Print this post Print this post

On the Russian Annexation of Crimea

crimea_from_space803 words

Translated by Greg Johnson

Czech translation here

The Crimean parliament has called for independence from Ukraine and a referendum over joining the Russian Federation. Thunder in the chancelleries! The Crimean authorities are illegitimate because they are self-proclaimed. Who is right, who is wrong?

Barack Obama said on March 6 that the planned referendum for joining Russia would be undemocratic and illegal. (See my previous article on this point.) He was followed in this analysis by the European governments. So, the decisions of the people are supposed to be illegitimate if they do not support the interests and ideology of what the Russians call the “Western powers.” Democracy is, therefore, a rubber standard.

Here we encounter a very old problem: the principle of nationality in the ethnic sense against the same principle in the political sense. Let me explain. Politically, the detachment of Crimea from Ukraine is actually illegal under the constitution of Ukraine, a Republic “one and indivisible” like France. But Ukraine is a very unstable, indeed divided nation-state. Imagine that tomorrow in France a majority of Bretons or Corsicans wanted to unconstitutionally secede.[1] Worse still, imagine a future region of France populated after decades of colonization migration by an Arab-Muslim majority desiring autonomy or attachment to an overseas Mediterranean country . . .

The same problem happens all over the world: in Spain with the Catalans, in Britain with the Scots, in Belgium with the Flemings, in Israel with Muslim citizens who have a higher rate of population growth. Many examples exist in Africa and Asia. Remember Kosovo, torn away from Serbia because Albanians became the majority? In that case, the Americans and the West agreed to the partition of Serbia! But they are no longer for partition in Crimea. A double standard.

Americans would do well proclaiming their principles carefully. For what if a Hispanic majority emerges in the Southwestern states (through immigration and high fertility) and demands to rejoin Mexico? That is a real risk in the next 20 years . . . This brings us to the old conflict between legality and legitimacy, thoroughly analyzed by Carl Schmitt. And it also makes us reflect on the concept of the multiethnic state (imperial/federal), which historically has always been difficult to manage and quite unstable.

In the minds of Putin and the Kremlin, Crimea historically belongs to Russia: it is predominantly Russian-speaking and harbors part of the fleet. Putin wants to restore Russia, not to the borders of the USSR but to those of Catherine the Great, the Russian Empire, which the ambitious Vladimir wishes to defend. Then what? Of course, Vladimir Putin wants to appear to his people as the one who brought back the (formerly Russian) Crimea to the motherland and wants to restore Russian international power.

Putin handled the crisis smoothly, using good judo to turn to his advantage the aggressive moves of his opponents, including the EU, NATO, and the U.S., to draw Ukraine into their fold.[2] It is a major geopolitical mistake to provoke Russia instead of respecting its sphere of influence, pushing it into the arms of China. It is stupid to revive the Cold War. Russophobia is not in the interests of Europeans. Russian power is not a threat, it is an opportunity. Presenting Putin’s Russia as a threat to “democracy” is the sort of lazy propaganda championed by the attention whore and professional dilettante Bernard-Henri Lévy. Of course, Washington’s policy (which is logical) is both to prevent Russia from once again becoming a great power and to decouple the EU and Russia: it is a general pattern.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian crisis is just beginning. This improbable country will probably not find a stable balance. Crimea will probably end up being part of Russia. Eastern and Southern Ukraine may become quasi-protectorates tied to Russia. The Western region, under the influence of “nationalist” and pro-Western Ukrainians has a more complicated fate. Indeed, Ukrainian nationalism faces a fundamental contradiction, for they are attracted to the EU, but it is committed to a cosmopolitan ideology opposed to all nationalism. And all “ethnic hatred.” This cannot be overcome. There is an inherent incompatibility between Ukrainian nationalism and the EU’s ideological vulgate, which many do not understand.

In history, there are often insoluble problems. My Russian friend Pavel Tulayev, who has published me in Russia, understands this well: the union of all peoples of European descent from the Atlantic to the Pacific is the only way, regardless of political organization. The Ukraine crisis is a resurgence of the 19th and 20th centuries. But we are in the 21st century.

Notes

1. Already the “Red Hats” present Breton autonomist claims against the French State tax, yet they do not belong to the traditional Breton autonomy and independence movement. Good food for thought . . .

