Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #853 Walkin’ the Snake at Babi Yar: Update on the Ukraine Crisis

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained here. The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by late spring of 2015.. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more) con­tains FTR #850.  (The pre­vi­ous flash dri­ve was cur­rent through the end of May of 2012 and con­tained FTR #748.)

WFMU-FM is pod­cast­ing For The Record–You can sub­scribe to the pod­cast HERE.

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE.

This pro­gram was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment.

Intro­duc­tion: Once again we set forth polit­i­cal devel­op­ments  against the sce­nario pre­sent­ed in Ser­pen­t’s Walk.

In that Nazi tract, the SS go under­ground in the after­math of World War II, build up their eco­nom­ic mus­cle, buy into the opin­ion-form­ing media, infil­trate the Amer­i­can mil­i­tary, and–following a series of ter­ror­ist inci­dents in the U.S. which cause the dec­la­ra­tion of mar­tial law–take over the Unit­ed States.

Cen­tral to this takeover is the use of the Nazi-con­trolled opin­ion-form­ing media to fun­da­men­tal­ly revise his­to­ry in a pro-Hitler fash­ion. Just such a revi­sion is under­way in Ukraine.

It is impos­si­ble with­in the scope of this post to cov­er our volu­mi­nous cov­er­age of the Ukraine cri­sis.

Pre­vi­ous pro­grams on the sub­ject are: FTR #‘s 777778779780781782783784794800803804, 808811817818824826829832833837849850Listeners/readers are encour­aged to exam­ine these pro­grams and/or their descrip­tions in detail, in order to flesh out their under­stand­ing.

In Ukraine, polit­i­cal his­to­ry is being stood on its head. Both for­mer pres­i­dent Yuschenko and cur­rent pres­i­dent Poroshenko have vis­it­ed the site of the Babi Yar mas­sacres, among the most noto­ri­ous inci­dents of the Holo­caust. They did so, how­ev­er, in order to hon­or the UPA/OUN/B cadre who par­tic­i­pat­ed in the mur­ders! The OUN/B was heav­i­ly involved with staffing the exe­cu­tion­ers ros­ter.

The deep pol­i­tics sur­round­ing the Ukraine cri­sis are such that we should not be sur­prised by such devel­op­ments.ABSTRACT: In the wake of the Orange Rev­o­lu­tion, Ukraine has wit­nessed a sub­stan­tial growth in orga­nized anti-Semi­tism. Cen­tral to this devel­op­ment is an orga­ni­za­tion, known as the Inter­re­gion­al Acad­e­my of Human Resources, bet­ter known by its Ukrain­ian acronym MAUP. It oper­ates a well-con­nect­ed polit­i­cal net­work that reach­es the very top of the Ukrain­ian soci­ety. MAUP is the largest pri­vate uni­ver­si­ty in Ukraine, with 57,000 stu­dents at 24 region­al cam­pus­es. MAUP is con­nect­ed to the KKK; David Duke is teach­ing cours­es in his­to­ry and inter­na­tion­al rela­tions at the uni­ver­si­ty. Fund­ed by Sau­di Ara­bia, Libya and Iran, MAUP’s print­ing house pub­lish­es about 85% of the anti-Semit­ic lit­er­a­ture in Ukraine. Until very recent­ly, Ukrain­ian Pres­i­dent Yushchenko and For­eign Min­is­ter Tara­siuk served on its board; for­mer Pres­i­dent Kravchuk still does. . . .”

In FTR #781, we not­ed that, under Yuschenko, the wartime his­to­ry of Ukraine was stood on its head, Ser­pen­t’s Walk style. In FTR #794, we not­ed that Poroshenko has basi­cal­ly engaged “Team Yuschenko” in the for­ma­tion of his gov­ern­ment.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: 

  • The pre­pos­ter­ous claims (by the UPA and its defend­ers) that the UPA con­tained a sig­nif­i­cant Jew­ish mem­ber­ship is tan­ta­mount to say­ing that the SS had sig­nif­i­cant Jew­ish par­tic­i­pa­tion.
  • The point that this kind of polit­i­cal iner­tia will lead to the Holo­caust being rel­e­gat­ed to “maybe it hap­pened and maybe it didn’t”–and final­ly Holo­caust denial as estab­lished his­tor­i­cal truth.
  • The above items ARE Ser­pen­t’s Walk in action.
  • The man­ner in which doc­u­ment­ed World War II his­to­ry is couched in rel­a­tivis­tic terms like “so and so says,” or “accord­ing to one arti­cle,” or “jour­nal­ist so and so has writ­ten.”
  • The Nazi-style polit­i­cal and racial doc­trine of the OUN/B, with which its cadre were imbued and which led to atroc­i­ties like that at Babi Yar and the liq­ui­da­tion of the Lvov ghet­to.
  • The exter­mi­na­tion of the Jew­ish ghet­to in Lvov by the Ein­satz­gruppe Nachti­gall (Nachti­gall Bat­tal­ion) is his­tor­i­cal fact, not “Russ­ian pro­pa­gan­da.” The orga­ni­za­tion’s polit­i­cal offi­cer was SS offi­cer Theodor Ober­lan­der, lat­er the (West) Ger­man min­is­ter for expellees, forced to resign when his role in the mas­sacre was revealed. Ober­lan­der (also spelled “Ober­laen­der” in some sources) is dis­cussed on pp. 191–192 of T.H. Tetens’ The New Ger­many and the Old Nazis. Note that Lvov was also known as Lem­berg (the Pol­ish name of a city that was part of var­i­ous coun­tries at var­i­ous times, includ­ing Ukraine, Poland and the for­mer Sovi­et Union.) “Nachti­gall” trans­lates into Eng­lish as “Nightin­gale,” the name for the unit com­mand­ed by Ober­lan­der, as dis­cussed in the Tetens text.
  • A street in the Lvov dis­trict was named in hon­or of the group.
  • The new law out­law­ing crit­i­cism of the OUN and UPA was pro­posed by Yuri Shukhevych, the son of Roman Shukhevych, who com­mand­ed the UPA!
  • Although it does not appear to have occurred to the author of the first arti­cle (or many oth­er observers) the instal­la­tion of the direct polit­i­cal­ly evo­lu­tion­ary prog­e­ny of World War II-era Nazi butch­ers on Rus­si­a’s bor­ders has not gone unno­ticed by Putin and oth­er Rus­sians. This had much to do with the over­whelm­ing sup­port the peo­ple of Crimea gave to re-uni­fi­ca­tion with Rus­sia. It would be impos­si­ble to exag­ger­ate the gal­va­niz­ing effect that the aware­ness of the pres­ence of World War II Nazis at Rus­si­a’s bor­ders has had on Russ­ian pub­lic sen­ti­ment.
  • A march by Pravy Sek­tor demand­ing a resump­tion of the war in East­ern Ukraine. This took place as sep­a­ratist rebels with­drew from some posi­tions. Dmytro Yarosh, head of the orga­ni­za­tion, is a mem­ber of the Ukrain­ian par­lia­ment and an advis­er to the head of the Ukrain­ian army.
  • The pres­ence in the orbit of the MAUP orga­ni­za­tion of Joran Jer­mas, aka “Israel Shamir,” one of Julian Assage’s most impor­tant aides.
  • Review of the entrenched nature of the Ukrain­ian fas­cists in pre-World War II Amer­i­ca.

1. We begin with an arti­cle not­ing that cur­rent Ukrain­ian pres­i­dent Poroshenko and for­mer pres­i­dent Yuschenko vis­it­ed the site of the Babi Yar mas­sacre and placed wreaths hon­or­ing the OUN/B, whose ranks sup­plied the bulk of the exe­cu­tion­ers for the mas­sacre.

“Ukraine: World War II Fias­co Leads to Pub­lic Rela­tions Dis­as­ter and Thorny Rela­tions for Kiev  and For­eign Dias­po­ra” by Nicholas Kozloff; The World Post; 6/29/2015.

For Kiev, win­ning the pub­lic rela­tions war against Vladimir Putin would seem to be a no-brain­er. For a year now, the Krem­lin has con­duct­ed a thin­ly-dis­guised war of aggres­sion in east­ern Ukraine result­ing in the deaths of thou­sands. Yet Kiev seems intent on squan­der­ing any inter­na­tion­al pub­lic sup­port it might have had amidst a bizarre crack­down on free speech and cen­sor­ship of con­tro­ver­sial his­tor­i­cal debates. Through its crack­down, Ukraine has actu­al­ly played into Putin’s pro­pa­gan­da war and facil­i­tat­ed Rus­si­a’s PR efforts.

