Selensky and the "retrieval" of Crimea
The Crimea platform flops right down the line Have you ever heard of the "Crimea Platform"? No? That is exactly what is surprising, because it was planned as a political and media spectacle, but was ignored by the media.
For months, an issue in Ukraine has been making headlines, but hardly anyone in the West has heard about it. This is more than surprising, because the "Crimea Platform" was supposed to bring the issue of the "occupied" Crimea back on the agenda of international politics. However, this obviously did not work.
The Crimea Platform
On February 26, 2021President Vladimir Selensky signed a decree "On the Deoccupation and Reintegration" of Crimea, which officially launched the preparation of the "Crimean Platform." The goal was to bring the issue of "occupied" Crimea back into the focus of international politics, to increase pressure on Russia, and in the end to return Crimea to Ukraine.
This was widely reported in Ukraine, Selensky hoped that many states would participate in the conference and that the issue would be put back on the agenda politically and in the media. The topics of the conference were mentioned as:
- The policy of non-recognition of the annexation of Crimea by Russia.
- The expansion and tightening of international sanctions against Russia
- International security
- Human rights
- The impact of accession on the economy and the environment
I have since collected many reports on the Crimea platform, waiting for the Western media to jump on the bandwagon at some point and cover the conference and its goals, but there has been little coverage. I am sure that most Germans have never heard of it. Only (and of all places) RT-DE has repeatedly reported on the preparations of the Crimea platform. For example, at RT-DE one could read the translation of a part of a press release of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, which said about the Crimean platform:"The Crimea Platform is a new consultative and coordination format initiated by Ukraine to increase the effectiveness of the international response to the ongoing occupation of Crimea, increase international pressure on Russia and achieve the main goal - the de-occupation of Crimea and the full restoration of Ukraine's sovereignty over the peninsula."
In contrast, there was virtually no coverage of the upcoming conference in the mainstream media.
The Crimea platform was scheduled for August 23 and has now taken place pretty much unnoticed by the Western media. Therefore, it must be called a flop, because it did not achieve the set goals. The Western media did not revisit the topic on the occasion and the participation was also decidedly modest. In order to increase the number of participants, Selensky merged the Crimea platform with the celebrations of Ukraine's 30th Independence Day, but even that did not help.
Germany, for example, only sent Economics Minister Altmaier, although Chancellor Merkel and Foreign Minister Maas were in Kiev the day before. In total, only 42 of the world's 190-plus states accepted the Ukrainian invitation, with hardly any countries other than the Baltic states and Poland sending heads of government or foreign ministers. Mostly it was some junior ministers or even just ambassadors to Ukraine who came to the event.
What was announced as a big and international action in support of Ukraine was in the end a class meeting of the US vassals, because no country accepted that is not under the influence of the USA, as the world map of the participants shows.
And, of course, NATO, the EU and the Council of Europe were not to be missed as international organizations, all of which are also dependent on the USA. However, no country or international organization that does not belong to the U.S. sphere of influence agreed to attend.
Since Kiev regularly begs the West for money, this event was no exception. As early as August 3, Selensky announced that Ukraine would like to hold this event annually, but had no money to do so. What is so unaffordable about renting a conference center for a few hundred participants for one day is not clear, but it also seems to be about something else.
The fact that the conference would flop was already foreseeable at that point, based on the commitments. Selensky has therefore suggested that the conference be held within the framework of the UN in the future. He probably hoped that this would lead to a broader participation of states - and of course the UN would then bear the costs of this class meeting of Western propagandists.
The course of the conference was then accordingly predictable. All the representatives read out short statements at the round table, ranting about Russia and the "annexation" of Crimea. Nothing more happened, there were no agreements or anything like that.
The media echo
It is fascinating that the "so named" "Russian propaganda channel" RT-DE, of all places, has reported extensively on the Crimea platform, while other German media have largely ignored the issue. RT-DE reported extensively on both the run-up to the conference and the conference itself.
Otherwise, media coverage in Germany was meager. Deutschlandfunk ran a short news item reporting on the final declaration, using Kiev propaganda terms, in which the states of the West demanded the return of Crimea. Under the search term "Crimea platform," Google doesn't turn up many reports about the conference in which Selensky had such high hopes.
Therefore, it is hardly an exaggeration to say that this conference, planned by Selensky as a propaganda show, was a complete flop.