2. In addition, Putin played upon the new authorities in Kiev’s measures against Russian speakers.

Source: http://www.gfaye.com/pour-le-rattachement-de-la-crimee-a-la-russie/

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

34 Comments

  1. Gladiator
    Posted March 14, 2014 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    Catiline
    Posted March 12, 2014 at 6:28 pm | Permalink
    There is no North African admixture in Italy. This is vulgar racialism, akin to vulgar Marxism on the Left.

    Correction, Sicilians (Some) are of Arab decent, albeit 1000 years ago, but most are of Greek decent, part of what was known in ancient times – Greater Greece!

  2. Catiline
    Posted March 14, 2014 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    I would like to see the EU distance itself from America on this issue. It will go some distance in clarifying things and separating the wheat from the chaff.

    What the EU should do is propose a holding of a conference, ideally in Athens (see below), between the major disputants in Ukraine along with reps. from the EU and Russia. America should be conspicuously excluded.

    To enhance it’s ow position, the EU should offer to send peace keepers to Crimea in place of Russian troops, to remain there until an agreement can be worked out.To induce Putin to accept all of this, small, inoffensive European nations with close cultural ties to Russia, and with the confidence of the Russian minority in Crimea’ should be proposed to fill this role. Greece and Finland come readily to mind. Others might be included to help shoulder the burden.

    Arguably pro-EU and pro-Russian parties in Ukraine might both find this satisfactory.

    Pan-Europeanism then will have scored a hit and demonstrated it’s value and it’s potential.

    • reiner arischer Tor
      Posted March 18, 2014 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

      Of all EU nations, probably the Bulgarians have the deepest historical ties to Russia. They were liberated by the Russians from the Ottoman yoke, a Greater Bulgaria was created by the Russians (but dismantled by the other great powers in the Berlin Conference a few months later), and of all the Eastern Bloc countries they never even had a Soviet occupation.

  3. Michael O'Meara
    Posted March 13, 2014 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

    Greg,

    Tu rigoles!

    In supporting Ukraine’s Zio-fascists and lining up against Putin, you, in effect, end up siding with the Great Satan.

    It makes me suspect that you might have recently gotten a NED grant.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted March 13, 2014 at 9:33 pm | Permalink

      It is a false alternative to think that we have to choose between the US and Russia when there is actually a nationalist alternative in play.

      It is grandiose to think that it matters what American White Nationalists think about these matters has any effect whatsoever on the outcome.

      It is unbecoming to bandy paranoid and vulgar materialist accusations.

  4. Armor
    Posted March 13, 2014 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

    Guillaume Faye: “Russophobia is not in the interests of Europeans.”

    It isn’t in the interests of Americans either.

    “Washington’s policy (which is logical) is both to prevent Russia from once again becoming a great power and to decouple the EU and Russia”

    Washington’s policy is to oppose the annexation of Crimea by Russia, while giving the whole of the United States territory to the Mexicans and other immigrants. How is that logical? The truth is that the Jewish lobby decides Washington’s policy, as well as Brussels’ policy. If you don’t know that, you won’t understand anything. Guillaume Faye knows the truth, but won’t say so. Then, what value are his opinions?

    [the EU] “is committed to a cosmopolitan ideology opposed to all nationalism.”

    The EU is committed to destroying the White race.

    “Remember Kosovo, torn away from Serbia because Albanians became the majority? In that case, the Americans and the West agreed to the partition of Serbia!”

    In France, in the beginning, the government and the media (that is to say, the Jews) supported Serbia against the Croatian independence movement. The Croats were the bad guys. Not only did they fight the legitimate central government, but their ancestors had fought alongside Germany…
    But very soon, there was some friction with the Bosnian Muslims, and the French government and media immediately turned on the Serbs and began demonizing them. So Croatia was allowed to go free. I think the German government sided with Croatia from the beginning. Later, the French and the Americans (that is to say, the Jews) went on supporting the Albanians who had taken over Kosovo. The obvious reason why the Albanians received support is that they are racially different from “real” Europeans.

    • reiner arischer Tor
      Posted March 18, 2014 at 3:29 am | Permalink

      Actually Albanians are at least as white (or rather, in my opinion, whiter than) most other Balkan peoples. Albanians were until the Ottoman conquest a very clannish Catholic people (roughly as clannish as the most clannish southern Serbs, the Montenegrins), fighting Orthodox Serbs and Ottoman Turks alike, their most famous and most important Christian warlord being Skanderbeg, who delayed Ottoman conquest by several decades in that corner of the Balkan. (Interestingly, Skanderbeg is still considered to be a national hero in this mostly nonreligious Muslim country.)

