A Statement by the Nationalist Alternative Committee

At this time of writing, with the potential of war in Ukraine, the Russian stock exchange has plunged over 10% – some reports say 13.5% – while the ruble has hit all-time lows against the US dollar. Clearly Putin’s antics have hit a nerve with finance capital – mainly because of the threat of massive EU and US sanctions on Russia. Any barriers to trade and investment with Russia, as well as simple financial transactions (e.g., shifting money in and out of Swiss bank accounts) would hit Putin’s pet oligarch class hard. Moreover, Western companies (European and American) are embedded in Russia, especially German companies – which is why Angela Merkel, the voice of Germany’s corporate capitalism, has been urging caution against Russia and endorsing diplomacy and ‘fact-finding missions’ (whatever they are) and why the UK foreign minister William Hague is terrified that EU sanctions against Russia will affect the UK’s bloated financial sector, the City of London. Russia is no longer the isolated country that it was in 1950 or 1990: it is part of the integrated global capitalist economy. When Russia hurts, bankers on Wall Street hurt; German auto-makers hurt.

Russia’s neighbours – who have significant Russian ethnic minorities who Putin may wish to “protect” from their governments – are worried. So too are Russians themselves who seem opposed to the annexation of Crimea. Simon Shuster, for Time, writes:

At home, this intervention looks to be one of the most unpopular decisions Putin has ever made. The Kremlin’s own pollster released a survey on Monday that showed 73% of Russians reject it. In phrasing its question posed in early February to 1,600 respondents across the country, the state-funded sociologists at WCIOM were clearly trying to get as much support for the intervention as possible: “Should Russia react to the overthrow of the legally elected authorities in Ukraine?” they asked. Only 15% said yes — hardly a national consensus.

That seems astounding in light of all the brainwashing Russians have faced on the issue of Ukraine. For weeks, the Kremlin’s effective monopoly on television news has been sounding the alarm over Ukraine. Its revolution, they claimed, is the result of an American alliance with Nazis intended to weaken Russia. And still, nearly three-quarters of the population oppose a Russian “reaction” of any kind, let alone a Russian military occupation like they are now watching unfold in Crimea. The 2008 invasion of Georgia had much broader support, because Georgia is not Ukraine. Ukraine is a nation of Slavs with deep cultural and historical ties to Russia. Most Russians have at least some family or friends living in Ukraine, and the idea of a fratricidal war between the two largest Slavic nations in the world evokes a kind of horror that no Kremlin whitewash can calm.

Indeed, Monday’s survey suggests that the influence of Putin’s television channels is breaking down. The blatant misinformation and demagoguery on Russian television coverage of Ukraine seems to have pushed Russians to go online for their information. And as for those who still have no Internet connection, they could simply have picked up the phone and called their panicked friends and relatives in Ukraine. (Simon Shuster, ‘4 Reasons Putin Is Already Losing in Ukraine’, Time, 04/03/2014).

Merkel opined, in a phone conversation with Obama, that Putin seemed to have lost touch with reality. Perhaps Putin’s actions are those of a madmen. Putin is portrayed in the media as a strategic grandmaster, a geopolitical genius who really knows how to outmanoeuvre his opponents and put the fey, effeminate Obama in his place. But the annexation of Crimea (and subsequent annexations of eastern Ukraine) could be the biggest Russian miscalculation since June 1940. Then, straight after Germany’s victory in France, Russia marched in and grabbed northern Romania after a Putin-style ultimatum – alienating Romania and pushing it into Germany’s arms (previously Romania had been diplomatically aligned with France) and convincing Hitler that the USSR intended to invade Germany and Romania (then the source of 40% of Germany’s oil) in the near future. (Hitler spluttered, on being told the news of the Soviet annexation, that ‘This is an invasion of Europe’). Germany began planning for a second invasion of Russia – the first being in WWI. (Germany managed to defeat Russia in WWI and occupy huge swathes of Russian territory, grabbing as much land as they did in WWII – contrary to the myth that says that invasions and occupations of Russia are military suicide). The rest is history. The point is, reckless adventurism does have consequences. Tikhon Dzyadko writes:

