Cold War Background
The Right jumped on the globalist bandwagon during the Cold War to help beat the war drums against Russia in its guise as the USSR. The Right was easily befuddled then because the spectre of “Communism” was used, even while the USSR maintained the most conservative positions, while the USA was busily cultivating Jazz and Abstract Expressionism via the Congress for Cultural Freedom, to which the anti-Stalinist Left flocked, and for the younger “anti-authoritarians” of the Left, the National Student Association, and its New Left spawn; both heavily subsidized by the CIA. Veteran Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, social democrats and liberals, were all portrayed as “anti-Communist,” when what was meant was anti-Russian and anti-post-Trotsky-USSR. Meanwhile as far-Left students rampaged from Chicago to Paris to Prague, Soviet analysts wondered to what extent these Leftists were being manipulated by the CIA and the U.S. foreign policy Establishment.1
While in the USA, conservatives, such as Congressman Ashbrook and The John Birch Society, worried about “Russian plots.” Soviet analysis was more astute than that of most of the Right. Senator Joseph McCarthy, when he came close to what was really happening, was suddenly silenced.2
What had transpired was the end of the wartime alliance. The USSR rejected the USA’s vision of post-1945 “world governance” via the U.N. General Assembly, enforced by the “internationalisation” of atomic weaponry (The Baruch Plan). This was confirmed by the Soviet foreign minister of the time, Andrei Gromyko, in his memoirs.3
Again, most of the Right, with some notable exceptions such as Yockey and Otto Remer, were calling the UNO a “Communist plot” to establish a world state. Rather it was a “capitalist” plot to establish a world state.4
This Soviet-Russian rejection of “world governance,” or “world federalism” as it was then called, resulted in the Cold War, and even here certain elements of the Right, including some astute analysts, got it wrong in contending that it was all phoney; a deceit hiding secret Russo-American collusion.
The Soviet “Reds” had nothing over the CIA, the U.S. foreign policy Establishment, and their oligarchic backers, when it came to subversion and disruption. After the revelations in 1967 about how the CIA and the oligarchic tax-exempt foundations had been subsiding the Congress for Cultural Freedom, and the U.S. National Student Association, both of which had worldwide networks, their places were taken by the National Endowment for Democracy and a myriad of NGOs that constitute “civil society,” whose work is focused on the destruction of Russia.
The USSR imploded, with a lot of outside help from the same interests that are still pursuing an anti-Russian agenda, and from within by a powerful cabal around Gorbachev that wanted to see Russia as part of the global system.5
Russia’s subordination to the world system was short-lived, and the Cold War quickly resumed. These globalist NGOs were sent packing by Putin in 2015.
Ukraine Key to Russia’s Destruction
Russia’s peripheries became the primary focus, with the Ukraine being center-stage. The states of the former Soviet bloc succumbed to globalisation, often via “colour revolutions” that were instigated by the U.S. State Department in tandem with the NGOs.
Where previously there was much moral posturing by the liberal-democratic- plutocracies against Assad and Milosevic, today venom against Russia over Ukraine spews out from decrepit Biden, and Polish turncoat Andrzej Duda, to the pathetic spectacle of finger-pointing, school ma’am fashion, by Britain’s foreign secretary Liz Truss, and New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern.
Here in the land of hapless idiocy that is increasingly being called “Aotearoa,” a failed state on the track to third worldism, the “Z” sign that has come to widely symbolise Russia’s defence of its people in the Ukraine, has been condemned as “hate speech,” and its appearance on two vehicles caused much anguish, with the Race Relations commissioner, Meng Foon, denouncing the display of such “insensitivity,” while Human Rights Commissioner Paul Hunt has declared that it symbolises an attack on “human rights.”6
(Might it then be that “Z” becomes as worldwide symbol of resistance to globalisation and liberal decay?).
The extent to which the globalist network has targeted Russia through the Ukraine is readily seen by examining the annual financial reports of NGOs such as the congressionally-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Open Society Institute, ad infinitum. Here we can discern the real meaning behind the rhetoric of Ukraine being a glowing paragon of “democracy,” “liberalism,” and the “open society.”
