As America moves to bring an end to a conflict in Ukraine we helped precipitate, it needs to guard against opponents of this new policy trajectory who will seek to disrupt its new role as peacemaker and/or extract vengeance on the United States for betraying their cause. Perhaps the greatest threat to the United States in this regard is the enemy within—the Ukrainian-American diaspora whose loyalty to the odious ideology of Stepan Bandera transcends everything—including the land which they currently call home.

In May 1940, 805 delegates from 168 different Ukrainian-American communities met in Washington, DC to form the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, or UKKA. Three of these organizations—the Ukrainian National Association, the Providence Association of Ukrainian Catholics in America, and the Ukrainian National Aid Association in America—had previously come together in 1922 to form the United Ukrainian Organizations in America (Obiednannia Ukrainskykh Orhanizatsii v Amerytsi, or OUO). Over the years, the OUO had been very active, raising around $250,000 dollars to help Ukrainian organizations in Western Europe and in Western Ukraine, and to protest the Polish “Pacification in Eastern Galicia" that took place from September-November 1932, and the famine in Soviet Ukraine which occurred in1932–3.

The OUO represented the initial wave of Ukrainian-Americans who had come to this country in the 19^th century. At the end of the First World War, however, a second wave of Ukrainian immigrants began to arrive, survivors of Ukraine’s violent efforts at independence. This second wave of immigrants included many who were loyal to the Ukrainian Military Organization (UVO), a resistance organization formed from veterans of Ukraine’s abortive bid for nationhood. Later, in 1929, the UVO was reorganized as the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, or OUN, co-founded by Andriy Melnyk, Yevhen Konovalets, and Stepan Bandera. The OUN was the largest Ukrainian nationalist organization, known for its extreme far-right ideology.

The UKKA advocated on behalf of Ukrainian nationalist interests during the difficult war years, a task complicated by the fact that the OUN was investigated by the FBI in the late 1930’s because of its affiliation with Nazi Germany. But the German invasion and occupation of Ukraine allowed the UKKA to alter the narrative regarding Ukrainians from collaborator to victim, and in 1944 the UKK established the United Ukrainian American Relief Committee (ZUADK) to aid Ukrainians displaced by the war. Between 1947 and 1957, ZUADK facilitated the resettlement of some 60,000 Ukrainian refugees into the United States.

Most of these refugees came from the displaced persons (DP) camps established by the western allies in occupied Germany. At the end of the Second World War, there were some two million Ukrainian refuges on German soil. By the end of 1945, approximately 1.8 million of these refugees had been returned to their homeland. Some left willingly, others were compelled to go against their will. By early 1946, some 200,000 Ukrainians remained, around 40% of whom represented Ukrainians who had fled their country along with the retreating German Army, and the others former slave laborers brought to work in German factories. While these refugees identified as Ukrainians, the western allies were loath to grant them citizenship to a nation the Soviet Union, a wartime ally, said did not exist. As such, these refugees were labeled as “stateless persons” or, more popular, “displaced persons,” or DP’s.

While the ideological composition of the more than 1,000 DP camps that had been established by the western powers was as diverse as Ukraine itself, the populations quickly fell under the control of the OUN, and more specifically, that part of the OUN loyal to Stepan Bandera (OUN-B.) Using the typical tools of coercion, including extreme violence that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of noncompliant DPs, the OUN-B began shaping how the DP population defined Ukrainian nationalism. By the time the decision was made to disband the camps and resettle the DP’s abroad, the OUN-B had brought around 70% of the DP population into its ideological fold.

The infusion of 40,000 hard core Banderists into the overall population of Ukrainian-Americans had a telling impact on the political orientation of organizations such as the UKKA; gradually, just as had occurred in the DP camps of western-occupied Germany, the discipline and organizational skill of the OUN-B resulted in their seizing political control over most of the organizations that comprised the UKKA. Soon the Banderist faction set their sights on the next generation of Ukrainian-American nationalists, forming the Ukrainian Youth Association (SUM), established in 1949. In 1962, at their flagship location in Ellenville, New York, SUM erected a monument to those they called the “heroes” of Ukraine—Stepan Bandera, Roman Shukhevych, Symon Petliura and Yevhen Konovalets. Every summer since, SUM runs a series of summer camps for kids of all ages, thoroughly indoctrinating them into the Banderist ideology, centered as it is around the notion of Ukrainian exceptionalism and unquestioned loyalty to the movement.

