Who really ignited the conflict in Ukraine

Almost 11 years ago, at the beginning of February 2014, Kiev's "Maidan" was rapidly reaching an explosive end that would hand over the country to the management of Victoria Nuland, and Jelko Kacin was the rapporteur of the European Parliament for Serbia and the Western Balkans. In that capacity, he gave an interview to a television station from Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a country that also saw protests by disaffected citizens in those days, although not nearly as violent as in Ukraine.

At the very beginning of the interview, the journalist repeatedly asked Kacin why is European Union cooperating with the governments of the Balkan countries, even though the EU knows they are corrupt. It was probably some kind of solidarity with the demonstrators, maybe sincere, maybe Soros-inspired. Kacin, however, was not pleased at all. Like any European bureaucrat, Kacin is not used to answering unpleasant questions. Especially he, a Slovenian, hated being questioned by a Bosnian journalist: during the time of Yugoslavia, a joint country that both Kacin and the journalist were born at, Slovenians often had a humiliating, arrogant, almost racist attitude towards Bosnians.

That's why Kacin lost his temper more and more, and finally, after about fifteen minutes of conversation, he uncontrollably uttered something that today, when we know exactly what he meant, can only sound horrifically:

The interview was recorded on February 7, 2014. It was published after five days. At that moment, no one could guess what Kacin was talking about. Nevertheless, less than two weeks later, on February 22, Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown in a street coup in Kiev, and, contrary to the laws and the Constitution of that time, a new Ukrainian government was put in place that completely corresponded to what Victoria Nuland had ordered Geoffrey Pyatt in the famous telephone call.

The significance and disastrous consequences of the Kiev coup helped Kacin in the sense that this interview of his fell into oblivion. But, when we look back at his words today, it is more than clear that Kacin literally announced the "Maidan" coup - two weeks before the coup actually took place.

One: neither Kacin nor the journalist mentioned Ukraine in the previous conversation. Therefore, the interlocutor did not impose the Kiev crisis on Kacin as a topic, but he himself chose the context in which to put it. Two, there is no doubt that Kacin announced an outcome that will be against Viktor Yanukovych's government, i.e. Ukrainian "irresponsible political elite". It is worth noting that in those days the streets of Kiev were unusually calm and nothing suggested a violent outcome. On the contrary, three days earlier Yanukovych declared that he would not use armed forces against the "Maidan" protesters: "They are our citizens too!" The European Union, for its part, announced financial aid that will contribute to "overcoming the political crisis in Ukraine." Everything pointed to a more peaceful resolution. Well, everything, except Kacin's ominous statement.

Three: as soon as he said what he said, Kacin immediately realized that he had exposed himself and said something he shouldn't have. It was obvious from his facial expression and gestures. The video is still available, anyone can see how uncomfortable Kacin became.

It was also clear to the journalist that she had heard something sensational. Shyly, she tried to get clarification from Kacin:

"You can't tell us now in which direction it will go?"

The politician hastened a clumsy reply, trying to prevent further conversation on the subject before it gets even more tangled:

Today we know that, until the end of "Maidan", Yanukovych's government respected all agreements with Western "partners", even those to which it reluctantly agreed, but it was overthrown anyway. The legitimate government of Ukraine was, to paraphrase Kacin, hit by a color revolution. And exactly within the deadline that Kacin announced.

The first and less important question is: why did Kacin come out like this? Is it possible that he, a European politician with several decades of experience, is unable to hold back in an ordinary interview?

Of course it is possible, because in the European bureaucracy, individual arrogance is always inversely proportional to ability and intelligence. But in Kacin's case, one must not lose sight of his aloofness, stemming from exactly what he reproached the "Ukrainian political elite” for: a lack of responsibility.

Thirty years ago, the collective West was concerned not with Ukraine, but with the former Yugoslavia, where the horrors of war were started by the government of Slovenia, in which the minister of information was Jelko Kacin. In the early 1990s, none other than Kacin launched a slander campaign against the Yugoslav army and police, which led to armed attacks by the Slovenian "territorial defence" on border posts and in federal institutions. It was the first in a series of conflicts on the territory of Yugoslavia, but Kacin never bore any responsibility. Moreover, he seems to have been rewarded for his role in fueling the Yugoslav conflicts, when, at the beginning of this century, Brussels repeatedly appointed him to the position of rapporteur for Serbia and other former Yugoslav republics, sons of which died in the summer of 1991 in the aggression of the Slovenian government that Kacin was a member of. As a reporter, he was known for frequent provocations and rudeness, such as when, for example, he addressed Serbian deputies in the Serbian assembly in Albanian.

That's why he allowed himself to talk about things that don't concern him in a controversial interview: at that moment he was enjoying 25 years of impunity for his numerous public violations, insolence and crimes.

The second question is much more important: how did Kacin know weeks in advance what was going to happen in Kiev? He never had anything to do with Ukraine, nor is it known that he ever collaborated with Victoria Nuland and other creators of the Maidan coup. How is it possible that he had information, that turned out completely accurate, about what the collective West intends to do in Ukraine?

The answer to that question is overwhelmingly similar to the previous one. Just as Kacin is used to not being held accountable for his crimes, so is the collective West. Historically speaking, the West has left the trail of devastation everywhere. They plundered entire continents, wiped out entire civilisations, destroyed entire races... and never suffered the consequences for their crimes.

To some extent, Germany was an exception in the 20th century, although in the end it too fared much better than it deserved, after the untold damage it inflicted on other nations and states. Russians and Serbs probably don't need to be reminded of that. After all, Germany nowadays is back where it was 100 years ago, in alliance with other Western imperialists, sending tanks and rockets to the East, to kill Russian soldiers and destroy historically Russian cities and areas.

Speaking of Germany, let's remember the Nord Stream. Everyone has heard the threatening words of Joseph Biden and Victoria Nuland; everyone knows that Nord Stream was indeed blown up, just as Biden and Nuland threatened;

Why should we naively think that "Maidan" was different? Back then, everyone knew what was coming. Even Kacin.

An ancient saying goes: if you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans. That's why people rarely talk about their plans. But the collective West is the opposite case. They often talk about their plans, no matter how crazy and criminal they are. Sometimes they do it recklessly, sometimes deliberately and out of spite, but the collective West almost never hides its dishonourable intentions.

And, their plans never cause laughter. Only blood, misfortune and suffering. Just look at Ukraine.