Among themselves, the globalists are boastful of the roles they play in the Ukraine. In 2016, Carl Gershman, president of NED, a veteran Leftist of the type that flocked to the U.S. side during the Cold War, stated that NED had been active in the Ukraine since the 1980s: “NED was there from the beginning, nurturing the active roots of civil society in the 1980’s.”7
In 2015 Gershman, the year following the overthrow of the Russia-aligned Ukrainian government, wrote in World Affairs that the Ukraine is pivotal for U.S. aims in encircling and subverting Russia, citing the geopolitical strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski:
… Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire, as Zbigniew Brzezinski has often said. It is possible that out of the present crisis Russia will become a more normal country, even a democracy, where the central concern will no longer be expanding the power of Greater Russia but providing for the welfare of its people.
So the strategic goal for people who want to see a more peaceful and democratic world is a Russia that, like Ukraine, wants to be democratic and a part of Europe. Right now such a scenario seems very unlikely. But if Ukraine succeeds, there is the possibility for a better outcome. That is why Ukraine’s struggle for democracy, independence, and territorial integrity has consequences for the whole world. And it’s why the US has a profound stake in its success. By standing with Ukraine, we are not merely supporting their struggle. We are also defending our own national security and advancing the values of human freedom that America, with all its troubles, continues to represent.8
Gershman made it plain that a breach with the Ukraine must be created that would undermine Russia. This breach has major implications in the globalisation and Americanisation process, according to Gershman.
Leaping to the present day, the NED budget spent on the Ukraine during 2021 reached over $5,500,000. The focus is consistently on the training of “youth activists,” and on funding propaganda outlets, euphemistically termed “independent journalism.”9 For example:
Supporting Investigative Journalism in Donbas: $35,000: To strengthen independent media reporting on public spending in the Donbas region of Ukraine. …
Donetsk Institute of Information: Fostering Independent Media in Donbas : $100,000 : To foster independent media in eastern Ukraine. The organization will produce news, investigations, and analytical reports on the developments in conflict-affected regions of Ukraine. The group will publish materials on its website and distribute them via social media and email newsletters. It will also produce and broadcast episodes of its weekly television show Donbas Today, promoting it through video clips on social media. The group will continue to monitor printed and online media in the separatist-controlled areas to counter disinformation.
Center for Research on Donbas Social Perspectives: Supporting Independent Regional Media : $50,500: To promote access to independent news and information about developments in eastern Ukraine. The organization’s popular news website will expand its analytical reporting on the conflict, continue to monitor the media and events inside the separatist-controlled territories, and debunk propaganda narratives. To reach international audiences with objective information about the conflict, the organization will translate its most important materials into English.
Caritas Mariupol: Promoting Independent Reporting in the Donbas
$39,000 : To promote independent reporting and foster citizen journalism in the Donbas. The group will organize training and mentorship programs for rural journalists from the conflict-affected areas of eastern Ukraine. Following the workshops, participants will write and contribute reports on pressing local issues to the local newspaper as well as regional media outlets.
Anti-crisis Media Center : Fostering Independent Media in Donbas : $50,000 : Public Summary: To foster independent media and public debate in Donbas. The Center will produce video reports on social and political developments in the Luhansk, Donetsk, and Dnipropetrovsk regions. It will also hold public events, including discussions, press conferences, roundtables, and seminars to address local issues. The Center will publish the content produced on its website and in social media, and stream its public events, so it will also serve as a convening platform for interaction among journalists, government and the public.
Truth Hounds: Monitoring and Documenting Human Rights Violations : $58,000 : To monitor, document, and spotlight human rights violations. Focusing on war crimes committed in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, the organization will train and carry out 10 monitoring missions to document conflict-related violations. Based on the findings and collected evidence, it will produce a series of reports and present them to Ukrainian and international institutions. The organization will also work with law enforcement agencies to improve their knowledge and implementation of international humanitarian law.
Charitable organization “Charity Foundation East-SOS”: Documenting and Raising Awareness of Human Rights Violations : $47,000 To raise public awareness of human rights violations in Donbas. The organizations will identify Russia’s policies of persecution and colonization in the region, and document illustrative cases. The human rights watchdog will compile a comprehensive report, promote it through public events in Ukraine, and submit it to international bodies, including the UN Human Rights Council, the European Courts of Human Rights, and the International Court of Justice.