      Later on they were conquered nevertheless, and after defeat their clans started to convert to Islam. They contributed to Turkey’s gene pool (many Janissaries and high officials were Albanian), but Turks didn’t contribute much to their gene pool, probably nothing at all. They actually look similar to Serbs (and I would venture to say different from Greeks, although of course there’s a more or less gradual transition).

      The enemy thinks of Muslims as “non-White” even if they have blue eyes and are blond, and that’s why they probably promote Albanians and Bosniaks at the expense of Christian Serbs, but they are genetically very close to each other and all are white. While I agree that the Christian-Muslim divide is a useful demarkation, I think Albanians can just as easily be classified White.

  5. Donar van Holland
    Posted March 13, 2014 at 6:48 am | Permalink

    The comparison between Putin and Ron Paul is probably correct. They may be useful to our cause as a kind of catalyst, to make views more akin to ours more popular. However, there is unclear how this works out. People may drift in our direction, or their energy may be deflected in a controlled opposition scenario.

    As far as the present crisis is concerned, there is one positive aspect that will remain, even if western Ukraine turns to the EU and eastern Ukraine becomes part of wrong headed authoritarian Russia. People have become acutely aware of the importance of ethnicity. Not just for coloured people, but for white people. First of all in the Ukraine and Russia, but this will resound through the whole continent.

    It is tragic that this awareness should come at the cost of friction between white peoples, but it is probably worth it. Besides, the peacefully bloated consumer society is killing our race like a lobster being kooked. Strife and even war offer much more possibilities for racial consciousness. It is a dangerous gamble of course, but our situation is critical. I found this article quite illuminating:

    alternative-right.blogspot.com/2014/03/a-prayer-for-war_8.html

    • Richard
      Posted March 19, 2014 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

      Beautifully stated. Thank you.

  6. Michael O'Meara
    Posted March 12, 2014 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

    Greg,

    Why are you providing a forum for Russophobes and Nordicists?

    Have you forgotten that Russia is the sole possible ally of the anti-system opposition?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted March 12, 2014 at 11:25 pm | Permalink

      In Russia, the anti-system opposition is in jail for “hate.” In Ukraine, the anti-system opposition is being branded “neo-Nazis” and “anti-Semites.” Thank goodness Putin is saving Crimea from the neo-Nazis and anti-Semites. Putin is no more on our side than Ron Paul or Rand Paul or the Tea Party or the Republicans.

      Nordicism is silly, but there are legitimate questions to be raised about the Europeanness of the Russian identity, mentality, and genetic substrate. I don’t doubt that many Russians are perfectly white. But I do wonder if they think of themselves as a white, European people or as something distinct–which means that they have a different destiny as well. Many of them certainly think of themselves as distinct, and White Nationalists need to be realistic about that. Is Russian nationalism like German or French nationalism, or like Mexican or American nationalism, which presupposes a multiracial population and seeks to give it an abstract, non-racial unity?

      • Fisherman
        Posted March 13, 2014 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

        Greg,

        I am very disappointed with your endorsing views questioning the “whiteness” of slavic Russians.

        • Greg Johnson
          Posted March 13, 2014 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

          Our author certainly does not make blanket claims about all Slavic Russians. But it is certainly true that Russia from the start contained whites, Mongoloids, Near Easterners from the Caucasus, and mixtures of all three.

          • Fisherman
            Posted March 13, 2014 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

            So do most South Europeans and probably central Europeans. To call into question the whiteness of some european ethnicities at this late hour is so very divisive. You are going to lose the respect and following of many good people.

          • Razvan
            Posted March 14, 2014 at 11:46 am | Permalink

            The foreign admixture is a huge issue, but finally of interest for each ethnicity itself. I don’t care much about “Nordicism” because I do not expect to be invaded by angry Swedes.

            Regarding the Eurasian Russian, its a different matter as they claim, through Mr Faye that we need an union from Pacific to Atlantic.

            Why is that? Because no one showed the slightest proof for that. Only the opinion the the Russian are the chosen ones to “save the West from itself”. Where did we heard that before?

            We just need to stay home, or return to our home immediately. And behave politely with each other. I don’t care how mixed anyone is as he stays at his own home and do not want to become the master of my own house. As the Russian colonists do just across the border.

            You don’t answer these legitimate questions, because some cheap quips like “Nordicists” and “Russophobes” are not an answer.