During the 1960’s and 70’s, the OUN-B faction solidified its control over the various organizations that made up the UKKA under the banner of what they called the “Liberation Front.” The “Liberation Front” was the American arm of what was known as the “World Ukrainian Liberation Front” (SUVF), a coalition of Ukrainian diaspora organizations loyal to the OUN-B. The SUVF first assembled in 1973, and by the end of the 1970’s had positioned itself to take control of the UKKA. During the 1980 UKKA convention, the “Liberty Front” arrived with sufficient delegates to claim total control of the UKKA leadership. Many Ukrainian-American organizations withdrew from the UKKA in protest.

The UKKA describes itself as “a bipartisan American organization that advocates for a strategic partnership between the United States and Ukraine. Our mission is to encourage and persuade the US government to enact specific policies that create ever stronger, more enduring, and mutually beneficial ties with the Ukrainian nation.”

According to their website, the UKKA fundraises “for various different causes in support of Ukraine, and UKKA works closely with other organizations like USAID and the Embassy of Ukraine in the United States to coordinate aid. UKKA further seeks to rally Ukrainian and international communities behind global campaigns to support Ukraine’s resistance.”

The close collaboration between the UKKA and the US Government over the years cannot be overstated. Throughout the 1990’s, Ukrainian “influencers” (radio and television hosts, journalists, and aspiring politicians) were recruited under programs fully funded by USAID that brought these individuals to the United States for “orientation” (i.e., guided visits to the White House, Congress, the State Department, and the Pentagon) where they met and coordinated with US policymakers on issues pertaining to Ukraine. In every instance, those who participated in such visits were assigned an “official” US government representative, and a “Banderist” from the UKKA.

The bottom line is that every aspect of US policy toward Ukraine in the lead-up to President Trump’s second term has been closely coordinated with the most extreme virulent form of Ukrainian nationalism imaginable—that espoused by Stepan Bandera and embraced without question by his loyal followers.

In the aftermath of Trump’s public humiliation of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the White House, Ukrainian nationalists throughout Ukraine began burning Trump in effigy. Others affiliated with the Ukrainian military called upon the Ukrainian diaspora to be prepared to undertake acts of violence to hold those accountable who have betrayed the cause of Bandera.

As I listen to these threats and reflect on the fact that the United States today provides a haven for the literal allies of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany, I take note of the fact that Ellenville, New York is but 60 miles south of where I live. Here successive generations of Ukrainian-American Banderists have been trained as paramilitary operatives ready to participate in armed resistance against those forces opposed to the odious ideology of their master, Stepan Bandera, and its modern-day manifestation as part of Zelensky’s Ukraine.

It is this legion of ideologically-aligned Ukrainian-American youth—successive generations of them—that the Ukrainian nationalists in Ukraine are appealing to.

And as the US works with Russia to bring the conflict in Ukraine to a close in a manner which will be seen as a betrayal by these expatriate Banderists, America needs to be on guard. Because the indoctrination of the Banderists, as carried out in camps such as the ones conducted in Ellenville, place loyalty to the Banderist organization and the cause of Ukrainian nationalism above all else.

Including the United States in which they live and have called home all these years.

Share

Subscribe now

Donate now

As the new tariff regime is launched, its impact on the United States, the targeted countries, and the global economy is increasingly challenging to predict. After identifying China as a foreign “adversary”, the United States has doubled down on aggressive policies aimed at inflicting economic pain to weaken China’s manufacturing, military, and geopolitical capabilities.

Dr. notes that China’s trade ties are well-diversified, and the shift away from the US market will take no longer than two years. The new tariffs are unlikely to yield better results than the tariff regime imposed on China during President Donald Trump’s first term. In fact, China has already won the technology race. Warwick underscored that tariffs alone would not “bring manufacturing back to the United States”; instead, policies to reduce the dominance of the finance sector, raise substantial investments in infrastructure, and create highly skilled, well-educated human capital should be prioritized.

Follow Warwick Powell on X, and check out his recent articles here!

Thank you to all my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions inspire it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute to the resources needed to produce more content on the platform. If you’d like to make a one-time contribution, please do so via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Subscribe now

Follow World Affairs in Context on YouTube for more video content. In the comments section, let me know who you would like to see as a guest on the podcast in the future.