Professional Development of Kharkiv: Strengthening Civic Activism among Youth : $110,000: To strengthen youth activism and civic engagement. The group will support the organizational development of newly established NGOs across Ukraine. Through online trainings, the group will enhance the management, communications, and advocacy skills of young activists. The grantee will award mini-grants to participants to implement projects that promote greater participation of youth in social cohesion and democratic transformation in local communities.
Analytical Center of Ukrainian Catholic University: Fostering Policy Dialogue : $39,000: To foster policy dialogue on key issues related to Ukraine’s occupied territories. The think tank will continue its in-depth research of state policy towards Ukraine’s occupied territories, organize a series of thematic roundtables, and publicize analytical materials to stimulate dialogue among civil society, government officials, and the public. The organization will develop policy recommendations and advocate for their implementation to key stakeholders and relevant institutions, promoting a value-based approach to public policymaking.
National Interests Advocacy Network ANTS: Supporting Social Innovations for Local Governance : $78,000: To promote innovative local governance solutions and foster a new generation of leaders. The group will organize a hackathon to facilitate collaboration between activists and local authorities as they jointly develop innovative solutions for local governance. A team of IT specialist, project managers and governance experts will mentor participating teams. The group will provide technical and financial support to three hackathon winners for project implementation. It will also hold networking events to foster interregional connections between activists.
“War Crimes” Psy-Ops
Here we also see the significance attached to the reporting of alleged “war crimes” by Russia in the Ukraine. There is nothing like the spectre of “war crimes” to demonise an adversary and dragoon the world into conflict against a targeted state. While nothing is reported of the “war crimes” committed by Ukrainian forces and militias, the masses of the West soak in any nonsense that is alleged against Russia even in its most unlikely forms: The allegation that Russians have cut the hands and feet off Ukrainians, and of Ukrainians being forced to inhale the exhaust fumes from tanks, might give a sense of déjà vu. Already there are calls for Russian leaders to be brought before the U.N. International War Crimes Tribunal. The only manner that could be accomplished is for the overthrow of the present Russian leadership, and the subordination of Russia, in the name of “democracy,” to globalisation, which is indeed the ultimate objective.
Zelensky called Russian forces “butchers and looters,” and he vowed to find every soldier involved in such crimes and hold them — as well as their leaders — accountable. “The responsibility is shared,” he said in Russian. “The responsibility for the murders, the torture, the torn-off hands and feet strewn about the street. For the people shot in the back of their head with their hands bound,” he said. The Ukrainian leader also announced the creation of a special agency to investigate and litigate crimes committed by Russian forces, and whose purpose will be to collaborate with local and international “specialists, investigators and prosecutors,” to punish people who may have been involved in crimes against Ukrainians.10
The situation is in many ways analogous to that of Serbia when Milosevic attempted to halt the ethnic cleansing that had long been perpetrated on Kosovo Serbs by the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). Yet, up to the time when Serbia was marked for “regime change” the KLA had been regarded by both the mass media and the U.S. State Department as a “terrorist organisation.” Over-night the KLA became “freedom fighters,” while it suddenly became the Serbs who had been committing the “ethnic cleansing.”11
Resurrection of Judah Maccabee
Now Zelensky, hero of “ethno-nationalism” among elements of the Right, while also being the gallant defender of the Ukraine as the bulwark of Western liberalism against Russian authoritarianism, assumes the role of a modern-day messianic Judah Maccabee, according to the Israeli press:
As a Jew, it is impossible not to feel proud of the courage, dignity, and defiance shown by Zelensky at this moment,” Molly Crabapple, a prominent leftist writer and artist, said in a tweet late Friday night, shortly after Zelensky posted a video showing him in the center of Kyiv, defiant in the face of encroaching Russian forces.