            The entire discussion acquired a specific religious stink.

            Our countries, peoples smell, we are decadent, corrupted to the bone, infectious to the entire world, Putin is the true and only Savior, we need to be punished for our sins. Beware you sinners and unbelievers, cause you’ll be punished.
            Which is the difference between this line of talking, and that jewish professor calling the white race the cancer of humanity? The name of the Saviour?

            Is the West only and only the depravity of the porn “industry”? Is the West only and only the stupidity and hypocrisy of the state bureaucrat promoting diversity?

            Is that what WN-ism has become, a cult of Mr Putin and his imperial ambitions? Where all the questioning is deemed as corrupt and the discussions need to be squelched or a schism or an ostracization will follow?

            I think we need to love our people/race at first and what they managed to build: “the West”. After that the answers will come. Until then we would be running in circles.

    • Bobo
      Posted March 13, 2014 at 5:26 pm | Permalink

      Putin is against European nationalism and any ww2 revisionism (even in western Europe). That is anti-system ?

      • reiner arischer Tor
        Posted March 18, 2014 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

        I am personally not much into holocaust-revisionism, but the freedom of speech of holocaust revisionists is a major issue, because it is used as a slippery slope to sentence people to fines and even prison for questioning the elevation of the holocaust to a religion. (See Jean-Marie Le Pen’s case, he never denied the holocaust, merely questioned its relevance today.)

        Swiss holocaust revisionist Jürgen Graf actually fled the free speech of Switzerland and Western Europe for the oppressive regime of Putin, because he was persecuted for his beliefs in Switzerland but not in Putin’s country.

  7. Peter
    Posted March 12, 2014 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    “It baffles me, though, that White Nationalists are cheering Putin as he saves Crimea from “fascists,” “neo-Nazis,” and “anti-Semites,” just like the Greatest Generation of the Great Patriotic War. ”

    Yes it’s annoying having to listen to these words from the same man that said Jews made up 85% of the first Soviet gov’t and that his mother had him baptized secretly. He’s a politician, I believe he wants good relations with the west (without sacrificing Russia to the current western way) and he knows what they like to hear. He also grew up in the Soviet Union which liked to talk about the fascist and Nazi enemy, but does he actually believe what he’s saying. I kind of doubt it.

    Regardless, I hope for closer relations between Russia and Germany and the rest of Europe. It makes sense economically and in every other way. They should push the USA out of Europe because they’re up to no good there.

    Germany’s foreign policy is controlled by the USA. I believe most thinking Germans know it makes sense to have good relations with Russia.

  8. Sandy
    Posted March 12, 2014 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

    In 1949 Great Britain gave Newfoundland to Canada. I hear now that Britain is seeking its old glory days and has launched its navy to get it back.

    • rhondda
      Posted March 12, 2014 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

      Oh Sandy, isn’t Newfoundland full of Scottish nationalists? Or is that just Cape Breton Island?

      • Sandy
        Posted March 13, 2014 at 3:11 am | Permalink

        I don’t know but to vote in the Scottish Independence referendum one must be a registered voter in Scotland. The result is the Pakistanis, Nigerians and you name it can vote but not Scottish people living abroad. Scotland (Britain really) is no longer a geographical nation but a race of people scattered abroad.

  9. WG
    Posted March 12, 2014 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    Thanks for publishing this.

    Faye makes an excellent point regarding the Ukrainian so-called “nationalists,” which many WNs in the West simply cannot understand.

    I’m sending a copy of this to some WN friends who support the US/NATO coup-regime.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted March 12, 2014 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

      The “so-called” Ukrainian nationalists include White Nationalists. It baffles me, though, that White Nationalists are cheering Putin as he saves Crimea from “fascists,” “neo-Nazis,” and “anti-Semites,” just like the Greatest Generation of the Great Patriotic War. I guess those White Nationalists who are deluded enough to actually move to Russia are planning to keep their mouths shut, lest they join their brethren in Putin’s dungeons.

      • NYTrad
        Posted March 12, 2014 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

        The legitimate patriotic nationalists like Right Sector did all the fighting and dying, and the pro-EU liberals gained control of the government, so it appears that the Ukrainian white nationalists were little more than cannon fodder for EU puppets. There are legitimate WNs in the US military playing the same role, obviously our next intervention overseas deserves full support. Also, we shouldn’t forget that one of the biggest enemies of Israel was the Soviet Union. Yockey looked past World War 2 atrocities and kept the larger goal in mind, I am in favor of such a stance.