Share World Affairs in Context

As the gold price reached $3,000 per troy ounce, the Trump administration may consider revaluing U.S. gold reserves. Despite the fact that calls to audit Fort Knox have died down, the existence of nearly 8,000 tons of gold (worth about $750 billion) held at Fort Knox is still surrounded by mystery. Does the gold at Fort Knox even exist? What is its true origin? What’s driving the federal government’s lack of transparency? Will gold revaluation collapse the U.S. dollar, as so many gold brokers claim? Will gold reserves be used to pay off $37 trillion in U.S. national debt or buy Bitcoin for the newly created Federal Bitcoin Reserve? I discussed these and other questions with Ryan McMaken, economist and executive editor at the Mises Institute.

Ryan McMaken notes that the gold held at Fort Knox was effectively “stolen” from the American public by the U.S. government after President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 6102 in 1933. This order effectively made gold ownership, both in coins and bars, illegal for all Americans and punishable by up to ten years in prison.

Follow Ryan McMaken on X, and check out his books and articles here!

Thank you to all my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions inspire it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute to the resources needed to produce more content on the platform.

Subscribe now

Follow World Affairs in Context on YouTube for more video content. In the comments section, let me know who you would like to see as a guest on the podcast in the future.

Share World Affairs in Context

Chinese regulators recently blocked BlackRock’s $23 b…

Read more

Greetings, All!

Let’s catch up on the latest top headlines, opinions, and recommendations.

Venezuela Blockade: Donald Trump Promises to Impose Tariffs on All Oil Importers Venezuela, Targets China and the EU

As America’s “Liberation Day” nears, the Trump administration added yet another country to a growing list of targeted states. The US will impose a 25% tariff on all importers of oil from Venezuela. President Trump clarified that the new tariff would be added to any other tariffs on trade with the United States.

During the past 12 months, nearly 200 cargo ships carrying Venezuela’s oil travelled to Europe, and 90 oil tankers shipped oil to China. The Trump administration might view the policy as a “two birds one stone” approach that allows it to wreck what’s left of Venezuela’s economy (as of February 2024, approximately 82% of Venezuelans live in poverty), potentially increase the cost of a fraction of China’s oil imports and weaken the EU, thus forcing it to focus on the US as its main source of energy (to its own detriment, without a doubt).

Imposing an economic blockade on Venezuela’s main source of revenue will cause disproportionate harm to the country’s civilian population. While economic sanctions are designed to destabilize the country from within, Nicolas Maduro has proven to be rather immune to covert regime change operations.

Subscribe now

End of Dollar Empire: How America Weaponized the World's Economy, Dedollarization Is Irreversible

In a recently published article, Financial Times points out several “truths” that were previously regarded as anti-American: de-dollarization is the result of failed Washington’s policies, not the inherent “evil” of China, Russia, or other actors seeking to protect their economic sovereignty. While the entire world has started to point out the hypocrisy of waging economic wars and weaponizing the most valuable asset of the United States, its dollar as the global reserve currency, US policymakers appear to be in denial as the day when an aggressive tariff regime goes into effect is celebratory advertised as “America’s Liberation Day”.

Since access to the dollar system was essential for governments and businesses around the globe, Washington could punish adversaries without firing a bullet by blocking their ability to transact in dollars.

The trend to amplify currency multipolarity is one of many features that accompany the transition from unipolarity to a more balanced global structure. The US's ability to print an endless supply of dollars and export them abroad solidified US monetary hegemony. The decline of trust in the US dollar is a symptom of a much deeper shift that is transforming the world as well as its main actors.

NEW US-Ukraine Minerals Deal: Looting and Economic Colonization

The US-Ukraine minerals deal, expected to be signed any day, is nothing short of looting Ukraine’s resources for generations to come: the deal, in its current format, is “indefinite” and hands over all resources—oil, gas, minerals—to the United States as the main beneficiary. Even Ukraine’s members of Parliament are protesting on social media platforms: "It [the deal] is not in our favor!”

While Volodymir Zelensky appears to deny that close to $120 billion provided in military assistance to Ukraine is, in fact, debt (one has to wonder - did Zelensky believe it was charity or humanitarian aid, or is this a maneuver to manipulate Donald Trump?) that Ukraine must repay, both sides appear to indicate that the agreement is close to being signed.

