• 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        A coup leading to a more U.S.-aligned government. The U.S. has only done that 100 times, including once in the last decade right there in Ukraine.

          • Alsephina
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            The same way they did in 2014. Don’t worry, the US is very used to this (and this is just from a NATOpedia article).

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            In this scenario, by assuring the coup plotters that the U.S. will keep funding the war as long as they keep fighting it, as opposed to cutting bait with the coup as an excuse. The coup plotters would then accuse the deposed government of treasonously planning a surrender (a mischaracterization, but that’s par for the course) and portray themselves as acting in the national interest. They then keep the status quo of the war, with just a change in management. This would all fit neatly with the anti-Russia/pro-U.S. propaganda Ukraine has been subjected to. Any Russian objection would be written off as lies.

            If Russia tried to support a coup government, that government would be branded as treasonous even if they sought to act in the best interest of the Ukrainian people. The U.S. would immediately seek to discredit and destabilize the coup government, and a lot of Ukrainians would listen as they’re fighting a war with Russia.

          • jabrd [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Zelensky just removed Zaluzhny from heading the military because Zaluzhny was getting too popular and becoming a political threat. Important to point out that Zelensky has called off the elections that should be happening right now and that there’s growing dissent for his administration due to how poorly the war is going. Also worth pointing out that Zaluzhny has ties to the far right militias of the Ukrainian armed forces and flaunted this fact when Zelensky first tried to have him removed. It would be very easy for NATO to back Zaluzhny and his right wing thugs (the same ones that took part in the maidan coup) against Zelensky if Zelensky breaks with the West’s wishes. US intelligence agencies are very good at pulling at threads of existing dissent to create chaos and oust difficult political leaders

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      This entire response here was ostensibly in respect to Ukraine.

      From the article, which you clearly didn’t read:

      A U.S. official, speaking in Washington on condition of anonymity, said that the U.S. has not engaged in any back channel discussions with Russia and that Washington had been consistent in not going behind the back of Ukraine.

    • GenEcon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It was Russia that tried to negotiate a treaty with the US. And the US said ‘fuck you, ask Ukraine, not us’. Its Russia treating Ukraine like a puppet state, not the US.