In Tel Aviv, people rallying for Ukraine chanted Zelensky’s name. A tweet by a former Israeli speechwriter encouraging people to pray for him by his Hebrew name was shared tens of thousands of times over the weekend. And multiple memes ricocheted around the internet highlighting Zelensky as a powerful embodiment of Jewish pride.12
West and Antiwest
In 2014 a situation in the Ukraine was contrived that followed the same scenario as sundry other states that have been brought into the globalist fold. The riots on the streets of Kiev and elsewhere constituted a “colour revolution” of the sort that went like a dose of salts through the states of the former Soviet bloc. While in 2014 riots broke out in the Ukraine, globalist sponsored upheavals were also occurring in two other states that had Russian-alignments, Venezuela13 and Syria.14
The conflict between Russia and the USA is an existential one, where two conflicting world-missions collide.15 Yet, while the USA is heralded as the “leader of the West,” the “West” has for centuries been in an epoch of decay. When one speaks of the West today, the democratic, liberal, plutocratic, materialistic, hedonistic “West,” it is hardly the heir to the spirit, ethos and morality of Western high culture. It is rather, more apt to call our present civilisation The Antiwest. It ill-behoves anyone concerned with the possibility of Western renewal, if that is possible, to champion this Antiwest and its U.S. “leadership.” It is especially inappropriate for the “Right” to advocate the extension of this Antiwest to any other part of the world. The Antiwest exports culture-pathogens as a conscious geopolitical strategy. One need only to consult geopolitical strategists such as Ralph Peters, who most cogently and approvingly describes the destructive world-mission of the USA in his essay “Constant Conflict.”16
At this historical juncture, Russia, and only Russia, stands against the “new world order” and the hell conjured by Ralph Peters et al. It is Russia as the Katechon.
Importance of Ukraine
The Ukraine has placed itself at the service of this world-system. Zelensky and his hurrah-chorus in the West laud the Ukraine as the outpost of Western decay poised at Russia, willing to serve the Russophobic offensive that cannot end until Russia is subjugated to the global system.
The National Endowment for Democracy, established with congressional sponsorship in 1983 by adherents of the Shachtmanite faction of post-Trotskyism and other “social democrats,”17 having taken over the “Cold War” roles from discredited CIA projects, has always had a special interest in the Ukraine.
For example, NED had been avidly sponsoring “youth activists” in various sectors of society, including “educating” electorates on how to vote in the October 2012 elections. The 2012 NED financial report lists the NGOs in the Ukraine that received $3,380,834 during that year.18 The amount represents the upper end of funds sent by NED throughout the world, and as the above-cited 2021 report shows, the amount has only increased.
Ukraine was among the states targeted for a “colour revolution” in 2004; the so-called “Orange Revolution.” With the failure of that revolt, orchestrated from the outside, the cry went up that the Ukraine was not sufficiently “democratic,” a euphemism for not being sufficiently under the influence of U.S./globalist hegemony.
A symposium on the Ukraine held by the NED-linked International Forum for Democratic Studies lamented that “following its failure to consolidate the democratic gains of the much-celebrated 2004 ‘Orange Revolution,’ Ukraine under the rule of authoritarian President Viktor Yanukovych has suffered numerous setbacks in its struggle to achieve a more democratic system.”19
Geopolitical Chessboard: Brzezinski’s 2014 Appraisal
Veteran globalist foreign policy adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, while a consultant for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, when interviewed by Ukrainian Pravda, a journal connected with NED, applauded the rioting youth that precipitated the ousting of the Russia-aligned Yanukovych. Brzezinski praised their sense of “nationhood,” as “an optimistic sign.”20 This praise of Ukrainian nationalism by Brzezinski was odd, coming from someone who spent a lifetime, since his days as a young academic, condemning nationalism and asserting that international capitalism, founded upon a globalist elite that transcends territorial borders, is the next phase of an historical dialectic. Brzezinski did not even believe in “independent nationhood.” He believed that it was passé.21 However, now the globalists in the USA, E.U., U.N. and elsewhere, in condemning Russia, find it opportune to champion Ukrainian nationalism.
None, of course, are champions of nationalism, which they regard as anathema. It is another means of undermining Russia as the primary state that remains in the way of the “brave new world,” or the “new world order” as it has been called. Hence, “nationalism” is only used as a dialectical strategy, as part of a globalist agenda. Any manifestation of nationalism that is in revolt against globalisation is promptly condemned as a revival of “fascism,” “racism,” “xenophobia,” and is marked for destruction, whether by U.N./E.U./U.S. sanctions, or military action or combination thereof.
Brzezinski alluded to what is the real bugbear of the globalists: the fear that Russia will lead a Eurasian bloc which, we might add, would also find allies across the world, from India, to Venezuela to Syria.22 Hence the simultaneous actions against the latter two states in 2014, fomented by the same forces that were then, and are now, fomenting crisis over the Ukraine.