At issue is Ukraine’s con­tentious World War II past, some of which isn’t par­tic­u­lar­ly flat­ter­ing. With the sup­port of Nazi Ger­many, mili­tias affil­i­at­ed with the extrem­ist Orga­ni­za­tion of Ukrain­ian Nation­al­ists (OUN) alleged­ly com­mit­ted a pogrom in the west­ern city of Lviv. Writ­ing in the Lon­don Inde­pen­dent, jour­nal­ist Patrick Cock­burn notes that while “Ukrain­ian politi­cians and his­to­ri­ans have denied com­plic­i­ty... sur­viv­ing Jew­ish vic­tims, oth­er wit­ness­es and con­tem­po­rary pho­tographs prove that Ukrain­ian mili­ti­a­men and mobs of sup­port­ers car­ried out the pogrom, though the Ger­mans over­saw it and com­mit­ted many of the mur­ders.”

One schol­ar, John Paul Him­ka, has con­clud­ed that the pogrom was most­ly con­duct­ed by the OUN under Ger­man super­vi­sion. Accord­ing to Him­ka, the OUN sought to demon­strate to the Nazis “that it shared their anti-Jew­ish per­spec­tives and that it was wor­thy to be entrust­ed with the for­ma­tion of a Ukrain­ian state.” . . . . the OUN fought the Sovi­ets and strived for an inde­pen­dent Ukraine, many [of its] lead­ers were influ­enced and trained by Nazi Ger­many. Indeed, the OUN could be char­ac­ter­ized as a far right ter­ror­ist group which hoped to con­sol­i­date an eth­ni­cal­ly homoge­nous Ukraine and a total­i­tar­i­an, one par­ty state.

Wartime Con­tro­ver­sy

“The truth is that the offi­cial pol­i­cy of the OUN was open­ly anti-Semit­ic, includ­ing approval for Nazi-style Jew­ish exter­mi­na­tion,” writes Eduard Dolinksy of the Ukrain­ian Jew­ish Com­mit­tee. Dolinksy adds that it was only at the end of the war, when it became clear that Ger­many would be defeat­ed, that the Ukrain­ian right changed its posi­tion. The OUN in fact played an impor­tant role in pogroms which spread across West­ern Ukraine in the sum­mer of 1941, result­ing in the deaths of tens of thou­sands of Jews. After the Nazis dis­solved the mili­tias, many mem­bers linked up with the Ukrain­ian police and helped car­ry out the Holo­caust through­out West­ern Ukraine.

Then, for good mea­sure, the OUN assumed con­trol over the Ukrain­ian Insur­gent Army or UPA in 1943. . . . The Times of Israel notes “accord­ing to some his­tor­i­cal accounts the group mur­dered thou­sands of Jews in the 1940s” [oth­er his­to­ri­ans, as well as sup­port­ers of the UPA, dis­pute this, claim­ing there were many Jews who them­selves served in the ranks of the orga­ni­za­tion]. A recent arti­cle by Reuters claims the UPA shut­tled vic­tims into labor camps where they were sub­se­quent­ly exe­cut­ed. Fur­ther­more, it is claimed the UPA was also guilty of con­duct­ing eth­nic cleans­ing of Poles in 1943–44. The mas­sacres in East­ern Gali­cia, which formed part of an over­all UPA strat­e­gy aimed at cre­at­ing a homoge­nous Ukrain­ian state, result­ed in the deaths of 100,000 peo­ple.

Crim­i­nal­iz­ing Dis­sent

Amidst esca­lat­ing war in the east, Ukraine des­per­ate­ly needs allies and pop­u­lar for­eign sup­port. Giv­en the des­per­ate stakes, one would think that Kiev would come to terms with some of the unsa­vory aspects of its World War II past. Yet strange­ly, polit­i­cal elites are run­ning hard in the oppo­site direc­tion in an effort to cod­dle the extrem­ist right. At issue is a high­ly con­tro­ver­sial law recent­ly signed by Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko which hon­ors the OUN and UPA.

Under the new law, it would be a crime to ques­tion the likes of the UPA. Specif­i­cal­ly, leg­is­la­tion stip­u­lates that Ukraini­ans and even for­eign­ers [includ­ing Americans?–D.E.] who “pub­licly insult” the mem­o­ry of wartime par­ti­sans “will be held to account in accor­dance with Ukrain­ian law.” The bill does not spec­i­fy the penal­ty for ques­tion­ing Ukraine’s wartime past, nor does the state explain which body will enforce the leg­is­la­tion. On the oth­er hand, it is pos­si­ble that any pri­vate indi­vid­ual could bring a case to court.

Though cer­tain­ly dis­tress­ing, Kiev’s approval of the ret­ro­grade law comes as lit­tle sur­prise. For­mer Pres­i­dent Vik­tor Yushchenko, in fact, hon­ored Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists at a memo­r­i­al in Babi Yar, where the most hor­rif­ic mas­sacre of Jews took place through­out the Holo­caust. Not stop­ping there, Yushchenko then bestowed the high­est gov­ern­ment hon­or on none oth­er than Stepan Ban­dera, a leader of the OUN.

Reha­bil­i­tat­ing Extrem­ist Right

Per­haps, Yushchenko’s efforts helped to reha­bil­i­tate Ban­dera and oth­ers in the minds of many. As recent­ly as 2013, rad­i­cal nation­al­ists were vis­i­bly active dur­ing Ukraine’s Maid­an rev­o­lu­tion. Indeed, right­ists bran­dished a host of OUN and UPA flags on Maid­an square while belt­ing out par­ti­san wartime songs [for a fuller dis­cus­sion of such curi­ous right­ist sym­bol­ism, see my ear­li­er arti­cle here]. If any­thing, the UPA’s pop­u­lar­i­ty has soared omi­nous­ly since the Maid­an.

Even more dis­turbing­ly, a num­ber of OUN-UPA apol­o­gists cur­rent­ly hold impor­tant gov­ern­ment posi­tions in Kiev, and Poroshenko has done noth­ing to con­front the rad­i­cal right. In fact, the Pres­i­dent has gone out of his way to fol­low in the foot­steps of his reac­tionary pre­de­ces­sor Yushchenko by once again lay­ing a wreath in hon­or of the OUN at Babi Yar. In addi­tion, Poroshenko has labeled the UPA as “defend­ers of the father­land” and estab­lished an offi­cial hol­i­day in hon­or of the par­ti­sans.

Need­less to say, Putin and Russ­ian media have made a lot of hay out of Kiev’s back­ward pol­i­tics and the emer­gence of so-called fas­cist hard­lin­ers. But while the new laws have raised a pre­dictable response from Rus­sia, the leg­is­la­tion has also report­ed­ly led to hack­les in Poland. Szczepan Siekier­ka, a leader of a civic orga­ni­za­tion ded­i­cat­ed to the mem­o­ry of Poles killed by Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists, is par­tic­u­lar­ly con­cerned. Speak­ing with the Chris­t­ian Sci­ence Mon­i­tor, Siekier­ka remarked “it’s hard to see rec­on­cil­i­a­tion and for­give­ness when the Ukraini­ans treat the UPA crim­i­nals and Ban­dera like nation­al heroes. Accept­ing one extrem­ism now will lead to the accep­tance of oth­er extrem­isms in future.”

Kiev Draws Inter­na­tion­al Fire

Pre­dictably, Kiev’s new leg­is­la­tion has drawn inter­na­tion­al fire from a vari­ety of quar­ters. The U.S. Holo­caust Memo­r­i­al Muse­um has protest­ed the new leg­is­la­tion, not­ing “as Ukraine advances on the dif­fi­cult road to full democ­ra­cy, we strong­ly urge the nation’s gov­ern­ment to refrain from any mea­sure that pre­empts or cen­sors dis­cus­sion or politi­cizes the study of his­to­ry.” The Orga­ni­za­tion for Secu­ri­ty and Coop­er­a­tion in Europe (OSCE) has echoed such sen­ti­ments, not­ing that “broad­ly and vague­ly defined lan­guage that restricts indi­vid­u­als from express­ing views on past events and peo­ple, could eas­i­ly lead to sup­pres­sion of polit­i­cal, provoca­tive and crit­i­cal speech, espe­cial­ly in the media.”

Per­haps, the new leg­is­la­tion could even harm Ukraine’s bid to join the Euro­pean Union. Dolin­sky writes “mod­ern Ukraini­ans need to real­ize and com­pre­hend this dif­fi­cult and trag­ic his­to­ry in order to become a tru­ly Euro­pean nation. Such laws as that recent­ly signed by Pres­i­dent Poroshenko can only harm the Ukrain­ian peo­ple.” For their part, some schol­ars have expressed grave dis­may over devel­op­ments in Kiev. Recent­ly, a group of forty his­to­ri­ans from west­ern uni­ver­si­ties even signed an open let­ter of protest.