A Russian invasion of Ukraine—if it ends up happening—will mean catastrophe, most of all for Russia. Paradoxically, it will only help Ukraine: Questions about the legitimacy of the new government in Kiev will fall away; the IMF and the West will be tripping over themselves to help Ukraine financially; this, in turn, will prop up the government in Kiev, which is currently broke; and, finally, the Ukrainian people will be united in their fight against an occupier—and isn’t this exactly the kind of unity you need after a revolution? Russia, on the other hand, will be left with international isolation and yet another neighboring territory recognized by no one. In 2008, it was Abkhazia and South Ossetia; now, it is the Crimea. But in acquiring the Crimea, Russia will lose Ukraine, its biggest partner for transporting gas to Europe.

It seems that the invasion of Ukraine is being done merely to remind the world about Russia and that it is a powerful regional player. But this is a game without an endgame. If Russian troops annex the Crimea or march further into eastern Ukraine, what will Russia do with this bounty? I doubt anyone in the Kremlin knows.

(Tikhon Dzyadko, ‘Put Doesn’t Know What He Wants in Ukraine’, New Republic, 03/03/2014).

Indeed, one is struck by unfeasibility of the whole thing: Ukraine could cut off all of Crimea’s water and electricity at the touch of a button – could Russia meet the needs of the Crimean populace by supplying water and electricity through the narrow Kerch Straits (which connect Crimea to Russia)? Probably not. As to holding onto the Crimea – any smart Ukrainian leader would take the guerrilla or partisan route against the Russian occupiers (partisan warfare is already being discussed among Ukraine’s political and military leadership). It would be easy enough to infiltrate Ukrainian soldiers, in plain clothes and with light arms and explosives, into the Crimea to carry out guerrilla war against the Russians; the Muslim Tartars – who constitute 12% of the Crimean population – could be armed and trained for guerrilla warfare as well. For a conventional war, though, the Ukrainian army would need the assistance of the Poles and the Germans (Poles and Germans fighting Russians in the Ukraine? Some things never change).

Russian Soldier at the Ukranian border

Russian Soldier at the Ukrainian border

The reactions of the Far Left and the Far Right to the toppling of Yanukovich and the annexation of Crimea have been revelatory. First we must take a look at the Left. The Ukrainian Communist Party, which is pro-Yanukovich and pro-Putin, is not a real communist party – it is (what I call) a nostalgic communist party (much like Otto Remer’s Socialist Reich Party in West Germany, which was a nostalgic-National Socialist party); nevertheless, its word carries weight with the Left. The Ukrainian communists condemned the ouster of Yanukovich as a coup by Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, fascists, etc., and called on communist parties around the world to do the same. The mainline communist parties (by mainline, I mean neither Trotskyist nor Maoist) seem to have followed the Ukrainians’ lead – a textbook example of democratic centralism. The Communist Party of the USA, the Communist Party of Great Britain (the party founded in 2004, not the historical Communist Party of Great Britain which was dissolved in 1991), all follow the Ukrainian communist line – in an obsequious way. It’s ironic, considering that the new Ukrainian government accuses Yanukovich and his family of looting $USD37 billion. (Even if Yanukovich had stolen half that sum, it’s an awful lot of money and one wonders what the Yanukovich clan did with all of it). As to the actual annexation of the Crimea – the Ukrainian communists haven’t communicated their views in English, but one can surmise that they are warm to the idea of a partition of the Ukraine and a surrender of Crimea to the Russians. If this is the case, then it would be the worst example of a communist party selling out its populace to an invader since Hungary in 1956. (The mainline parties in the West, too, have been silent – no doubt they are waiting for the correct interpretation of events from the Ukrainian party). The Trotskyite and Maoist formations, on the other hand, have commented on the annexation and are a little more critical of Yanukovich and Putin.

