Billede
NATO kalder Krim for "invaderet" og "besat". NATO har vist verden hvordan invasion og besættelse virkelig ser ud og Krim følger ikke det billede.. I 2001, invaderede NATO og begyndte en besættelse af det Sydcentralasiatiske land, Afghanistan. Invasionen og besættelsen har resulteret i titusinder af døde, mange flere deplaceret og har ført til en fortsat vold og kaos helt op til og inklusiv dagen idag. Gennem hele konflikten har der været afsløringer af mishandling, massemord og andre uhyrligheder, inklusiv systematisk tortur som er dukket frem i lyset, udøvet af NATO styrker og deres afghanske kollaboratører.

Denne krig har resulteret i brugen af bevæbnede droner som regelmæssigt dræber mænd, kvinder og børn, udiskriminerligt langs grænsen mellem Afghanistan og Pakistan - en kampagne af massmord som er blevet udøvet i næsten hele den tid som konflikten har hærget.

I 2003, gjorde NATO medlemmer fælles sag med USA i invastionen og den efterfølgende besættelse af Irak. En skøn på 1 million mennesker har mistet deres liv, deriblandt tusinder af vestlige tropper. For over et årti har Irak været besat af USA og igennem deres forsøg på at understøtte en passende vassalstat er landet blevet lagt i ruiner. Amerikanske tropper har i deres forsøg på at udøve kontrol over den irakiske befolkning gjort omfattende angreb på hele byer. Byen Fallujah er hele to gange blevet jævnet næsten til jorden.

USA har også opretholdt fangelejre på tværs af nationen. Nogle kollosal store og vidtfavnende, andre mørke og hemmelige, deriblandt det berygtede Abu Ghraib fængsel, hvor grusomheder er blevet udøvet. Udover vestlige bevæbnede styrker, har et betydeligt antal af lejesoldater deltaget i besættelsen og i grusomhederne som er fundet sted igennem den, ibefattende massemord på civile som har resulteret i kriminelle sagsanlæg og som stadig giver genlyd i det Vestlige retssystem og underminerer Vestens troværdighed verden over.

Dette er hvad rigtige invasioner og besættelser ser ud. Et væbnet indtog ind i en nation, den absolutte undertvingelse af dets beboere via maximum magtudøvelse - eller som USA kalder det "shock and awe" - og en besættelse med 'pistolen til hovedet' med tankvogne og tropper i gaderne mod et folk som ikke ønsker dem der og som er parate til at kæmpe og dø for at drive dem ud.

Så når i Marts 2014, Krim kom tilbage til Rusland og NATO kaldte det en "invasion" og "besættelse" så var verden forståeligt nok bekymret. Nogle var bekymrede fordi de satte ordene ordene "invasion" og "besættelse" lig med den grad af massemord og decimering som man associerer med NATOs udenlandske interventioner over de sidste årtier - og i den tro at en sådan grad af vold nu ville udfolde sig på Krim, men i hænderne på russerne. Andre var bekymrede fordi den åbenlyse falskhed under hvilken NATO fordrejede begivenhederne på Krim.

Forskellen mellem en NATO og en Russisk intervention

Billede



Kommentar: Vi undskylder at resten af artiklen er på engelsk, men håber at du har forståelse for at vores lille stab af redaktører og oversættere gør deres bedste for at viderebringe til dig de vigtigste af "tidens tegn", som vi observerer dem. Hvis du har lyst til at støtte vores bestræbelser med dine egne oversættelser eller forslag, så tøv ikke med at skrive til sott_da@sott.net




NATO's intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan ran into heavy resistance while Russia's intervention in Crimea did not, because of several crucial differences. First, NATO was invading nations literally oceans away. The targets of their military aggression shared no common history with the West, no cultural, religious, or linguistic similarities, and surely no mutual contemporary shared interests. No significant party within either Iraq or Afghanistan asked the West to intervene beyond token proxies arranged by the West itself. Crimea on the other hand, had once existed as part of Russia. Many in Crimea identify themselves either as Russians, or of Russian descent. They speak Russian and observe Russian customs. Many in Crimea recognize that the soil beneath their feet has been soaked in Russian blood to defend it from aggression throughout history, including against the Nazis in World War 2.

When the government of Ukraine was violently overthrown by an overtly US-backed coup in Kiev, and many of the familiar symbols and movements that had in the past taken power with the help of Adolf Hitler in the 1940's began stirring in western Ukraine again, turning to Russia for protection was only natural. Not only did the people of Crimea ask Russia to intervene, a referendum was held that overwhelmingly quantified their request.

Aside from storming several military bases and some tense moments in stand-off's with Ukrainian troops, there was no violence when Russian forces began moving into Crimea.

A Year On, All is Well...

Life in Russian Crimea today is exceedingly normal. While a war rages on next door in Ukraine, the people of Crimea enjoy peace, stability, and a sense of unity and hope for the future. Even with economic setbacks delivered by NATO's attempts to take the horrors they've created within Ukraine, and recreate them on the other side of the border in Russia, people are still able to conduct business more or less as they did before the conflict began. Some say the economy has actually improved despite the sanctions.

Of course, the transition, with an armed conflict unfolding just across the border, is not seamless. Euronews would report mixed feelings in Crimea, stating in its article, "Crimea economy one year on after Russian annexation," that:
For many locals the biggest worry is the spiralling cost of food. Kyiv's refusal to recognise the border means it can't legally export to Crimea directly.
Most supplies come from Russia by ferry but bad weather can delay shipments for days. Many products are just not available. Regional government data showed inflation jumped 38 percent and the cost of food increased by almost a half from March through to December. Not a single Russian supermarket chain has opened in Crimea.
But a poll at the end of January by a Ukraine market research agency recorded that more than half of the 800 people questioned believe they are better off financially since joining Russia.
Despite this, after only a year, and considering the circumstances, Crimea is faring well, especially compared to neighboring Ukraine. Logistical networks will surely be restructured and markets will surely adjust. With the West desperately seeking to portray Crimea's state one year after returning to Russia as dire as possible, that the best they can do is cite the disappearance of "McDonald's" and "Apple" stores as "proof" that Crimea is "suffering," bodes well for the Crimean people.

While NATO calls this an "invasion" and "occupation," it is ironically NATO itself that has taught the world so well what a real invasion and occupation looks like, making their recent claims against Russia in Crimea ring particularly hollow. Also ironic is the fact that the NATO-backed regime in Kiev, Ukraine, is imposing upon its own people the conditions and horrors generally associated with a real invasion and occupation. That some call the conflict in Ukraine one of several "proxy wars" NATO is waging around the world, this should come as no surprise.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-baseret geopolitisk forsker og skribent, specielt for netmagasinet "New Eastern Outlook".