Still oth­ers wor­ry about the chill­ing effect upon schol­ar­ship. Writ­ing in the His­to­ry News Net­work, aca­d­e­m­ic experts declare that “the dan­ger is that a pro­hi­bi­tion on ‘insult­ing’ the ‘fight­ers’ or ques­tion­ing the legit­i­ma­cy of their ‘strug­gle’ is tan­ta­mount to a ban on crit­i­cal research. The law does not spec­i­fy what con­sti­tutes ‘insult­ing’, rais­ing the ques­tion as to what schol­ars of mod­ern Ukrain­ian his­to­ry are allowed to write and say, and what they are not.”

The Search For Ukrain­ian Iden­ti­ty

Con­tro­ver­sy swirling around the his­toric role of the OUN and UPA high­lights Ukrain­ian soul search­ing and the quest for a mod­ern nation­al iden­ti­ty. Though Ukraine has its right wing agi­ta­tors and even main­stream apol­o­gists, the coun­try has by and large prac­ticed tol­er­ance and inclu­sive­ness since gain­ing inde­pen­dence in 1991. Unfor­tu­nate­ly how­ev­er, back­ward leg­is­la­tion may serve to obscure such his­to­ry. Accord­ing to the Chris­t­ian Sci­ence Mon­i­tor, recent polit­i­cal con­tro­ver­sy demon­strates that “the debate over Ukrain­ian fas­cist his­to­ry isn’t sim­ply a he-said-she-said between Moscow and Kiev, but a deep­er prob­lem of how to square Ukraine’s some­times sor­did past with its efforts to find a mod­ern iden­ti­ty.”

While the recent World War II flak pos­es thorny ques­tions for many in Ukraine prop­er, the imbroglio may prompt some soul search­ing with­in the wider for­eign Dias­po­ra, too. In the wider met­ro­pol­i­tan New York area, the Ukrain­ian com­mu­ni­ty num­bers more than 100,000 peo­ple. In Man­hat­tan’s East Vil­lage, some­times known as “Lit­tle Ukraine,” locals expressed oppo­si­tion to Russ­ian influ­ence while hold­ing fundrais­ers in sup­port of Maid­an protest. Though the East Vil­lage has become gen­tri­fied in recent years, the neigh­bor­hood still sports land­marks such as the Asso­ci­a­tion of Ukrain­ian-Amer­i­cans; the Ukrain­ian Nation­al Home; the Vesel­ka restau­rant; a Ukrain­ian Church, and the local Ukrain­ian Muse­um.

In the wake of Maid­an protests in Kiev, Ukrain­ian-Amer­i­cans took to the Brook­lyn Bridge in sup­port of demon­stra­tions back home and even sang the nation­al anthem on the sub­way. Indeed, Euro­Maid­an encour­aged the growth of civic pride and patri­o­tism, with many bran­dish­ing Ukrain­ian flags and embrac­ing native folk­lore, crafts, music and food. The Krem­lin’s sub­se­quent annex­a­tion of Crimea unit­ed Ukrain­ian-Amer­i­cans like nev­er before in oppo­si­tion to Russ­ian aggres­sion. Along Sec­ond Avenue in the East Vil­lage, local res­i­dents set up an improved shrine hon­or­ing the Euro­Maid­an move­ment with signs attack­ing Wash­ing­ton for not stand­ing shoul­der to shoul­der with Kiev.

Tack­ling Dif­fi­cult Ques­tions

Unit­ing the Ukrain­ian-Amer­i­can com­mu­ni­ty against exter­nal threats is one thing, but look­ing inward and try­ing to define the new soul of a nation is quite anoth­er. Per­haps, as Kiev’s polit­i­cal class increas­ing­ly moves to cod­dle extrem­ist con­stituen­cies, the for­eign Ukrain­ian com­mu­ni­ty will under­take seri­ous reflec­tion. Hope­ful­ly, the wider Dias­po­ra will not only con­demn right wing pol­i­tics and leg­is­la­tion but also build upon and expand mod­ern con­cepts of Ukrain­ian iden­ti­ty. Rather than appease World War II apol­o­gists, Ukraine should rec­og­nize the his­toric role of Jews in the coun­try. Today, many are sore­ly under-informed about such con­tri­bu­tions and may not even be aware of such lit­er­ary giants as Shalom Ale­ichem, for exam­ple.

In New York mean­while, the expat com­mu­ni­ty seems to fol­low famil­iar scripts. At the Ukrain­ian Muse­um, which sup­port­ed the Euro­Maid­an move­ment by dis­play­ing patri­ot­ic posters in win­dows, cura­tors have by and large played it safe by push­ing rather nar­row def­i­n­i­tions of Ukrain­ian iden­ti­ty. Rather than tack­le the tan­gled his­to­ry of Ukrain­ian-Jew­ish rela­tions, for exam­ple, the muse­um tends to con­cen­trate on folk art and themes such as his­toric Ukrain­ian resis­tance to Russ­ian expan­sion­ism. At the height of the Euro­Maid­an move­ment, one exhib­it dis­played — appar­ent­ly with­out irony — a pho­to of a col­or­ful “Cos­sack” pro­test­er on the Maid­an [need­less to say, many Jews of Ukrain­ian ances­try may have fear­ful asso­ci­a­tions of such Cos­sack his­to­ry]. On their way out, patrons may pur­chase kitschy folk­loric items in the muse­um gift shop.

Just a few blocks south of the East Vil­lage lies the Low­er East Side, a neigh­bor­hood which absorbed waves of Jew­ish immi­grants in the late nine­teenth and ear­ly twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry. Many of the immi­grants hailed from Czarist Rus­sia, pri­or to mod­ern Ukrain­ian inde­pen­dence. Lat­er, many of the Jew­ish arrivals moved out of the Low­er East Side and assim­i­lat­ed into the wider cul­ture. Arguably, how­ev­er, many of the immi­grants’ descen­dants could be con­sid­ered just as Ukrain­ian as more recent arrivals in the East Vil­lage. To be sure, mem­o­ry or asso­ci­a­tions of Ukraine may seem quite dis­tant and abstract to the great grand­chil­dren of Low­er East Side migrants. On the oth­er hand, it is not unheard of for Amer­i­cans of Ital­ian or Irish descent, for exam­ple, to express sym­pa­thet­ic eth­nic ties to the moth­er coun­try. Maybe it is time for Ukraine to take a hard look in the mir­ror and ask itself why Jew­ish descen­dants are not clam­or­ing for the same.

2. About the par­tic­i­pa­tion of the OUN/B in the mas­sacres at Babi Yar.

“The Nazis Even Hitler Was Afraid Of” by George Elia­son; OpE­d­News; 3/16/2014.

. . . . Dur­ing WW2, Babi Yar was the sin­gle most hor­rif­ic act of holo­caust at the time. Even today, the Ban­derite response to Babi Yar is “I am proud of the fact that among 1,500 Polizei exe­cu­tion­ers in Babiy Yar there were 1,200 OUN men but only 300 Ger­mans.” This quote is from a Rivne city offi­cial named Shku­ratiuk, and appears in the book Orga­nized Anti-Semi­tism in Con­tem­po­rary Ukraine: Struc­ture, Influ­ence and Ide­ol­o­gy by Pers Anders Rudling.

The atroc­i­ties at Babi Yar, and the accom­pa­ny­ing bru­tal­i­ty, were left to SS Nachti­gall and the polizei. Both were Ban­derite. The rea­son was sim­ple. The bru­tal work of geno­cide at this lev­el made even hard­ened Ger­man SS uncom­fort­able. This fact is even obscured in the Holo­caust Ency­clo­pe­dia at the Unit­ed States Holo­caust Muse­um.

Dur­ing the peri­od Sep­tem­ber 29–30, 1941, the first mas­sacre at Babi Yar killed over 30,000 Jews. Over the next few years the geno­cide piled up. Vic­tims from the Roma (Gyp­sies) alone num­bered almost 200,000. Ban­derite apol­o­gists have offered a range of ratio­nal­iza­tions, from “Ukraini­ans suf­fered too” to the sur­re­al “Ban­der­a’s men stepped back and the Jews did it them­selves.” No kid­ding. Babi Yar was racial sui­cide. . . .

3a. About the his­to­ry of anti-Semi­tism in the OUN/B and its out­crop­pings dur­ing World War II.

