That's about it, isn't it?

Salon correctly notes that Ukraine has fallen out of the news because "our policy failed."

The moment of truth was the cease-fire accord the Kiev government, Moscow and the two republics declared in eastern Ukraine signed in Minsk on September 5. With that document, Vladimir Putin succeeded in putting a stop to the preposterous charade wherein Ukraine was supposed to swerve smoothly into the Euro-American camp, so rolling out the neoliberal agenda like linoleum straight up to Russia’s borders.

Nice try, Victoria Nuland and all other “new world order” idolators. Actually, it was a very horrific try, costing several thousand lives and wrecking cities and vast parts of eastern Ukraine’s productive infrastructure. All this for the sake of deregulated capital and “free markets.”

If you're still confused, don't be. I know a guy who can help.

From time to time, I've directed your attention to Lobster, the oddly-named political journal published by a brilliant British writer named Robin Ramsay. His "A View From the Bridge" column (a semi-blog in pdf form) includes a summary of why and how we tried to steal Ukraine. I hope he won't feel that I've burgled an excessive number of his words, because what you're about to read should be considered mandatory. (I've turned the footnotes into hyperlinks.)

Recent events in Ukraine illustrate the gap between the mainstream media’s version of events and what we can find out for ourselves. The American-EU attempt to detach the Ukraine from the Russia orbit is stupid and dangerous. A comparison might be made to the Russians seeking to sign Mexico or Canada into an economic and military alliance. But the standard moves were made: the IMF offered a big loan to Ukraine with the usual conditions, ‘restructuring’ – i.e. unemployment and economic devastation. Unless the IMF analysts are incredibly stupid and completely misread the economic data on Ukraine, the real plan was that Ukraine would be unable to repay the loan and thus would have to repay in kind. This would entail giving large chunks of Ukraine to the American agri-chemical giant Monsanto, to seed the Ukrainian plains with its GM wheat; and so, when Ukraine eventually joined the EU, an end run would have been made around the widespread objection to GM crops within the union: GM wheat would already be growing there.

That was the plan but the Russians initially topped it with a better offer than the IMF/EU deal. So the Americans overthrew the Ukrainian government and installed one of their people.

That’s about it, isn’t it?

Yep. Pretty much.

And how much of this has made it into the British mainstream media?

Or the American mainstream media. Or anyone else's.

The IMF loan has since been made but Ukrainian politics is so corrupt the loan is probably long gone into off-shore accounts, it won’t be repaid and Monsanto will duly get their hands on what used to known as ‘the breadbasket of Europe’.

Despite the presence in Russia of a kleptocracy not dissimilar to that running the US, the American weapons lobby wants Russia as an enemy and Obama’s people cannot cannot think of a way to resist this.

That last bit is the only claim my readers might question. Where's the evidence that Obama's people have "resisted" anything? I'm not convinced that "the West" will win this one.

If any of you ever get the chance to run into John Kerry, ask him this question: "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for Monsanto?"

Jack Frost will settle the matter. Moon of Alabama explains what is happening in Ukraine right now, and what (in all likelihood) will happen.

The Minsk ceasefire is largely holding even as daily battles occurs at the Donetsk airport. There coup-government troops are holed up in the nuclear bunkers beneath the airport and resist all attacks from the federalists while other government units indiscriminately shell the city every day.

But that fight is a bit of a sideshow. The government troops have lost too much material to go on a large offense and the federalists currently lack resupplies from Russia and are thereby restricted to generally defensive positions.

Russia is for now happy with the situation. It sits comfortable and waits for its largest traditional ally, Jack Frost, to come and to squeeze the Ukrainian government into further concessions.

The Ukrainian ultra-nationalists may feel a lot less "ultra" once the shivers set in -- which will happen if Kiev and Russia can't negotiate a deal. Russia has the gas and they don't.

That's about it, isn't it?

Troubling signs. Victoria Nuland is in Ukraine right now, stirring up trouble, as is her Machiavellian wont. University of Illinois professor Francis Boyle has some interesting insights into the visit:

"Nuland certainly is not over there to promote democracy: there are elections coming up in Ukraine toward the end of the month, but clearly these are "Potemkin's village" elections simply to enable the Obama administration to say there is a democratically elected government and parliament, while no one in Donbas is voting and there's already been lustration applied to prevent any of the opposition to vote.

"Nuland, who is responsible for the coup d'état against former president Yanukovich and for bringing Petro Poroshenko in power, is not interested in establishing democracy in Ukraine, but instead in making Ukraine at least de facto member of NATO and using this as a jumping off point for destabilization of the Russian Federation."

"Lustration" is defined (and rationalized) here.

Europe is sending spy drones to Peter Puppetshenko. Will armed drones follow?