Given that Yanukovich represents sleazy, Putin-style, vulgar nouveau riche capitalism (complete with monogrammed golf club bags, a private zoo for pet ostriches, gold bathroom fittings and a private Spanish-galleon themed restaurant on the river) and that the Ukrainian communists support him – one has to ask if there is a genuine Marxist-Leninist party in the Ukraine?

Right Sector

Right Sector in action

As for the Far Right, most of the commentators in the Western nationalist movement have been busy these past few days playing the game of (what I call) Jew-spotting. Was the uprising of Yanukovich Jewish or not-Jewish in character? Is the present government of the Ukraine Jewish? Conversely, if it is Jewish, then Putin must be pro-white, a defender of the white race, a white nationalist, etc., then he must be ‘standing up to the Jews’ by annexing the Crimea. If Obama, Kerry, Clinton and John McCain are against the annexation of Crimea, then the annexation is good, good for the whites of not only Russia and the Ukraine but the world and Putin should be allowed to do whatever he wants.

One has to take the idea of a racialist, Far Right and anti-Jewish Putin with a grain of salt. For one, he or his representatives attend the Auschwitz liberation ceremonies every year, and his government has gone on record, several times, as declaring that Nuremberg was a ‘free and fair trial’ (which is like saying that the Moscow trials of the late 1930s were free and fair). Nothing puts a bee in the bonnet of Putin’s government than, say, the celebration of Baltic nationalist veterans who fought against the Russians in WWII. As for the racialism – Putin has overseen an unprecedented wave of Asian and Muslim immigration into Moscow (immigrants who are exploited as cheap labour by Russian capitalists), and in that regard he is like Tony Blair, George W. Bush or John Howard, that is, a leader who brought about long-term, perhaps permanent, demographic changes to their respective countries. (Putin’s patriotism is only skin-deep. George W. Bush became an American patriot and nationalist after 911 – remember how American greeted him with patriotic chants of ‘USA, USA’ when he visited them in the rubble of the Twin Towers?). The other thing to remember is that Putin wishes to recreate, like Stalin, the old Czarist Russian empire – an empire which was multi-culti and full of Muslims, Mongols, Asians and goodness-knows-whats (are the Georgians, Armenians, Yazidis, Abkhazians, South Ossetians, et al., white?). Russia has never been completely ethnically homogenous and white as, say, Australia, Britain or even the US. And yet, the “white nationalists” in America keep on remonstrating with the Ukrainians who toppled Yanukovich, on the grounds that if Ukraine joins the EU, it will be filled up (like Greece, Holland, Italy, Spain, France and the UK) with non-whites! Absorption of parts of the Ukraine into the “white nationalist” Putin’s Russia would be good for them.

Putin, no doubt, would sign up the independent Crimea to his own proposed Eurasian Union, which would unite former Soviet countries in a trading bloc like the EU. No doubt it would open borders between states as well. Given that the Eurasian Union would be more Asian than European, we could expect a lot more Tajik, Khazak, et al. immigration into the Slavic countries of Belarus, Russia and the Ukraine more than ever before. Fortunately, Putin’s actions in the Ukraine have put the kibosh on proposed union:

So in the course of one weekend, Putin has spooked all of the countries he wanted to include in his grand Eurasian Union, the bloc of nations he hoped would make Russia a regional power again. The only gung-ho participants in that alliance so far have been Kazakhstan (see above) and Belarus, which is known as Europe’s last dictatorship. Its leader, Alexander Lukashenko, has so far remained silent on the Russian intervention in Ukraine. But last week, Belarus recognized the legitimacy of the new revolutionary government in Kiev, marking a major break from Russia, which has condemned Ukraine’s new leaders as extremists and radicals. The Belarusian ambassador in Kiev even congratulated Ukraine’s new Foreign Minister on taking office and said he looks forward to working with him.

As for the impoverished nation of Armenia, a late-comer to Russia’s fledgling Eurasian alliance, it has also recognized the new government in Kiev while stopping short of any official condemnation of Putin’s intervention in Ukraine so far. But on Saturday, prominent politicians led an anti-Putin demonstration in the Armenia capital. “We are not against Russia,” said the country’s former Minister of National Security David Shakhnazaryan. “We are against the imperial policies of Putin and the Kremlin.”

