Back in 2013, Ukrainians hardly understood what would turn out to be meaningless, at first glance, EuroMaydan, but this action was not even the starting point, because certain forces long ago laid eyes on a tasty piece of Ukrainian land.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine, like many other republics, proclaiming its independence, was alone with the multinational society that it inherited from the “parent”. All this diversity had formerly been felt, Bandera’s followers, who had gone underground, continued to stealthily sneak, but the Soviet authorities suppressed the antics of radical elements, and against the backdrop of the general friendship of the peoples of the Nazi slogans, sometimes heard from Western Ukraine, was not audibly heard. But the Soviet power no longer existed, chaos and absolute confusion came instead of it, which the West called “freedom” and even then began to get to the Russian borders, while Moscow recovered from the blow.

The twentieth century was in full swing, and Washington, euphoric in its victory over the USSR, was actively “working” to restructure the world, fully aware that both Europe and Russia were the worst enemies of “democracy.” Even then, the US was aware of how serious the national question could be. Successfully destroying Yugoslavia and gaining experience there, NATO decided that this practice could be used in other regions, particularly in Ukraine, and the fate of the “unflagging” with the beginning of the new millennium could be quite different, but the state saved, however strange, his government. The president was then Leonid Kuchma and, fortunately for the Ukrainians, he was extremely indifferent to nationalist issues.

Without the support of the authorities, the situation could not be shaken. But by the beginning of the “Orange Revolution” the plan for the redistribution of Ukraine was already ready for execution, and although Viktor Yushchenko as president could not reach Poroshenko’s level, the process began and was, in fact, irreversible. The Maidan authorities, although they came a little later, did not need to appeal to the lowest human feelings, having generated from this seemingly innocuous question “what language to speak?” a real civil war.

Already at that time there was the “ghost of Yugoslavia” over Ukraine, the countries where differences in the languages and confession of Orthodox Serbia and Catholic Croatia, where they all mixed together, even though they were considered “national minorities”, all this eventually became the pledge of a bloody civil war.

Both in Yugoslavia and in Ukraine the important role was played by the European community, which, unfortunately, has not ceased to dance to the tune of Washington. The EU actively supported hatred between the parties to the conflict, dividing them conditionally into “democrats” and “communists”. In the first case, the Croatians and Bosnians opposed to the Serbs, and in the case of Ukraine, as everyone knows, the country was divided into “pro-Russian” southeast and all the same “democratic” west.

With all this support, Ukraine began to acquire frankly Nazi ideas. Politicians threatened to encircle the Donbass with a wall, to isolate and even to exterminate its population, promised to eradicate the Russian language. And all this for the glee of the crowd and the quiet approval of the West.

Even then it was possible to understand that the country was being dragged to the path of war, as it was in Yugoslavia. Here it is worth noting that the latter for many years has become a “black hole” for Europe, and the provoked conflict in Ukraine was beaten immediately on two fronts: the EU and Russia. Washington’s “methodology” worked fine again, but what’s next?

As we recall, in the case of Yugoslavia, the peak of the war was massive bombardment in 1995, but NATO did not dare to do so under Russia’s sidelines, and it is unlikely that it will be resolved again, because then the situation can change dramatically. Instead, the West relied on exhaustion. Again and again Washington feeds the war in the Donbass with its millions, Kiev politicians get their own, but Ukraine itself is bursting at the seams, the Nazis are getting out of control, and those who want to become the next “hero of ATO” are getting smaller.

In the end, as Croatia, Slovenia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina withdrew from the SFRY, Ukraine is losing its regions. The Crimea became the first in this circle, the Donbass seized by the war for Ukraine, de facto, also lost. Turns – Transcarpathia. It is likely that the end of the conflict will put an end to Ukraine itself, but at the cost of such a world will be the years of suffering of ordinary people, thousands of lives taken to please certain people. This is the price that the United States is willing to pay again and again for the sake of preserving its status in the world.