“The Hon­or They So Clear­ly Deserve” by Per Anders Rudling; Jour­nal of Slav­ic Mil­i­tary Stud­ies; 26:114–137, 2013; Copy­right © Tay­lor & Fran­cis Group, LLC ISSN: 1351–8046 print/1556-–137.

. . . . In May 1941, the OUN(b) had issued a blue­print for the nation­al­ist upris­ing that was to accom­pa­ny the Ger­man inva­sion. The out­break of vio­lence would ‘per­mit the liq­ui­da­tion of unde­sir­able Pol­ish, Mus­covite, and Jew­ish activists’34 and to ‘shoot the Mus­covites, Jews, and NKVD men.’35 The vio­lence was inter­con­nect­ed as the OUN(b) used the NKVD mass mur­ders as a pre­text for pogroms across West­ern Ukraine, hold­ing Jews col­lec­tive­ly respon­si­ble for Sovi­et atrocities.36 OUN(b) fliers pro­claimed ‘Know this! Moscow, Mag­yars, Jews —these are all your ene­mies. Exter­mi­nate them.’37 Cur­rent research show that there were over 140 pogroms in 58 cities in West­ern Ukraine fol­low­ing the Ger­man inva­sion, in which between 17,000 and 35,000 Jews were killed.38 OUN(b) pro­pa­gan­da pre­sent­ed Bol­she­vism being a tool of Jew­ry. This stereo­type was not only embraced by the OUN. Dur­ing the recruit­ment of the Waf­fen-SS Gal­izien, Volodymyr Kubi­jovyc, one of the ini­tia­tors of the ˇ Waf­fen-SS Gal­izien pub­li­cal­ly called upon its vol­un­teers to help ‘exter­mi­nate the Jew­ish-Bol­she­vik pesti­lence.’ . . . .

3b. Illus­trat­ing the his­tor­i­cal fact now being denied and re-writ­ten by the cur­rent Ukrain­ian gov­ern­ment, the pro­gram repris­es a sec­tion of AFA #14. Note that the ABN/OUN/B milieu was part of the Rea­gan admin­is­tra­tion and the GOP, and was active in the U.S. in work­ing to deny war crimes by the OUN and UPA.

The exter­mi­na­tion of the Jew­ish ghet­to in Lvov by the Ein­satz­gruppe Nachti­gall (Nachti­gall Bat­tal­ion) is his­tor­i­cal fact, not “Russ­ian pro­pa­gan­da.” The orga­ni­za­tion’s polit­i­cal offi­cer was SS offi­cer Theodor Ober­lan­der, lat­er the (West) Ger­man min­is­ter for expellees, forced to resign when his role in the mas­sacre was revealed. Ober­lan­der (also spelled “Ober­laen­der” in some sources) is dis­cussed on pp. 191–192 of T.H. Tetens’ The New Ger­many and the Old Nazis. Note that Lvov was also known as Lem­berg (the Pol­ish name of a city that was part of var­i­ous coun­tries at var­i­ous times, includ­ing Ukraine, Poland and the for­mer Sovi­et Union.) “Nachti­gall” trans­lates into Eng­lish as “Nightin­gale,” the name for the unit com­mand­ed by Ober­lan­der, as dis­cussed in the Tetens text.

4a. The largest uni­ver­si­ty in Ukraine is con­trolled by the MAUP orga­ni­za­tion, an insti­tu­tion­al dis­sem­i­na­tor of anti-Semit­ic doc­trine. David Duke teach­es at the insti­tu­tion. For­mer pres­i­dent Yuschenko is on the advi­so­ry board, as was Leonid Kravchuk, anoth­er pres­i­dent of Ukraine.

Orga­nized Anti-Semi­tism in Con­tem­po­rary Ukraine: Struc­ture, Influ­ence and Ide­ol­o­gy” by Pers Anders Rudling; Cana­di­an Slavon­ic Papers; Vol. 48, No. 1/2 (March-June 2006): pp. 81–118.

ABSTRACT: In the wake of the Orange Rev­o­lu­tion, Ukraine has wit­nessed a sub­stan­tial growth in orga­nized anti-Semi­tism. Cen­tral to this devel­op­ment is an orga­ni­za­tion, known as the Inter­re­gion­al Acad­e­my of Human Resources, bet­ter known by its Ukrain­ian acronym MAUP. It oper­ates a well-con­nect­ed polit­i­cal net­work that reach­es the very top of the Ukrain­ian soci­ety. MAUP is the largest pri­vate uni­ver­si­ty in Ukraine, with 57,000 stu­dents at 24 region­al cam­pus­es. MAUP is con­nect­ed to the KKK; David Duke is teach­ing cours­es in his­to­ry and inter­na­tion­al rela­tions at the uni­ver­si­ty. Fund­ed by Sau­di Ara­bia, Libya and Iran, MAUP’s print­ing house pub­lish­es about 85% of the anti-Semit­ic lit­er­a­ture in Ukraine. Until very recent­ly, Ukrain­ian Pres­i­dent Yushchenko and For­eign Min­is­ter Tara­siuk served on its board; for­mer Pres­i­dent Kravchuk still does. This paper is a study of anti-Semi­tism in Ukraine, of its intel­lec­tu­al roots, influ­ence and strength. It traces the Sovi­et, Chris­t­ian, Ger­man and racist polit­i­cal tra­di­tions and out­lines the polit­i­cal ambi­tions of orga­nized anti-Semi­tism in post-Orange Rev­o­lu­tion Ukraine.

4b. In addi­tion to David Duke, Joran Jer­mas, aka “Israel Shamir,” is part of the MAUP con­stel­la­tion. Jermas/Shamir is a top aide to Julian Assange and, along with his son Johannes Wahlstrom (a bird of the same polit­i­cal feath­er) is in charge of Wik­iLeaks’ oper­a­tions for the Scan­di­na­vian coun­tries, Rus­sia and Belarus.

It was Joran Jer­mas who offered Julian Assange the oppor­tu­ni­ty to host Wik­iLeaks on the Pirate Bay web­site, fund­ed by Swedish fas­cist Carl Lund­strom.

“Anti-Semi­tism Inter­na­tion­al: Ukraine Uni­ver­si­ty of Hate;” adl.org; 11/3/2006.  