(Shuster, Ibid).

But, given that Clinton and the Obama administration condemned the idea of the Eurasian Union in 2012, the Union must be inherently ‘anti-Jewish’ and ‘pro-white’.

It is worth noting that all the nationalist anti-immigrant groups in Russia – including Alexei Navalny, the liberal (and racialist) opponent of Putin and probably the only real contender for the position of ruler in Russia – despise Putin, and the Putin government has violently suppressed them (just as it has suppressed all the liberal and left enemies of the regime, including Pussy Riot). Nationalist Alternative has collected copious examples over the years of Putin’s suppression of Russian nationalists – mainly culled from the Western media (who are not exactly friends of Russian nationalism or any nationalism at all).

What of the ‘Jewishness’ of the Ukraine and Russia today? It is true that the Jewish prime minister Yatsenyuk has appointed some Jewish billionaires as regional governors; but members of the anti-Semitic and nationalist Ukrainian Far Right party Svoboda have joined the interim government. Credence has been given (perhaps unnecessarily) to an article in the Israeli Haaretz newspaper which claims that a Jewish-Israeli was part of the groups battling in the streets at the time of the unrest; Haaretz, however, reports that Ukrainian nationalists are handing out translated copies of Mein Kampf and the Protocols– in Maidan square in Kiev. According to the Putin government,

15.03 AFP is reporting the strong response from Russia to warnings by United States Secretary of State John Kerry over military intervention in Ukraine.

Mr Kerry, who is set to visit Kiev on Tuesday to meet the new leadership, warned Russia on Sunday that it risked exclusion from the Group of Eight nations and faced possible sanctions for sending troops into Ukraine’s southern Crimea region.

In a statement on its website Russia’s foreign ministry said:

“We consider the threats against Russia made in a series of public statements by US Secretary of State John Kerry over the latest events in Ukraine and in Crimea to be unacceptable,”

Moscow accused Kerry of relying on “Cold War clichés”, saying that he had not bothered to understand the complex processes taking place in Ukrainian society.

Kerry failed to “objectively assess the situation that is continuing to deteriorate after the forcible seizure of power in Kiev by radical extremists,” the ministry said.

It accused the United States and its allies of turning a blind eye to the “rampant Russophobia and anti-Semitism” of the opposition protesters who took power in Kiev.

“The West’s allies now are outright neo-Nazis who wreck Orthodox churches and synagogues,” the ministry said.


Don’t these statements sound like those of a Western liberal and anti-fascist? On that note, one poster, ‘Sangraal’, at American Renaissance writes:

Sangraal6 days ago

I have been wondering if WN/AR support for Putin’s Russia is as misguided as Ukrainian nationalists alliance with pro-EU parties.

What little coverage of the situation in Ukraine that I have seen on WN/alt right/etc. sites has been unanimously pro-Russian/Putin, and has largely sidestepped the involvement of Ukrainian ethno-nationalists in the insurgence. As I see it, this is who we should be supporting – they are our counterparts, not Putin and the Duma. This coverage has echoed the propaganda broadcasts by the Russian foreign ministry and Russia Today. This propaganda, among other things, has soured my attitude to Putin’s Russia and its geopolitical project somewhat. They have resorted to the cheap, anti-nationalist slurs one would expect from our enemies in order to demonise Ukrainian patriots, branding them ‘neo-Nazis’ and ‘anti-Semites’. Why is our supposed ‘great hope’ in the fight against globalism and U$ hegemony adopting the language of the SPLC and the ADL?

I read an article on RT condemning the Right Sector/Svoboda’s proposals for the revised Ukrainian constitution, among them the proposal to repeal anti-thought crime laws (you know the kind I mean…). With friends like that, who needs the EU?

