rsn | here's
not much point in staging a coup if you don't influence who is placed
in power in the aftermath. Of course in order for a puppet government to
be effective, they can't be perceived as such. You wouldn't want the
natives to get restless would you?
The evidence that the U.S. was behind the toppling of the Ukrainian government
early this year is so overwhelming at this point that the subject
really isn't up for debate, however initially it was unclear how the
election of Petro Poroshenko fit in. The ecstatic response by Washington
when he was declared the winner, and their unbending support in spite
of his ongoing military assault against civilians in the east, made it clear that he was the chosen one, but the paper trail wasn't immediately obvious.
As it turns out, the evidence that Poroshenko is in
the pocket of the U.S. State Department has been available all this
time, you just had to know where to find it. In a classified diplomatic cable from 2006 released by Wikileaks.org, U.S. officials refer to Poroshenko as "Our Ukraine (OU) insider Petro Poroshenko".
A separate cable also released by Wikileaks makes it clear that the U.S. government was considered Poroshenko corrupt.
"Poroshenko was tainted by credible corruption allegations, but wielded significant influence within OU; Poroshenko's price had to be paid."
The U.S. government knew Poroshenko was dirty, but he was influential, and arguably their most dependable mole.
Perhaps the most interesting revelation comes from a 2009 cable
where Poroshenko told then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton he
supported "the opening of a U.S. diplomatic presence in Crimea" and "He
emphasized the importance of Crimea, and said that having U.S.
representation there would be useful for Ukraine." Poroshenko's role as
an informant for the U.S. government continued in cables in 2010 as well.
0 comments:
Post a Comment