MAUP: A Uni­ver­si­ty of Hate

  • MAUP is the main source of anti-Semit­ic agi­ta­tion and pro­pa­gan­da in Ukraine. It orga­nizes anti-Semit­ic meet­ings and con­fer­ences, reg­u­lar­ly issues anti-Semit­ic state­ments and pub­lish­es two wide­ly-dis­trib­uted peri­od­i­cals, Per­son­nel and Per­son­nel Plus, which fre­quent­ly con­tain anti-Semit­ic arti­cles.
  • At the same time, MAUP is a bona fide uni­ver­si­ty (its Eng­lish name is the Inter­re­gion­al Acad­e­my for Per­son­nel Man­age­ment), with more than 50,000 stu­dents enrolled at cam­pus­es in var­i­ous loca­tions. Busi­ness, polit­i­cal sci­ence and agri­cul­ture are among the sub­jects taught.
  • The anti-Semit­ic activ­i­ties are direct­ed by MAUP’s Pres­i­dent, Geor­gy Tschokin, and a num­ber of his col­leagues. Tschokin is also the leader of the far-right Ukrain­ian Con­ser­v­a­tive Par­ty.
  • MAUP has revived the noto­ri­ous blood libel. In March 2006, MAUP lead­ers led by Tschokin paid their respects at the grave of Andrei Yuschin­sky, a Chris­t­ian boy whose death in 1911 led to the false con­vic­tion of Mendel Beilis, a Jew, who was even­tu­al­ly acquit­ted. The charges were based upon the noto­ri­ous accu­sa­tion of Jew­ish rit­u­al mur­der.
    A MAUP pub­li­ca­tion alleged that Yuschin­sky was “mur­dered by Jews with rit­u­al pur­pose”. Tschokin is also cam­paign­ing for the Ortho­dox Church to canon­ise Yuschin­sky.
  • White suprema­cist David Duke has close links with MAUP: he “teach­es” a course on his­to­ry and inter­na­tion­al rela­tions, has been award­ed a doc­tor­ate for a the­sis on Zion­ism and was a key par­tic­i­pant in MAUP’s June 2005 con­fer­ence on “Zion­ism: Threat to World Peace”.  In Octo­ber 2006, Duke addressed a MAUP audi­ence on the sub­ject of “Zion­ist” influ­ence in the US media and signed copies of his book, “The Jew­ish Ques­tion Through the Eyes of an Amer­i­can.” Duke opened his speech by declar­ing: “The pow­ers of glob­al­ism and Zion­ism are reach­ing out and they are try­ing to con­trol the lives, the val­ues, the cul­ture and the for­eign pol­i­cy of every nation on earth”.
  • MAUP runs a num­ber of kiosks in Kiev which spe­cial­ize in anti-Semit­ic lit­er­a­ture, includ­ing one locat­ed across the street from the “Hil­lel” club for Jew­ish stu­dents. Titles on sale include: “The Zion­ist pro­to­cols: sources and results”,  “Jew­ish syn­drome” “Jews and eco­nom­ic life” and a book describ­ing the infa­mous 1941 mas­sacre of Jews at Babi Yar as “the third influ­en­tial leg­end of the zhi­dovskoy cat­a­stro­phe”.
  • On Novem­ber 22, 2005, Tschokin issued a state­ment of sol­i­dar­i­ty with Iran­ian Pres­i­dent Ahmadine­jad’s threat to wipe out Israel. The state­ment blend­ed tra­di­tion­al Chris­t­ian anti-Semi­tism with anti-Zion­ism: “We’d like to remind that the Liv­ing God Jesus Christ said to Jews two thou­sand years ago: ‘Your father is a devil!’…Israel, as known, means ‘The­olo­gian’, and Zion­ism in 1975 was acknowl­edged by Gen­er­al Assem­bly of UNO as the form of racism and race dis­crim­i­na­tion, that, in the opin­ion of the absolute major­i­ty of mod­ern Euro­peans, makes the most threat to mod­ern civ­i­liza­tion. Israel is the arti­fi­cial­ly cre­at­ed state (clas­sic total­i­tar­i­an type) which appeared on the polit­i­cal Earth map only in 1948, thanks to good will of UNO…Their end is known, and only the God’s true will res­cue all of us. We are not afraid, as God always togeth­er with his chil­dren!”
  • MAUP con­tin­ues to boast of its ties with Iran. In March 2006, Tschokin received the Iran­ian Ambas­sador, Saed Ahmed Musavi Male­ki, and nego­ti­at­ed a stu­dent exchange scheme between MAUP and Iran­ian uni­ver­si­ties. Accord­ing to the MAUP web­site, the two men also dis­cussed the build­ing of a Ukrain­ian cul­tur­al cen­ter in Iran. MAUP rep­re­sen­ta­tives par­tic­i­pat­ed in an April 2006 con­fer­ence held in Tehran under gov­ern­ment spon­sor­ship, enti­tled “Al Quds and the Pro­tec­tion of the Rights of the Pales­tini­ans”. There are wide­spread alle­ga­tions that MAUP receives fund­ing from the Iran­ian regime.
  • MAUP con­tin­ues to main­tain close ties with indi­vid­u­als in the Ukrain­ian polit­i­cal estab­lish­ment. Of spe­cial con­cern is the rela­tion­ship between MAUP and Lev­ko Lukya­nenko, a for­mer dis­si­dent and for­mer Ukran­ian Ambas­sador to Cana­da, who is a promi­nent mem­ber of the polit­i­cal bloc led by for­mer Prime Min­is­ter Yulia Tymoshenko. Lukya­nenko has blamed the ter­ri­ble Ukrain­ian famine of the 1930s on a “Satan­ic” gov­ern­ment con­trolled by Jews and has false­ly claimed, in attack­ing the for­mer Sovi­et regime, that both Lenin and Stal­in were Jew­ish.
  • MAUP’s June 2005 anti-Zion­ist con­fer­ence was attend­ed by anti-Semi­tes from all over the region, as well as Duke, French Holo­caust denier Serge Thion and Israel Shamir, a Russ­ian Jew who con­vert­ed to Chris­tian­i­ty and is noto­ri­ous for pub­lish­ing anti-Semit­ic essays on the inter­net. The Pales­tin­ian Author­i­ty rep­re­sen­ta­tive in Ukraine, Walid Zakut, was also report­ed to have attend­ed.
  • MAUP’s anti-Semit­ic activ­i­ties can be traced back to at least 2002. MAUP’s lead­ing fig­ures have been at the root of attempts to bar Jew­ish orga­ni­za­tions in Ukraine and, more recent­ly, a call to ban “The Tanya”, a clas­sic work of Has­sidic Jew­ish lit­er­a­ture, on the grounds that it pro­motes racism against non-Jews.

5. Illus­trat­ing the direct line of suc­ces­sion from the World War II peri­od to the present in Ukraine, the laws ban­ning crit­i­cism of the OUN or its UPA mil­i­tary wing (involved with the Lvov [Lem­berg] mas­sacre) were drawn up by Yuri Shukhevych, the son of Roman Shukhevych, the head of the UPA!

The Tele­graph has a report on Ukraine’s ‘his­tory laws’ that make it ille­gal to crit­i­cize Ukraine’s fas­cist Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors. The arti­cle con­tains much of the expect­ed “some peo­ple say these groups were involved with [insert his­toric crime here], but oth­ers disagree”-back and forth when a top­ic like this gets report­ed on. But it also con­tains this lit­tle fun-fact: The MP in the Rad­i­cal Par­ty that wrote the “free­dom fight­ers” law, Yury Shukhevych, is the son of Roman Shukhevych, the for­mer head of the UPA:
“Ukraine’s ‘His­tory Laws’ Purge it of Com­mu­nist Sym­bols but Divide the Pop­u­la­tion” by Tom Parfitt; The Tele­graph; 6/30/2015.

 Lion­is­ing nation­al­ists and remov­ing Sovi­et mon­u­ments helps pro­tect Ukraine from Russ­ian aggres­sion, sup­port­ers say — but oth­ers see praise for Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors and an assault on the past

 Almost blind and 82 years old, Yury Shukhevych leans heav­ily on a stick topped with an orna­men­tal axe-head. “It’s a Hut­sul axe from the Carpathi­ans,” he says, with an imp­ish smile. “You could cleave a head in two with this.”

His stooped body and eyes squeezed almost shut do not sug­gest much of a war­rior, but Mr Shukheyvch has pedi­gree. His father, Roman, was the head of the Ukrain­ian Insur­gent Army (UPA), a nation­al­ist group that fought both the Ger­mans and the Sovi­ets dur­ing the Sec­ond World War, col­lab­o­rat­ing for a time with the Nazis.

For some in Ukraine, mem­bers of the UPA were hero­ic free­dom fight­ers who resist­ed all intrud­ers in an attempt to pre­serve a nation­al home­land. But for oth­ers in this deeply divid­ed coun­try of 45 mil­lion peo­ple, they were trai­tor­ous fas­cists, bent on mass mur­der and eth­nic cleans­ing.

Now the argu­ment is being stirred anew after Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine’s pres­i­dent, approved a series of con­tro­ver­sial new “his­tory laws” last month. Under one law, Ukraine is to be purged of com­mu­nist sym­bols, includ­ing hun­dreds of stat­ues of Vladimir Lenin. Under anoth­er, UPA vet­er­ans – and oth­er 20th cen­tury “fight­ers for Ukrain­ian inde­pen­dence” – acquire a spe­cial sta­tus, mak­ing it ille­gal to express “pub­lic con­tempt” towards them or deny the legit­i­macy of their strug­gle.

The con­tentious laws feed into a wider bat­tle for iden­tity and sur­vival as gov­ern­ment troops fight pro-Russ­ian sep­a­ratists in the east­ern Don­bas region, where a cease­fire is dis­in­te­grat­ing.

‘Let the Rus­sians not tell us who are our heroes’

Mr Shukhevych, an MP with the nation­al­ist Rad­i­cal Par­ty since Octo­ber, draft­ed the law on free­dom fight­ers. He says his father and com­rades resist­ed Moscow’s dom­i­nance and as a result were sub­jected to a Sovi­et – and now Russ­ian — smear cam­paign.

“Let the Rus­sians not tell us who are our heroes,” he says. Fight­ing togeth­er with the Ger­mans against Sovi­et forces dur­ing the war was a tem­po­rary and prag­matic move for Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists, Mr Shukhevych adds, and they did not sym­pa­thise with Nazi ideas. . . .

“This is all Russ­ian pro­pa­ganda,” he says. . . .

6. Right Sec­tor just had a march in Kiev with all of their usu­al fan­fare includ­ing the white suprema­cy sym­bols. The mes­sage of the marchers? Drop the Min­sk cease-fire and wage full-scale war in the East.

“Ukraine Cri­sis: Ral­ly in Kiev Urges War on East­ern Rebels”; BBC News 7/04/2015.

About 1,000 Ukrain­ian pro-gov­ern­ment fight­ers and far-right sup­port­ers have marched through the cen­tre of the cap­i­tal, Kiev.

Many burned tyres and wore bal­a­clavas; some car­ried white suprema­cist flags.