Russia has also played the ‘linking to Hitler’ game that our enemies are so fond of with the Ukrainian patriots, condemning their support for Stepan Bandera and the OUN/UIA, who they brands as ‘Nazis’. (In fact, these groups fought alongside the Soviets against German occupation, and alongside the Germans against Soviet occupation. Their loyalty was to Ukraine, and they formed their alliances according to what would best serve their cause at the time.)

I question whether Putin’s Russia genuinely represents multipolar sovereignty, as Aleksandr Dugin (perhaps naively, perhaps cynically) claims, or if, like the US, it will predicate its allegiance on tactical self-interest. In railing against the US, it has generally been tactical for Russia to espouse the values that we hold (resistance to Cultural Marxism, traditional culture, anti-globalism, national sovereignty, etc.), yet in the case of Ukraine, Russia has thrown those who champion these values (our natural comrades) under the bus, as they have gotten in the way of its power struggle with the US.

I am under no illusions – if the US/EU are allowed to gain a foothold in the new Ukraine, they will throw the nationalists under the bus at the first opportunity. Further, I recognise that US/EU domination will be far worse than Russian domination – government corruption and the Moscow lobby will be nothing compared to third-world hordes and Cultural Marxism. That is why it is imperative in the coming weeks for Ukrainian nationalists to consolidate their hard-won, yet tentative victory and ensure that the US/EU virus is not allowed to take root. The Ukrainian nationalists have taken a huge gamble in exchanging Russian hegemony for either sovereignty or damnation. But we will all have to take risks to achieve our goals, as we well know, and the Right Sector have done so boldly and effectively. They have lit a torch for other European patriots to follow, and showed that with popular support, militance, organisation, and will, our enemies can be overthrown.

Slava Ukraini! Sa Svobodu!

Right Sector: The Great Ukrainian Reconquista

We know that America is thoroughly subservient to Israel and the Jewish lobby, and has been for many decades. But Americans may be inferring from this, mistakenly, that Jews have the same power and importance in Russia and the Ukraine as they do in America. Just because the EU, Soros, the Obama administration, turned on Yanukovich in the final days doesn’t mean that ‘The Jews’ orchestrated a ‘coloured revolution’ against Yanukovich and that they were planning for this outcome (the toppling of Yanukovich) and manipulating the Euromaidan movement all along, hiring Ukrainian nationalist to riot for 30 euros a day (which is what Paul Craig Roberts alleges). Secondly, the presence or absence of Jews in a Russian or Ukrainian government doesn’t count for much these days. Francis Parker Yockey made the famous argument that while the USSR was Jewish-dominated in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s, it ceased being so some time around the time of the Slánský trial and the Doctor’s Plot in 1952. Yockey wrote that, in the 1950s, the Soviet Jew everywhere is being exterminated without violence – which is to say, forcibly assimilated to Soviet multiculturalism. By the 1970s the West was being subjected to a publicity campaign to ‘free the Soviet Jews’ and to allow them to emigrate to Israel and thereby escape the ‘anti-Semitic’ Soviet Union. The Soviet Jews had become another minority in a land of minorities, shorn of the power they once enjoyed. But the American Far Right can’t conceive of a country which has a large Jewish population and where Jews aren’t the dominant political force (so dominant that resistance against them is useless). George Lincoln Rockwell took exception to Yockey’s thesis and argued that the post-1952 USSR was Jewish to the core.