Brzezinski, as a principal strategist for the globalists, talked of an “expansion of Europe.” He stated that the globalists want the Ukraine to be part of the E.U. as the start of a process that will integrate Russia also. He stated that this is the wave of the future, and that a Russia-led “Eurasian union” will fail. However, if the E.U. had represented a truly independent third force, it would have been targeted as avidly by the globalists as Russia. Unfortunately, the E.U. has not emerged as a third force, but as an appendage of U.S. foreign policy.
From Brzezinski’s statements in 2014, we can see why the globalists were so eager to oust the Yanukovych regime, under whom there was a prospect of the Ukraine coming closer to Russia rather than opting for the E.U. The Ukraine is clearly an important part of the globalist agenda. Into this situation Zelensky and his party entered, with a policy platform of the Ukraine joining the E.U.
Soros in Ukraine
The globalist network of foundations and NGOs under the patronage of George Soros has had, like NED, a particular interest in the Ukraine. The Soros network operates in the Ukraine mainly through the International Renaissance Foundation.23 The Soros network states of the present that,
Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine is an assault on democracy and a violation of international law. It has also posed a grave threat to civil society in the country—including the staff, partners, and grantees of the International Renaissance Foundation, a part of the Open Society Foundations, which has been working in the country since 1990.24
One might, on the other hand, say that perhaps the Ukraine at last stands a chance of liberation by Russia from the globalists and international predators. A realignment back to Russia would mean that the whole gaggle of “civil society” subversives and agitators, the vanguard of globalisation, would be sent packing, as they were in Russia by Putin, and in Hungary by Orbán. That is what the Soros apparatus means when it laments that there is a “grave threat to civil society.”
Viorel Ursu, division director of Open Society’s Europe and Eurasia programme, lauded Soros in messianic terms, as the great hope and dear friend of the Ukraine:
We have been working in Ukraine for more than 30 years. We were one of the first foundations there following the end of the Soviet Union. Our founder, George Soros, has a special place in his heart for Ukraine, and has devoted a lot of time, emotion, and resources to the country.25
Ursu states that the Soros network was the first NGO into post-Soviet Ukraine, and focused on the re-education of the young, from the age of kindergarten onward. He states of the ideological void left by the implosion of the Soviet bloc,
So we made education a priority, from kindergarten on up to higher education, to scholarships allowing study abroad to bring fresh perspectives. Libraries were a big focus, and publishing textbooks.26
They have had thirty years to indoctrinate Ukrainians into becoming obedient citizens in a globalised world. They focused on controlling education, textbooks and what went into libraries.
With what Ursu calls “free and fair elections” following the 2014 riots, “civil society” had been “strengthened.” He states that the present conflict is not only a military affair, but “an information war” where “the media play a big role in telling the real story, and calling Russia by its name, as the aggressor;”27 that is, the mass media is compliant and can be relied on to follow the globalist agenda. As we have seen with the budget of NED, for example, money has long been lavished on creating this media compliance, especially with the training of journalist, editors, producers et al, and the capturing of social media to the extent of being a primary factor in fomenting and organising “colour revolutions.”
Ursu is correct in seeing the present conflict as being one of world importance. It is a straight-out conflict between the forces of globalisation against self-determination; money against spirit; liberal decay against life-affirmation. Ukraine has chosen a course that could only have eventuated in conflict with Russia, unless Russia had become too etiolated to react against provocation and belligerence, egged on by globalists whose primary goal remains the elimination of Russia from the world-stage. For his part, Putin sees Russia as an “inalienable and organic part of Greater Europe and European civilisation.”28
In the same address, Putin called for a harmonious community of nations from Lisbon to Vladivostok. However, Putin warned of tragic consequences in seeing how matters were shaping up ten years ago, and two years prior to the globalist-orchestrated revolt in the Ukraine:
It is NATO expansion, including the deployment of new military infrastructure and the bloc’s (US-sponsored) plans to set up a missile defense system in Europe. I could have ignored the subject had they not been playing their games in the immediate proximity of Russia’s borders, undermining our security, and upsetting global stability. We have presented our arguments more than once, and I will not repeat them in detail here. But unfortunately, our Western partners ignore and dismiss them. We are concerned because, even though it is not yet clear how our “new” relationship with NATO will work, they are creating facts on the ground.29
These “facts on the ground” are what has been playing out in the Ukraine. That the global wire-pullers react with feigned moral outrage over issues of their own making is collective sociopathy. Generally, sociopathy leads not to self-aggrandisement in anything other than the short-term, but to eventual self-destruction. The tragedy is that this self-destructive course could spread ever-wider.
