Brzezinski about Ukraine: Underlying Meaning of Finland Option

Sergey MAXIMOV

Ex: http://www.strategic-culture.org

A coup took place in Kiev of February 22, 2014. The same day the Financial Times published the Russia Needs to be Offered a ‘Finland Option’ for Ukraine article by Zbignew Brzezinski. The editorial board found that the piece was important enough to reprint it again the next day with the changed title Russia Needs a ‘Finland Option’ for Ukraine. It makes one wonder what the author of Game Plan and Grand Chess Board really means by all of a sudden turning to the theme of Ukraine with his offer of «Finlandization»? 

Mr. Brzezinski has a long history of giving advices to many US administrations. Now he comes up with an offer to lend a helping hand to the new government in Kiev and deter Russia from taking resolute steps to defend its interests of vital importance in Ukraine. He recommends, «Washington to use its influence internationally to prompt steps that would be economically costly to Moscow» as he believes that contemporary Russia is vulnerable to such actions. 

Since long ago Brzezinski has been affirming that Ukraine is a key country for the control of the entire Russian (post-Soviet) geopolitical space. Until now the United States has not succeeded much in its endeavors to get hold of the key. The «big Zbig» explained the recent predicaments the US has encountered on the way while playing on the Grand Chess Board by the «President Vladimir Putin’s «nostalgic dream of the Eurasian Union». Ukraine is considered to be important by the US foreign policy savvy because by defending its national rights it makes the states of Central Asia, in particular Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, realize they need to be tougher while resisting the ongoing attempts by Moscow to take away their independence. 

The Brzezinski’s idée fixe is the further fragmentation of Eurasia’s political map (along the former Yugoslavia lines) that’s why he virulently opposes any form of integration in the post-Soviet space… The inveterate enemy of Russia and seasoned master of geopolitical intrigue he pins hope on rescuing the «new Ukrainian democracy» (as he calls the regime which grabbed power in Kiev after the coup), «So, irrespective of what happens in the near future, I continue to believe: «Sooner rather than later, Ukraine will be truly a part of democratic Europe. Later rather than sooner, Russia will follow unless it self-isolates itself and becomes a semi-stagnant imperialistic relic».

The Brzezinski’s Financial Times piece has strictly defined the core goal for those who set store by political recommendations of Polish American strategist and are ready to follow through. According to him, the rapprochement between Ukraine and the post-Soviet states united in the Customs Union with an eye to create the Eurasian Union in future must be prevented at any price, even if it will lead to great human losses the Yarosh-Turchinov-Yatsenyuk regime’s staying in power bodes for Ukrainian people. 

As Brzezinski puts it, «The West, however, can play a constructive role in containing the exploding violence. That will take concerted action by the US and the EU. The US could and should convey clearly to Mr. Putin that it is prepared to use its influence to make certain that a truly independent and territorially undivided Ukraine pursues policies towards Russia similar to those so effectively practiced by Finland: mutually respectful neighbors, wide-ranging economic relations both with Russia and the EU, but no participation in any military alliance viewed by Moscow as directed at itself – while also expanding its European connectivity. In brief, the Finnish model as the ideal example for Ukraine, and the EU, and Russia». 

At that, why Finland? The neutral status of Finland has been gradually eroded by involvement of Finnish armed forces into the NATO «Partnership for Peace» program as well other forms of military cooperation with the alliance. This is only one side of the matter. It should be added by the fact that Finland is used as a springboard for subversive actions against neighboring Russia. 

For instance, the terrorist organization Imarat Kavkaz enjoys safe haven of the territory of Finland, its Kavkaz Center website openly operates there. Islamists and separatists from the Russian Federation and other post-Soviet states have gone through the training course of ideological brainwashing and the ways to wage «war for democracy» under cover of different kinds of «scientific conferences», seminars and trainings. Finland connives at such activities. It also supports the Kavkaz Center under the pretext that the state boundaries should not limit efforts to defend «democratic values». 

Something like this is planned for Ukraine, but this time it’s not the «soft» Finnish option, but rather its tough «Slav» version. 

Andriy Parubiy, former Maidan commandant, has been appointed Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine by putschists. In 1991 together with Oleh Tyahnybok he founded the Social-National party of Ukraine. Being too close to German national-socialism, the party was renamed in 2004 to become the All-Ukraine Union Svoboda (Freedom). Since 1996 he heads the «Patriots of Ukraine» paramilitary nationalist youth organization which is part of Pravy sector movement – the striking force of the coup. Dmitry Yarosh, the leader of Neo-Nazi assault groups, has become his deputy. 

Yarosh is a professional revolutionary (they said he has never worked). In 1994 he joined Trezub (named after Stepan Bandera) created under the aegis of Ukrainian abroad-based organization the Brotherhood of OUN – UPA (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists- Ukrainian Insurgent Army). He heads Trezub since 2005. Yarosh has a long experience of working together with Valentin Nalivaychenko appointed new head of Security Service of Ukraine, as well as Ukrainian (US and Canada nationals) experts on guerilla warfare. He is an ardent supporter of the theory which says that a war against Russia «to liberate Ukrainian territories occupied by Russia empire», including the Kuban and the Far East, is inevitable. 

Under the circumstances the «Finlandization of Ukraine» offered by Brzezinski will not lead to friendship and good neighborly relations but rather will turn Ukraine into an outpost of subversive activities against Russia and its allies.