They called on the gov­ern­ment to end the Min­sk cease­fire accord and declare war on pro-Russ­ian rebels in the east.

The demon­stra­tors say the Russ­ian gov­ern­ment is bring­ing troops and equip­ment into Ukraine, a claim that Rus­sia has always denied.

Many in the ral­ly were from vol­un­teer bat­tal­ions and were dressed in their bat­tle fatigues.

They said they had returned from fight­ing Russ­ian forces and demand­ed an end to all diplo­matic rela­tions with Rus­sia.

The ultra-nation­al­ist Right Sec­tor group called the march. Pro­test­ers also demand­ed the nation­al­i­sa­tion of Russ­ian-owned busi­ness­es.

More than 6,400 peo­ple have been killed in fight­ing in east­ern Ukraine that began in April 2014 when rebels seized large parts of the two east­ern regions. This fol­lowed Russia’s annex­a­tion of the Crimea penin­su­la.

The BBC’s David Stern in Kiev says Friday’s ral­ly was a show of strength in the heart of Ukrain­ian offi­cial­dom.

But above all, our cor­re­spon­dent says, the demon­stra­tors were call­ing for change. Both in the way that the con­flict is being fought in the east and in the way that the coun­try is being run.

Cen­tral to their demands is an end to the Min­sk cease­fire agree­ment signed in Feb­ru­arywhich they say is a cha­rade because of Russia’s activ­i­ties in Ukraine.

The Ukrain­ian gov­ern­ment, West­ern lead­ers and Nato all say there is clear evi­dence that Rus­sia is help­ing the rebels in the Donet­sk and Luhan­sk regions with heavy weapons and sol­diers. Inde­pen­dent experts echo that accu­sa­tion.

But Moscow denies it, insist­ing that any Rus­sians serv­ing with the rebels are vol­un­teers.

Clash­es between gov­ern­ment troops and rebels have recent­ly inten­si­fied.


7. So the folks that have repeat­edly threat­ened to ‘march on Kiev’ when the war is over just marched in Kiev demand­ing more war. How help­ful.

And in oth­er news, on the same day of march in Kiev, the sep­a­ratists in the East with­drew from some posi­tions and had their own sym­bolic march, of sorts: they marched out of strate­gic posi­tions and made renewed pleas for con­sti­tu­tional guar­an­tees for semi-autonomous sta­tus in the break­away regions as a path towards long-term peace:
’Death to the Ene­my’ as pro-Kiev Fight­ers March in Cap­i­tal”; i24 News; 7/04/2015.

About 2,000 pro-Kiev vol­un­teer fight­ers and far-right group mem­bers ral­lied in the Ukrain­ian cap­i­tal on Fri­day evening to demand the dec­la­ra­tion of all-out war against the east­ern gun­men.

Many in the ral­ly were from vol­un­teer fight­ing units wear­ing their fight­ing fatigues, bal­a­clavas and burn­ing tyres.

Call­ing on the Ukrain­ian gov­ern­ment to end the Min­sk cease­fire accords with Rus­sia, some chant­ed “Death to the Ene­my” and “Glo­ry to Ukraine”.

Ukraine rebels with­draw from key front­line vil­lage

Pro-Russ­ian fight­ers have with­drawn from a strate­gic front­line vil­lage, Ukraine’s mil­i­tary report­ed on Fri­day, although some troops doubt­ed whether the sur­prise retreat and lull in fight­ing would last.

Lying just 10 kilo­me­tres (six miles) east of the Sea of Azov indus­trial port of Mar­i­upol — the tar­get of repeat­ed rebel attacks — Shy­rokyne has been one of the dead­liest hotspots of the 15-month sep­a­ratist con­flict in the ex-Sovi­et state’s indus­trial east.

“The rebels with­drew to the east, leav­ing the set­tle­ment of Shy­rokyne com­pletely destroyed,” mil­i­tary spokesman Olek­sandr Motuzyanyk told reporters in Kiev.

But sep­a­ratists warned that “uni­lat­eral demil­i­tari­sa­tion” by their side may not be enough to estab­lish a last­ing peace.

“We are wait­ing for a sim­i­lar step (from Ukraine),” sep­a­ratist leader Denis Pushilin told Russia’s state-run RIA Novosti news agency.

A top offi­cial with the Orga­ni­za­tion for Secu­rity and Coop­er­a­tion in Europe (OSCE) said his Ukrain­ian mon­i­tor­ing teams had also not found any pro-Russ­ian fight­ers in the vil­lage, Inter­fax report­ed.

West­ern pow­ers, Rus­sia and the OSCE have repeat­edly urged the two sides to respect a Feb­ru­ary truce deal that demand­ed the imme­di­ate with­drawal of heavy weapons from the front.

But mutu­al mis­trust has prompt­ed dai­ly exchanges of fire and turned Shy­rokyne into an impor­tant stag­ing post for rebel attacks on Mar­i­upol — a port city the insur­gents had vowed to seize in Jan­u­ary before claim­ing to have changed their mind.


–Diplo­matic ten­sions -

The insur­gents’ retreat along the south­ern edge of the front comes in a week that has wit­nessed a marked de-esca­la­tion of fight­ing and drop in the num­ber of dai­ly report­ed deaths.

But diplo­matic ten­sions between Moscow and Kiev remain high, with Rus­sia on Fri­day accus­ing Ukrain­ian Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko of refus­ing to agree final peace terms with the sep­a­ratist com­mand.

The West­ern-backed Ukrain­ian leader irked both Moscow and the fight­ers by unveil­ing draft changes to the con­sti­tu­tion that gave sweep­ing pow­ers to the regions but crit­i­cally failed to address the rebels’ main demands.

His amend­ments, which Poroshenko on Fri­day asked par­lia­ment to approve with­in the next two weeks, refuse to add to the con­sti­tu­tion the semi-autonomous sta­tus demand­ed by mil­i­tants who now con­trol land rough­ly the size of Wales.

Rebel parts of the most­ly Russ­ian-speak­ing Lugan­sk and Donet­sk regions would like to see their right to par­tial self-rule spelt out in con­sti­tu­tional amend­ments that would be enor­mously dif­fi­cult to over­turn.

But Poroshenko’s draft only makes ref­er­ence to an exist­ing piece of leg­is­la­tion that gives insur­gency lead­ers par­tial right to admin­is­ter the areas for an inter­im peri­od once a set of pre­lim­i­nary con­di­tions are met.

The sep­a­ratists fear that the law could be revoked or sus­pended by Ukraine’s strong­ly pro-Euro­pean par­lia­ment.

For his part, Poroshenko is try­ing to avoid los­ing cred­i­bil­ity with more nation­al­ist Ukraini­ans who backed the pro-Euro­pean protests last year and remain a pow­er­ful voice in the cri­sis-torn country’s frac­tured polit­i­cal sys­tem.

8.  We con­clude with a look at the entrenched nature of Ukrain­ian fas­cism in the Unit­ed States, pri­or to World War II. Note the close rela­tion­ship between the Ukrain­ian fas­cist milieu in the U.S. with the Third Reich, as well as promi­nent Amer­i­cans, such as Hen­ry Ford.

The Hitler Lega­cy by Peter Lev­en­da; IBIS Press [HC]; Copy­right 2014 by Peter Lev­en­da; ISBN 978–0‑89254–210‑9; pp. 102–103.

. . . . Now Cough­lin real­ly opened up. He revealed to the aston­ished priest [Pelypenko] that he was a coor­di­nat­ing link with all sub­ver­sive groups in the coun­ty; that he was con­nect­ed to the whole of the White Russ­ian Nazi groups under [Nazi spy Count Anas­tase] Von­si­atsky, that he was in direct touch with Ukrain­ian ter­ror­ist groups in Detroit, and that he was linked to John Koos, the Nazi Ukrain­ian work­ing for Hen­ry Ford. (From Amer­i­can Swasti­ka by Charles High­am, p. 129.) John Koos was the leader in Amer­i­ca of the Ukrain­ian Het­man Orga­ni­za­tion (UHO). This was a Nazi group, based in Berlin, com­posed of eth­nic anti-Com­mu­nists and engaged in ter­ror­ist activ­i­ties against the Sovi­ets, as well as against pro-Com­mu­nist or anti-Nazi indi­vid­u­als and groups every­where else. Koos worked out of the Ford Motor Com­pa­ny fac­to­ries in Detroit where he arranged for the hir­ing of thou­sands of Ukraini­ans to work the plants and to form a fifth col­umn work­ing direct­ly for Hen­ry Ford. The posi­tion of Koos was so secure in the eyes of the Reich that Hitler him­self sent the mes­sage that Koos would be named Min­is­ter of Inter­nal Affairs in Ukraine once it had been lib­er­at­ed by the Nazis. Koos received a medal award­ed by Alfred Rosen­berg, the Nazi ide­ol­o­gist men­tioned above. . . .