Thank you to all my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions inspire it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute to the resources needed to produce more content on the platform.

Subscribe now

This Week’s Top Headlines

• On Friday, Elon Musk’s xAI acquired X (formerly Twitter) at a valuation of $33 billion. Combined valuation of XAI Holdings now exceeds $100 billion, not including the debt.

• With the price of vehicles expected to rise due to new 25% tariffs effective April 3, auto dealers report complete chaos in their showrooms as buyers attempt to purchase a vehicle before the price increases. Automakers are accelerating shipments and builds.

  “US dealerships are sitting on about 60 to 90 days of inventory on average, providing them with a cushion against the immediate effects of the tariffs.

  What happens after that supply runs out remains unclear. Analysts say that automakers will most likely absorb some of the higher costs, dealers may see a hit to profitability and consumers will pay the rest. But exactly how that’s all balanced out is anyone’s guess at this point.” (Bloomberg)

• The Trump administration is moving ahead with the Golden Dome missile defense project. This is not the first time the US has attempted to create the infrastructure— after issuing an executive order to make it official, President Donald Trump drew parallels with the well-known Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) of 1983 under President Ronald Reagan. An advanced system, whether it is practically justified or not, will cost billions of dollars to develop and implement, and it is a major win for American defense contractors.

• President Trump threatened Iran, stating that “bad things will happen” if it refused to negotiate with the United States. The escalation follows Iran’s response, conveyed to the US via Oman, which indicated that the country will not agree to coercion but is open to diplomatic, respectful negotiations.

  Following the US withdrawal from the JCPOA agreement, which, according to independent reports, Iran was in full compliance with, the Trump administration may attempt to revive the failed deal. Whether such attempts will be made in good faith remains to be seen.

• Despite not being acknowledged as such by the responsible parties, the Signalgate scandal that unraveled this week is a complete disaster on an international scale. Where does one even begin? Bombing an entire residential building to allegedly target a single individual, then cheering on an “excellent” outcome as the building collapses with civilians inside? Dislcosure of what should be classified information? A detailed list of planned bombings on Yemen? The list goes on…

  Here is a video of the “bomb Yemen” group chat shared by The Atlantic:

  Ted Snider's article "The Signal Scandal, Carelessness, Revelations, and Hypocrisy" provides an excellent perspective on the failure to protect national security and adhere to the rules of war.

Share World Affairs in Context

What I’m Reading & Listening to This Week

• This week I enjoyed a podcast America’s Constitutional Crisis by featuring Prof. Katherine Franke from Columbia University. Whether you are independent, right, left or somewhere in the middle, it may be time to admit that selective application of law, as well as blutantly silencing dissent, is a red flag and a sign of much more pervaisive, structural issues that will only exxacerbate if left unchecked.

• I focused on reading a well-resesarched, insightful book by Samuel Moyn, Humane. I will discuss it in greater detail in a new, Substack-exclusive, video series featuring interviews with authors that I am currently working on (please stay tuned and subscribe to get updates when it is released!)

  Moyn examines the evolution of modern warfare and the bi-partisan push for so-called “humanitarianism” in the context of US foreign policy.

  The author argues that this shift, which began in the mid-20th century, coincided with the rise of "humane" warfare tactics, such as precision bombing and drone strikes, which are portrayed by policymakers as less destructive and more ethical than traditional warfare methods. As we know well, these efforts have not necessarily led to less violence or fewer civilian casualties. Instead, they have provided a moral cover for ongoing US military interventions and endless wars abroad.

Thank you to all of my subscribers for being part of World Affairs in Context. Your support makes the newsletter happen, and your questions, ideas, and suggestions are the inspiration behind it. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, which will help contribute towards the resources needed to produce more content.

Subscribe now

The Russia House had a special guest, Maria Zakharova, the Spokeswoman of the Russian Foreign Ministry. What started as a classic interview turned into a remarkable conversation that touched on the very essence of the problems that exist today between Russia and the West, emphasizing the responsibility on the part of the West for these problems, and underscoring how important it is to overcome Russophobia if solutions to these problems are to be found.

Click here to read related article. Click here to subscribe to The Russia House.

Share

Subscribe now

Donate now