        • Greg Johnson
          Posted March 12, 2014 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

          Svoboda has how many ministers in the interim government? And we shall see how they fare in the May 25th elections. “We” are so used to losing that we fall all over ourselves to cede defeat as soon as a Jew shows his face or wins a round.

        • Catiline
          Posted March 12, 2014 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

          The logic of the EU -pan-Europeanism- contributed to the partial success of White Nationalism in Ukraine. The force of that logic will continue to make progress. What racialist success has Euroscepticism produced?

      • Vacant Serif
        Posted March 12, 2014 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

        And it baffles me that so called “nationalists” would prepare the ground for the very pinnacle rootless cosmopolitanism. Odd that. It would seem to as an astute an observer as you that the privates are useful idiots and the generals are busy appointing Jewish oligarchs all over the place. Curious..

        • WG
          Posted March 13, 2014 at 10:14 am | Permalink

          In an interview with Newsweek, the leader of Right Sector, Dmitry Yarosh, repeatedly calls Putin a “fascist” and claims “Jews and other nationals” can feel comfortable in his movement.

          Some “Nationalist.” lol

          • Greg Johnson
            Posted March 13, 2014 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

            Disgusting, I know.

  10. reiner arischer Tor
    Posted March 12, 2014 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    In general I think Russian identity is at least as white as Italian, Spanish, or Portuguese identities, with their few percentage points of North African admixture.

    On the other hand it’s wise not to lose sight of the fact that Putin’s empire is not white nationalist, nor has it any intention of becoming such. He might be the lesser of two evils, should we succeed, but even here I would be beware of what we wish for.

    The best way is not to get too involved in this conflict of globalist powers and their respective oligarchs (just notice how oligarchs like Pinchuk are being appointed as governors to Eastern Ukraine, as if Ukraine needing nothing but a bit more looting), and anybody doing so should do that at their own risks. Svoboda is a party with which I can sympathize with, but Yatsenuk, Tymoshenko and the likes are slimy amphibians I wouldn’t touch with a stick, and frankly seem more repulsive to me than anything Putin stands for.

    • Catiline
      Posted March 12, 2014 at 6:28 pm | Permalink

      There is no North African admixture in Italy. This is vulgar racialism, akin to vulgar Marxism on the Left.

      • reiner arischer Tor
        Posted March 17, 2014 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

        My bad, I wanted to refer to the West African (not North African) ancestry of South Italians (and to a much smaller extent North Italians as well). See here. (Jews have a bit more of it.)

        For the record, I don’t think this small amount of West African ancestry disqualifies Italians or Spaniards as Whites. This is the straw man of the enemy, that racialism is only meaningful or genetic interests only exist if there is such a thing as a “pure race”. It is foolishness to accept this straw man position as our own. If Italians have 96% (totally unique, different from Scandinavian) European ancestry, 2% West African ancestry, and maybe 2% other (like Middle Eastern or whatever) ancestry, then their genetic interests are to promote this particular mix. Since they genetically cluster with Scandinavians (and not with Middle Easterners or Africans), their genetic interests are naturally way more aligned with them than with ME or A populations.

        But it’s totally off topic here. What matters is that a few percentage points of Mongol, African, etc. ancestry does not a non-White make.

    • Gilles
      Posted March 12, 2014 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

      No. If Russian Identity is orientated to Eurasia and sees itself as outsiders to the Western Traditional heartland (England, Germany, France, Nth Italy), then it doesn’t matter if their skin glows like a supernova– they are not White–unless you count Ashkenazi Jews as white too. Genetics can only go so far.

      If people welcome the Russian Bear to dominate Europe, and to rewrite our history according to their whims (as they are prone to do), then please relocate there and stop eroding our identity. We’re in a tough enough position as is.

    Kindle Subscription
  • EXSURGO Apparel

    Our Titles

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Tyr, Vol. 4

    Reuben

    The Node

    Axe

    Carl Schmitt Today

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    Generation Identity

    Nietzsche's Coming God

    The Conservative

    The New Austerities

    Convergence of Catastrophes

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    The Fourth Political Theory

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Metaphysics of War

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Shock of History

    The Prison Notes

    Sex and Deviance

    Standardbearers

    On the Brink of the Abyss

    Beyond Human Rights

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    Archeofuturism

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Tyr

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Revolution from Above