fbpx
Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

Ledeen Admits Foreign Meddling in Ukraine

Yushchenko seems to have won, big big bigtime, in the Ukraine. Big turnout–around 78%–and big margin, about 15 points. It’s a dramatic and important moment, and the winning forces of the “orange revolution” are right to talk about democratic revolution. Here is yet another case where the forces of repression seemed to have all the […]

Yushchenko seems to have won, big big bigtime, in the Ukraine. Big turnout–around 78%–and big margin, about 15 points. It’s a dramatic and important moment, and the winning forces of the “orange revolution” are right to talk about democratic revolution. Here is yet another case where the forces of repression seemed to have all the advantages, including the reconstituted KGB and the full, cynical, support of a nasty Russian tyrant. Yet freedom won.
For those of us who have long preached the power of democratic revolution, it’s a happy day, and I hope that our leaders draw the appropriate lessons:
–The mild support we gave to the democratic forces in the Ukraine proved far more powerful than most of the experts expected. The revolutionaries required a bit of guidance in the methods of non-violent resistance, a bit of communications gear, and many words of encouragement. They did the rest. The same can and should be done elsewhere in the world (Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea…)~ Michael Ledeen, Dec. 26, 2004

What Mr. Ledeen is alluding to is the U.S. government funding of the Ukrainian group Pora, the delightful group whose symbol is the jackboot crushing the beetle, along with funding other Yushchenko supporters. That the hegemonists and the dutiful major media kept mum about this overt interference in the elections of another country during the last month is no surprise–now, of course, they want to claim credit for having backed the meddling they so strenuously denied having any part in.

Mr. Ledeen is an extremist, even for the circles in which he operates, but his foreign policy views remain broadly representative of the kinds of people who pressed for the invasion of Iraq and now the subversion of representative government in the Ukraine. Observe how Mr. Ledeen views meddling in the Ukraine as part of the same strategy of meddling in any and every Near Eastern country. What Mr. Ledeen refers to as the victory of freedom is the expansion of the same sort of hegemony he has been urging us to inflict on the Near East. Anyone who found the invasion of Iraq disturbing or appalling must pause at the thought that the jingo pundits believe that U.S. actions in Iraq and Ukraine are all of a piece. Note how often Mr. Ledeen uses the word revolution, and how quickly everyone christened Mr. Yushchenko’s staged “movement” the “Orange Revolution,” while Mr. Yanukovych has frequently and consistently invoked the Ukrainian constitution and rule of law in defense of his position.

Once again, Mr. Ledeen shows his radicalism (which he takes no pains to hide) and reminds us why those who echo his arguments have nothing to do with conservatism. Also note in all of this how he never explains how this expansion of “freedom” serves the interests of the United States–and why should it? His silly platitudes about freedom defusing terrorism aside, there is nothing to indicate that popular governments in various Near Eastern countries will produce foreign policies any less inclined to the same or greater sponsorship of terrorist groups. But why worry? Our country is only a vehicle for an ideology, just as the interests of the Ukraine are irrelevant in how the ideologues determine who represents the side of “freedom” in that country. Today it is Mr. Yushchenko, just as yesterday it was Sheverdnadze in Georgia. But, as with all puppets, one day they will find their strings being cut and they may not take kindly to the attempt.

This is, to a certain extent, a rhetorical game: Mr. Ledeen doesn’t care about freedom or revolution as such, but the power they bring to those whom he favours in international politics, and few politicians are really committed to legality unless it benefits them. But this is what must be stressed again and again: whatever the flaws of Mr. Yanukovych, he represents the side of law and constitutional government against the subversion and revolutionary tendencies of the Orangemen. Where the side of law and constitutional government loses, real freedom also loses. Let our friends over at Liberty & Power chew on that when considering Mr. Justin Logan’s remarks that the means to advancing “liberalism” are not of much concern to him.

Advertisement

Comments

The American Conservative Memberships
Become a Member today for a growing stake in the conservative movement.
Join here!
Join here