care about Ukraine as such, and the original purpose of the conflict was to provoke Russia and wreck its economy through sanctions. However, not only are they not working, but the West itself is trapped in a severe economic and energy crisis as a result of such actions. Colonel Jacques Baud acknowledges that, since 2014, large parts of Ukraine have considered themselves occupied by the Kiev regime. He also fully agrees that the famous Law on the Indigenous Peoples adopted by the Kiev authorities in July 2021, which outlines various rights of Ukrainian residents, among whom Russians are not included, bears a certain resemblance to the infamous Nuremberg Laws of 1935 in relation to Nazi Germany. Given the Ukrainian authorities’ order this summer for the Russian-speaking population to leave the eastern regions, the outcome of the referendum and the desire of the residents of eastern Ukraine to join Russia was, as the former NATO advisor admitted, predictable and understandable to all.
However, apart from outright disappointment at the failure of their provocative actions in Ukraine, the negative reaction of the US and the “collective West” to the accession of eastern Ukraine to Russia has other very good reasons. First, one should not forget that the negative reaction from the White House is undoubtedly due to the failure of active attempts over a number of years by the “Biden clan” to enslave Ukraine and make it their personal fiefdom, of which many media have already provided plenty of evidence. It is only as a result of Biden senior’s forceful actions that proceedings against such criminal activities of the “clan” have now been suspended. But it could erupt with renewed vigor in the very near future, especially after the realization of numerous demands by US residents to impeach Biden and even the filing of charges against President Joe Biden by six US states in court. Therefore, the more actively the White House opposes the accession of eastern Ukraine to Russia, the more obvious will be the “Biden clan’s” personal interest in the return of its “lost Ukrainian fiefdom”.
But the most important reason for the “disappointment” of the US and the West in general is that in the recent period these actors in Ukraine have showered Kiev with many billions of dollars in loans, and not only in the form of weapons transferred to Ukraine. However, with the secession of the LPR and DPR, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye regions from Ukraine, given that these territories have significant natural resources and other riches, Washington and the West are faced with the question: who will pay all these debts? After all, it is clear to everyone that these sums will not be compensated by returning the “Western donations” stolen by Zelensky and his inner circle, nor even by the corrupt “savings” of the “Biden clan” itself. And the imminent demands of US and European taxpayers, against the backdrop of a rapidly escalating energy, financial and economic crisis, could be very tough and the current “rulers of the West” will have to answer for everything, just as they did for the war unleashed in Ukraine.
Turkey is in a similarly flawed situation, having been quite cunning in its dealings with Kiev in recent years, gradually “covering” more and more Ukrainian areas. And it has had no trouble doing so, as Ukraine’s economy has long been in decline. Accordingly, if Crimea and the east of the country had still been in Ukraine, Turkey, taking advantage of Ukraine’s weakness, could have gradually established full control over the region, and later even annex these regions to itself, in line with the pan-Turkic strategy.
It should also not be forgotten that Turkey is one of the countries that has benefited greatly from this conflict. From poverty-stricken Ukraine, Ankara manages to get money not only for Bayraktars but also for mercenaries recruited among refugees and Syrian fighters. Without even waiting for the completion of the Russian special operation, the Turkish President flew to Kiev to negotiate contracts for the construction and restoration of infrastructure in Ukraine. After all, it is not even a question of who will pay for it – Zelensky or his successor – but of who will absorb the budgets, the billions of dollars in promised subsidies from the West. But, with the secession of the eastern regions from Kiev’s jurisdiction, everything falls apart in Ankara’s plans, and so there are statements from Turkey about its refusal to recognize Russia’s new borders.