putin1Putin may back down and markets may recover. One can’t say what will happen in the Ukraine and Russia in the next few days, but one can say what ought to happen, and that is: revolution. The Yanukovichs and the Putins are symptoms, not the disease itself. That disease is a sleazy, corrupt post-Cold War capitalism. According to the Marxist textbooks, the bourgeois liberal democratic state is controlled by a ruling class – the capitalist class – who control all the institutions (including the media) to ensure their rule; they are a hegemony. Liberalism and parliaments only go so far; anyone who challenges the hegemony is ruthlessly crushed by state power… This describes Putin’s Russia to a tee. The main difference between his Russia and Yeltsin’s is that, in the latter, the Jewish ‘oligarchs’ (wealthy Jewish businessmen who had built their fortunes by looting privatised Soviet assets) were the ones skimming whereas in the former, it is indigenous Slavs – Putin and his cronies right down to the lowest, pettiest bribe-taking official. It’s quite possible that there could be an uprising against Putin and that he will be forced to flee and throngs of ordinary Russians will tramp through and gawp at his abandoned palatial dachas; this, however, does not necessarily entail that the fundamentals of the Russian political, economic and social system will be changed. What is needed is a two-stage revolution of the kind that took place in Russia in 1917: first a revolution of the bourgeois liberals against Czarism, and then a Bolshevik one – the first being a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the second a dictatorship of the proletariat. Putin is no Czar, of course, but he is fundamentally illiberal while many of his enemies, such as Navalny, are not; it is these men who could help bring about a bourgeois revolution against the Putin regime. As for the Bolsheviks, well, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation is for Soviet nostalgics and is led by the ageing, pro-Putin Zyuganov; it is a controlled opposition party which exists solely to channel nostalgia for Soviet socialism and to make Putin look democratic. A real worker’s party – in the Ukraine or Russia – is nowhere to be found. Which is the party of the humble working man which stands against the lootocrats of Russia and the Ukraine? In the Ukraine, it is Right Sector?


7 Responses to Putins’ Unpopular Imperialist War in Ukraine

  1. Nathan says:

    I must say, I welcomed this article because I have found that the whole subject of the Ukraine is beyond my ken. When one turns to particular ‘forum’ for enlightenment, they find partisan factions flaming their position. I have heard so much about how Putin will protect Ukraine from the jewish EU, and the other way round, and the other way round again. Much appreciated, NA.

  2. […] multiracializing Great Russia and other Slavic lands; there is a case for a Ukrainian state. See: Putins' Unpopular Imperialist War in Ukraine – Nationalist Alternative As this article foreshadows, the history is a life-study and beyond us here. I am not sure any […]

  3. […] Re: Ukraine – The Clock is Ticking … A point of view – Putins' Unpopular Imperialist War in Ukraine – Nationalist Alternative […]

  4. romannoff says:

    The author of this article, if he was not paid by the CIA or the ASIO, he couldn’t have done a better job.
    He tries to ignore the highly probable involvement of the CIA and NATO in destabilising Ukraine on the Russian border in order to create a crisis and then involve NATO in another Imperial adventure.
    He also tries to ignore the connect, the parallel of events in former Yugoslavia and the Putsch in Ukraine. Yugoslavia was destabilised, attacked and destroyed through a series of events programmed by Western governments and their secret services. Both, Yugoslav civil war and the current Ukrainian political crisis follow similar paths and causes.
    Same as the Serbs and Milosevic, Russian people and Putin are now being demonised by the Western propaganda and by the millions of Western scribblers who have nothing else to do but to feel themselves morally superior through the chaos and suffering imposed on other nations.
    If the author is an Australian, he could better save his breath and look into the corruption practices of Federal government in Australia.
    The Fact remains, that unlike Russia, Australian National government has been hiring on steadily, in the past 22 years, over 1200 Asians for public service jobs each year.
    Several thousands of these Asians employed by the National government have not been the residents in the country more than 3 years. Hardly enough to claim citizenship according to legal rules of any civilised nation in the world.
    Instead of being brave to explore the corrupting influence of the Asian businesses on Australian government, and its leading politicians, some unbalanced dribblers will always find an excuse to stick their noses into the Russian affairs.

  5. Jack Mite says:

    Some time has passed since the last comment and NATO’s intention is becoming even more clear now. Controllers of the New World Order have certainly decided that they want to expand the borders of the EU and invest the Ukraine with NATO troops to cower Russia. But Putin does not cower in fear of the West. The Jews who control the entire Western power structure know they cannot advance their “project” with a recalcitrant Russia, so they are willing to risk WW3. Time is running out for the puppet government in Ukraine. It will implode shortly because the US will only help them indirectly, whereas Putin will, not surprisingly, go to war to safeguard his vulnerable southern border.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please enter CAPTCHA *