1Yuri Zhukov, “Werewolves,” Pravda, May 30, 1968.
2K. R. Bolton, Revolution from Above (Arktos Media Ltd., 2011), 42-43.
3A. Gromyko, Memories (London: Arrow Books, 1989). Also see: Bolton, Stalin: The Enduring Legacy (London: Black House Publishing, 2021), 125-139.
4See for example, G. Edward Griffin, The Fearful Master: A Second Look at the U.N. (Boston: Western Islands, 1964). This is in general a valuable examination of the UNO, but errs assuming that the USSR is the main culprit.
5K. R. Bolton, Russia & the Fight Against Globalisation (London: Black House, 2018), 139-180.
6Nadine Porter, “Appearance of pro-Russian Symbols ‘deeply traumatising’ to Kiwi Ukrainians,” Stuff, March 30, 2022; https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/128196419/appearance-of-prorussian-symbols-deeply-traumatising-to-kiwi-ukrainians
7Carl Gershman’s remarks to the Washington conference 2016; “Ukraine’s success after 25 years,” https://www.ned.org/ukraines-success-after-25-years/
8Gershman, “A fight for democracy: why Ukraine matters,” World Affairs, January 22, 2015; https://www.ned.org/a-fight-for-democracy-why-ukraine/
9NED Grants, Ukraine 2021, https://www.ned.org/region/central-and-eastern-europe/ukraine-2021/
10“World Leaders Condemn Atrocities Alleged in Bucha,” Washington Post, April 3, 2022).
11K. R. Bolton, The Tyranny of Human Rights : From Jacobinism to the United Nations (Antelope Hill Publishing, 2022), 95-98.
12Philissa Cramer, “For many Jews, Volodymyr Zelensky is a ‘modern Maccabee’ as he fights Ukraine’s war,” The Times of Israel, March 1, 2022; For many Jews, Volodymyr Zelensky is a ‘modern Maccabee’ as he fights Ukraine’s war | The Times of Israel
13See for example, National Endowment for Democracy, “Venezuela,” 2012 annual report, http://www.ned.org/where-we-work/latin-america-and-caribbean/venezuela
14K. R. Bolton, “Attack on Syria planned nearly two decades ago,” Foreign Policy Journal, September 16, 2013, http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2013/09/16/attack-on-syria-planned-nearly-two-decades-ago/
15K. R. Bolton, Russia and the Fight Against Globalisation, passim.
16Ralph Peters, “Constant Conflict,” Parameters, Vol. 40, No. 4 (2010), U.S. Army War College; https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol40/iss4/16/
17K. R. Bolton, Revolution from Above, op. cit., 218.
19“Ukraine’s Lessons Learned: From the Orange Revolution to the Euromaidan,” National Endowment for Democracy, February 12, 2014, http://www.ned.org/events/ukraine-lessons-learned-from-the-orange-revolution-to-the-euromaidan
20Sergei Leshchenko, “Zbigniew Brzezinski: Yanukovych understands that has no chance of fair elections. So went under the umbrella of Putin,” Ukrainian Pravda, January 15, 2014, http://www.pravda.com.ua/articles/2014/01/15/7009577/. Leshchenko, who conducted the Brzezinski interview, is a NED Fellow.
21Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technotronic Era (New York: The Viking Press, 1970), 29.
22K. R. Bolton, Geopolitics of the Indo-Pacific: Emerging Conflicts, New Alliances (London: Black House Publishing, 2013), 174-180.
23Open Society Foundations, http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/offices-foundations/international-renaissance-foundation
24“Standing up for Ukraine,” Open Society Foundations, February 24, 2022; https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/q-and-a-standing-up-for-ukraine
28V. Putin, “Russia and the Changing World,” Ria Novosti, February 27, 2012.