7 comments for “FTR #853 Walkin’ the Snake at Babi Yar: Update on the Ukraine Crisis”

  1. Dear Dave,

    Noth­ing that tran­spired in the
    Rea­gan admin­is­tra­tion would sur­prise me.

    What do you have in your archives on the doc­u­men­tary, “Hell­storm”?

    Is it legit or more rigt-wing pro­duced pro­pa­gan­da? Some are pro­mot­ing it as a post­war Ger­man geno­cide.


    Posted by Marilyn Allen Frith | July 9, 2015, 4:51 pm
  2. @Marilyn Ellen Frith–

    I’m not famil­iar with the doc­u­men­tary. It appears to be pro­pa­gan­da.

    This is not to say that abus­es did not occur–hell, they always do in war.

    The Sovi­et forces were very rough indeed, under­stand­ably so. One can go on and on about 27 mil­lion dead–the toll exact­ed against the U.S.S.R.

    To gain some­thing of a “wor­m’s eye view” of what the Ger­mans did to the Sovi­ets, con­sid­er that one brigade (prob­a­bly around 7,000 men at that point in the war) belong­ing to the Leib­stan­darte Adolf Hitler (1st Waf­fen SS Divi­sion) com­mand­ed by gen­er­al Jochen Peiper earned the nick­name “The Blow­torch Brigade.”

    The nick­name was gen­er­at­ed by the fact that the brigade burned 200 Sovi­et vil­lages with the cit­i­zens locked in the build­ings.

    That was just ONE brigade. What the Ger­mans expe­ri­enced at the hands of the vic­to­ri­ous Allies (includ­ing the Sovi­ets) can­not be com­pared in any way.

    The advent of the doc­u­men­tary is part of the “Ser­pen­t’s Walk” strat­a­gem. In a cou­ple of hun­dred years, the Third Reich will be por­trayed as heroes, who tried to lib­er­ate the world from Jew­ish Bol­she­vik dom­i­na­tion.

    Just watch while it hap­pens!



    Posted by Dave Emory | July 9, 2015, 5:25 pm
  3. Won­der­ful info, dave...as always exopect­ed from a valid source.

    Won­der what your take on Dr. James Fet­zer is–He is clever about dis­guis­ing his anti­semitism behind “metic­u­lous research.”

    Thank you so much for tak­ing time and shar­ing with me. I am all in for telling truths, not lies.

    Best and bless.

    Posted by Marilyn Allen Frith | July 10, 2015, 5:36 am
  4. @Marilyn Allen Frith–

    Fet­zer is–in the ‚most lit­er­al sense of the term–bad news.

    Hypes the unten­able “con­trolled demo­li­tion of the World Trade Cen­ter” dis­in­fo and has flirt­ed with Holo­caust denial.



    Posted by Dave Emory | July 10, 2015, 5:48 pm
  5. Agree regard Fet­zer. Char­la­tans come in all shapes and sizes. Fet­zer is a real­l­l­l­ly big one. lol

    Posted by Marilyn Allen Frith | July 11, 2015, 6:51 am
  6. Ukraine just com­plet­ed anoth­er round of elec­tions and the results are, well, quite mixed. While Darth Vader’s elec­toral run could have gone bet­ter, his boss won and now Darth Sid­i­ous, a.k.a. Emper­or Pal­patin, is now is a city coun­cil mem­ber in Odessa. So that hap­pened.

    Also, Svo­bo­da surged, com­ing in first in a few regions and sec­ond in Lviv:

    Bloomberg View
    Why a ‘Star Wars’ Emper­or Won Office in Ukraine

    By Leonid Bershid­sky
    Oct 26, 2015 2:56 PM EDT

    Less than two years after Ukraine’s “rev­o­lu­tion of dig­ni­ty,” local elec­tions on Sun­day hand­ed pow­er in the south and east to for­mer sup­port­ers of the oust­ed pres­i­dent, Vik­tor Yanukovych,. The vote also cre­at­ed siz­able ultra­na­tion­al­ist fac­tions in a num­ber of local leg­is­la­tures, includ­ing in the cap­i­tal. The elec­tion proved vot­ers’ grow­ing mis­trust of the polit­i­cal class, which was only par­tial­ly reshaped by the rev­o­lu­tion, and revealed a dis­ap­point­ed nation that still is divid­ed along an east-west line.

    The vote was an impor­tant mile­stone for Ukraine. Pres­i­dent Petro Poroshenko has vowed to decen­tral­ize the coun­try by giv­ing cities and com­mu­ni­ties more polit­i­cal and bud­getary pow­ers. Ukraine is scrap­ping its sys­tem of region­al gov­er­nors appoint­ed from Kiev and giv­ing author­i­ty to local leg­is­la­tures, an attempt to shift from a Sovi­et-style super­central­ized state to a Euro­pean nation man­aged from the bot­tom up. It’s a good idea. But unless oli­garchs and cor­rupt local boss­es are kept out, the coun­try risks get­ting a ver­sion of medieval feu­dal dis­uni­ty instead of Euro­pean self-gov­ern­ment. The elec­tions made that risk pal­pa­ble.

    A year ago, the out­come of Ukraine’s first post-rev­o­lu­tion­ary par­lia­men­tary elec­tion was worth cel­e­brat­ing: The rem­nants of Yanukovy­ch’s Regions Par­ty were on the run. Its suc­ces­sor, the Oppo­si­tion Bloc, won a plu­ral­i­ty in some Russ­ian-speak­ing east­ern regions, but its over­all result was less than 10 per­cent, and it seemed to have only resid­ual influ­ence. The far-right par­ty Svo­bo­da failed to get into par­lia­ment, show­ing that Ukrain­ian vot­ers had spurned xeno­pho­bic, extreme nation­al­ism. The vic­to­ry of the par­ties of Prime Min­is­ter Arseniy Yat­senyuk and Poroshenko was evi­dence Ukraini­ans sup­port­ed their reformist, pro-Euro­pean ori­en­ta­tion.


    The vote count is still under­way, but it is clear that the Oppo­si­tion Bloc and oth­er Regions Par­ty splin­ters have done bet­ter than last year. That does­n’t mean more vot­ers are lean­ing toward Rus­sia: The Regions Par­ty was only pro-Russ­ian when it served the eco­nom­ic inter­ests of its lead­ers. But Ukraini­ans seem to have vot­ed for the same cor­rupt elites that have run their regions through­out the coun­try’s 25 years of inde­pen­dence, show­ing they have lit­tle con­fi­dence in the reformist rhetoric ema­nat­ing from the gov­ern­ment.

    This is espe­cial­ly vis­i­ble in Ukraine’s sec­ond, third and fourth cities by pop­u­la­tion and its most impor­tant remain­ing busi­ness and indus­tri­al cen­ters: Kharkiv, Odessa and Dnipropetro­vsk.

    In Kharkiv, a for­mer Yanukovych backer with a crim­i­nal past, won the may­oral elec­tion by a land­slide. In Dnipropetro­vsk, two politi­cians who don’t sup­port Poroshenko will com­pete in a runoff for the may­oral race. In Odessa, where for­mer Geor­gian Pres­i­dent Mikheil Saakashvili was appoint­ed as gov­er­nor to turn the region into a show­case of West­ern-style reforms, Saakashvil­i’s can­di­date was defeat­ed by a wide mar­gin.

    In the Ukrain­ian-speak­ing west, Svo­bo­da rad­i­cal­ly improved its per­for­mance, com­ing in first in a few regions and sec­ond in crit­i­cal­ly impor­tant Lviv, Ukraine’s cul­tur­al cap­i­tal. The ultra­na­tion­al­ist par­ty also won a sur­pris­ing 10 per­cent of the vote in Kiev. These results raise con­cerns there could be a nation­al­ist rebel­lion against Poroshenko if he’s seen as too soft on the sep­a­ratists in the east.

    The Poroshenko bloc has few suc­cess­es. In Kiev, its rep­re­sen­ta­tive, for­mer world box­ing cham­pi­on Vitaly Klichko, will prob­a­bly hold on to the may­oral­ty after a runoff vote, and the par­ty has a plu­ral­i­ty in the city and region­al coun­cils. A few oth­er cen­tral Ukrain­ian regions leaned its way, too. Nation­wide, the par­ty expects about 18 per­cent sup­port. It had hoped to get 25 per­cent, down from almost 22 per­cent in last year’s elec­tions.

