“Do we really believe that the U.S. wants democracy for Ukraine, or was this about encircling Russia, increasing Western profits, and attempting to expand NATO?”
By Mary Beaudoin WomenAgainstMilitaryMadnessNewsletter March/April 2014 It’s probably safe to say that most Americans wouldn’t really be very receptive to the idea of using their tax money to increase profits for the international financial sector and multi-national corporations—especially when they themselves are experiencing economic insecurity. And control of Ukrainian pipelines through which Russian gas is transported to Europe seems pretty far removed from our lives, as does NATO expansion.
But because we are accustomed to hearing that any protest anywhere is a way to improve the lives of citizens, it’s harder for us to detect underlying profit motives. And so it was last December, when U.S. Undersecretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland brazenly handed out cookies in a gesture of solidarity with regime-change protesters in Maidan, the main square of Ukraine’s capital—this while a democratically elected president sat as the legitimate head of the Ukrainian government (aka “regime” in State Department-speak). Two days later, on December 13, fresh from Kiev, appearing before the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation in Washington against a Chevron logo backdrop, Nuland thanked the people in the room (representatives from mega-corporations like Raytheon, Boeing, Microsoft, Monsanto, and also the Heritage Foundation, Freedom House, and the Brookings Institute) for supporting the brave Ukrainian people support that she said had cost the U.S. $5 billion in developing “democratic institutions” within Ukraine.