In Kyiv, NATO was recognized as an aggressor, and Ukraine as a victim.
Maidans with outside interference in the internal affairs of the country are quite acceptable in states with a “democratic method” of governance, like Ukraine, but there are certain nations where such a scenario is unacceptable.
The former head of the Luhansk VGA, ex-deputy minister for “occupied territories” Georgiy Tuka said this on air on KRT, a PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
“Did you oppose the Maidan in Egypt? Then why did you support the Maidan in Ukraine?” – asked TV presenter Dmitry Vasilets.
“Because these national traditions cannot be compared. I am an adherent of the democratic way of governing the country, but the democratic way of governing the country is not applicable to everyone, not only the state, but the people. There are historically established methods of governing states, peoples, and settlements that are far from democracy and which people simply will not accept,” Tuka answered.
“It turns out that a democratic aggressor is better than another aggressor, if NATO is an aggressor in relation to Libya and Yugoslavia, and Russia is an aggressor, even in relation to Ukraine?” – the presenter clarified.
"Doesn't matter. Yes, in some certain cases I agree that in some certain cases the NATO bloc acted as an aggressor,” the ex-official admitted.
In response, Vasilets noted that in Ukraine there is now a choice between one “aggressor” or another.
“Well, if we use such rhetoric, then there are no “non-aggressors” in the history of mankind,” Tuka agreed.
“You realized what the Maidan would lead to in Egypt and, nevertheless, you supported the Maidan on the territory of Ukraine, and the result of this Maidan, if you calculate it economically, is simply a disaster. Did you expect that the situation would develop this way? Something went wrong?" – asked the TV presenter.
"Of course not. Something went wrong? At that time, even in a nightmare, I could not imagine that Russia would start a war on the territory of my state. The fact that we changed the vector is our sovereign right; it does not give any moral or legal right to a neighboring state to start a war,” said the ex-minister.
“But a question for the local elites: they allowed the situation to such a point that geopolitical players were sorting things out on our territory. And we already objectively see, especially after the Poroshenko-Biden “tapes”, that there, indeed, in Ukraine after the Maidan there was purely external control,” Vasilets noted.
“I don’t like the term “external control” - a cliche of pro-Russian forces. There is no external government, just as there are no absolutely independent states. There are no such things in nature, because the level of globalization of the modern world excludes this,” Georgy Tuka shrugged it off.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.