    To retain a sem­blance of con­trol over the new­ly empow­ered regions, Poroshenko and his team will have to make deals with oli­garchs, local barons, nation­al­ist mil­i­tants and pop­ulists. This will com­pound the coun­try’s bare­ly man­age­able chaos. It also will make more dif­fi­cult an eco­nom­ic rebound or strict adher­ence to the eco­nom­ic pro­gram dic­tat­ed by the Inter­na­tion­al Mon­e­tary Fund as a con­di­tion of the coun­try’s finan­cial res­cue pack­age. Root­ing out cor­rup­tion now appears a remote prospect at best.

    Ukraine’s chaot­ic democ­ra­cy pre­vents the coun­try from turn­ing into a Russ­ian-style con­gealed, oppres­sive author­i­tar­i­an state. Yet cor­rup­tion remains the glue hold­ing togeth­er the polit­i­cal­ly, eco­nom­i­cal­ly and cul­tur­al­ly divid­ed coun­try. West­ern observers said Mon­day that the elec­tions “gen­er­al­ly showed respect for the demo­c­ra­t­ic process.” Nonethe­less, they point­ed out “the dom­i­nance of pow­er­ful eco­nom­ic groups over the elec­toral process” and “the fact that vir­tu­al­ly all cam­paign cov­er­age in the media was paid for.”

    No won­der Ukraini­ans weren’t par­tic­u­lar­ly enthu­si­as­tic about going to the polls. The 46.6 per­cent turnout may seem accept­able by the stan­dards of Euro­pean and U.S. local elec­tions, but, as com­men­ta­tor Leonid Shvetspoint­ed out, the indif­fer­ence of half the vot­ers in post-rev­o­lu­tion Ukraine sig­ni­fies “a total mis­trust of those who offer their polit­i­cal ser­vices.”

    Per­haps the best sym­bol of that mis­trust and the renewed sep­a­ra­tion between the state and the peo­ple is the elec­tion of Dmitri Pal­patin to the Odessa city coun­cil. If his last name seems famil­iar, it is because he offi­cial­ly adopt­ed the moniker of an evil emper­or in “Star Wars” (also know as Darth Sid­i­ous). The new­ly elect­ed city coun­cilor’s day job is Emper­or at Pal­patin Finance Group. And why not? To many vot­ers, the coun­try’s pol­i­tics seem as real as those of a fic­tion­al galaxy far, far away.

    “In the Ukrain­ian-speak­ing west, Svo­bo­da rad­i­cal­ly improved its per­for­mance, com­ing in first in a few regions and sec­ond in crit­i­cal­ly impor­tant Lviv, Ukraine’s cul­tur­al cap­i­tal. The ultra­na­tion­al­ist par­ty also won a sur­pris­ing 10 per­cent of the vote in Kiev. These results raise con­cerns there could be a nation­al­ist rebel­lion against Poroshenko if he’s seen as too soft on the sep­a­ratists in the east.”

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | October 28, 2015, 7:09 pm
  7. Israeli Pres­i­dent Reuven Rivlin gave a speech in Ukraine’s Rada dur­ing par­lia­men­tary hear­ings enti­tled, “The 75th anniver­sary of the Babyn Yar tragedy, his­to­ry lessons and mod­ern age” that includ­ed a spe­cif­ic men­tion of the role the OUN played in actu­al­ly car­ry­ing out that mas­sacre. As one might unfor­tu­nate­ly expect at this point, it did­n’t go over super well:


    Ukrain­ian politi­cians dis­pleased with Israeli pres­i­den­t’s speech at Verk­hov­na Rada

    14:51 28.09.2016

    Israeli Pres­i­dent Reuven Rivlin made a num­ber of incor­rect remarks on cer­tain Ukrain­ian his­tor­i­cal events in his speech at the Ukrain­ian Verk­hov­na Rada, Verk­hov­na Rada First Deputy Speak­er Iry­na Gerashchenko said.

    “While address­ing the Ukrain­ian par­lia­ment, the Israeli pres­i­dent took the lib­er­ty of mak­ing incor­rect and undiplo­mat­ic remarks on cer­tain pages of trag­ic Ukrain­ian his­to­ry, includ­ing the Orga­ni­za­tion of Ukrain­ian Nation­al­ists [OUN, banned in Rus­sia]. It is a shame that the Israeli pres­i­dent did not hear the pre­vi­ous speech­es of the Right­eous amongst the Nations, lead­ers of Ukraine’s Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ties, Ukrain­ian patri­ots, such as Aca­d­e­mi­cian Ivan Dzi­u­ba who was the first to call atten­tion to the sub­ject of Babyn Yar, all those who recalled the holy inno­cents and their res­cuers, many of whom were aver­age Ukraini­ans risk­ing their lives and the lives of their chil­dren to save Jew­ish fam­i­lies and Jew­ish chil­dren,” Gerashchenko said on Face­book on Wednes­day.


    In the opin­ion of the Verk­hov­na Rada first vice-speak­er, cer­tain remarks made by the Israeli pres­i­dent “were inap­pro­pri­ate to make on the days of mourn­ing in par­lia­ment of the coun­try fight­ing for its inde­pen­dence.”

    “We expect­ed the high-rak­ing guest vis­it­ing the Ukrain­ian par­lia­ment to sup­port the ter­ri­to­r­i­al integri­ty of Ukraine. It is a pity that cer­tain lead­ers of mod­ern states are still using clich­es of Sovi­et pro­pa­gan­da dat­ing back to the peri­od when the Babyn Yar tragedy was hushed up,” Gerashchenko said.

    Rivlin said on Sep­tem­ber 27 in Kyiv, dur­ing par­lia­men­tary hear­ings enti­tled, ‘The 75th anniver­sary of the Babyn Yar tragedy, his­to­ry lessons and mod­ern age’, that about 1.5 mil­lion Jews were killed in ter­ri­to­ry of Ukraine dur­ing WWII.

    “In Babyn Yar and oth­er places, they were exe­cut­ed in the woods, near ravines and moats, pushed into mass graves, many of the col­lab­o­ra­tors were Ukraini­ans, of par­tic­u­lar promi­nence among them were fight­ers from the OUN [Orga­ni­za­tion of Ukrain­ian Nation­al­ists, banned in Rus­sia],” he said.

    “Unfor­tu­nate­ly, the Israeli pres­i­dent repeat­ed the Sovi­et myth of OUN involve­ment in the Holo­caust in his speech in the Ukrain­ian par­lia­ment. Trib­ute to the mem­o­ry of Babyn Yar vic­tims would have been more sin­cere with­out ref­er­ences to the myths of those who were eras­ing mem­o­ry of them,” head of the Ukrain­ian Insti­tute of Nation­al Remem­brance Volodymyr Via­tro­vych said on Face­book.

    Accom­plices in those mur­ders worked for the local police, which was some­times called Ukrain­ian, but far from every­one was involved and far from all mur­der­ers were police­men, Via­tro­vych said.

    “Mass mur­ders of the Jews were ‘an area’ of the Ger­man Ein­satz­grup­pen and Ger­man police,” the insti­tute direc­tor said.

    He also said that the police employed not only Ukraini­ans but also Sovi­et POWs of var­i­ous nation­al­i­ties for whom ser­vice for the Ger­mans was the only way to escape death. “There were OUN mem­bers amongst Ukrain­ian employ­ees of the police. But far from all police­men belonged to the OUN, and far from all OUN mem­bers were the police,” Via­tro­vych said.

    In his words, some OUN police­men par­tic­i­pat­ed in killings of the Jews, but far from all OUN police­men did so.

    “In the opin­ion of the Verk­hov­na Rada first vice-speak­er, cer­tain remarks made by the Israeli pres­i­dent “were inap­pro­pri­ate to make on the days of mourn­ing in par­lia­ment of the coun­try fight­ing for its inde­pen­dence.””

    Yes, it was appar­ent­ly “inap­pro­pri­ate” for Israel’s pres­i­dent to give a speech men­tion­ing the role the OUN played in the Holo­caust dur­ing a par­lia­men­tary hear­ing on the 75th anniver­sary of one of the more notable Holo­caust mass slaugh­ters. Why inap­pro­pri­ate? because it’s not like “all” mem­bers of the OUN par­tic­i­pat­ed in the killing or “all” the mass mur­der­ers were mem­bers of the OUN. And there­fore any mem­o­ry of the OUN’s involve­ment in the Holo­caust is just a Sovi­et myth! So says the head of the Ukrain­ian Insti­tute of Nation­al Remem­brance com­plete­ly non-iron­i­cal­ly. Iron­i­cal­ly.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | September 28, 2016, 2:44 pm

Post a comment