Was the 2014 Maidan Revolution in Ukraine a genuine cry for freedom, or a carefully orchestrated power grab by Western forces?
According to The Populist Times, the events surrounding the dramatic ouster of Ukraine’s democratically chosen leader, Viktor Yanukovich, have resurfaced in a pointed discussion by commentators Jack Posobiec and Mike Benz, who argue that this was no grassroots movement but a calculated U.S.-backed operation with profound geopolitical consequences.
Back in 2014, Ukraine was thrust into chaos with mass protests erupting in Kyiv’s Maidan Square. These demonstrations, according to Posobiec and Benz, were not the spontaneous uprisings they appeared to be but rather a coordinated effort influenced by American interests. They label this as a "color revolution," a term often used for externally supported regime changes.
Yanukovich, elected as Ukraine’s president in 2010, found himself forced out of power following the Maidan unrest. Posobiec and Benz contend that this removal lacked any constitutional backing, painting it as a direct assault on democratic principles by outside forces.
Posobiec ties the upheaval directly to the foreign policy stance of the Obama administration, highlighting a clear antagonistic posture toward Russia. In this context, he suggests, framed the Maidan events as part of a broader chess game against Moscow, not a mere internal struggle.
After Yanukovich’s departure, a new government swiftly took the reins in Ukraine. Benz points to reports from The New York Times indicating that this transition was anything but organic, with Western hands allegedly guiding the process.
Delving deeper, Benz references a specific New York Times account claiming that the new head of state, Yatsenyuk, wasn’t chosen by Ukrainian citizens. Instead, his selection came via a phone call involving U.S. officials Victoria Nuland and Geoff Pyatt—a revelation that raises eyebrows about national sovereignty.
“He was not elected. The new head of state was literally selected in a joint phone call by Victoria Nuland and Geoff Pyatt, who, in very explicit terms, picked the next president of Ukraine—not the Ukrainian people,” Benz stated.
One might wonder if this is democracy in action or democracy in name only. If foreign powers can handpick leaders, what’s left of a nation’s right to self-determination? It’s a bitter pill for those who value national autonomy over globalist agendas.
Post-Maidan, the restructuring of Ukraine’s intelligence services unfolded under a curious spotlight, as per another New York Times report cited by Benz. The state of Ukraine’s intelligence headquarters right after the shift was described as chaotic, with lights off and papers strewn about—a fitting metaphor for a nation in disarray.
Benz notes that the new intelligence chief’s first move was to reach out to both the CIA and MI6 representatives in Ukraine. This immediate contact suggests a troubling dependency, far from the independent recovery one might hope for. “A three-way partnership was struck the very day after the coup to rebuild Ukraine’s intelligence state from the ground up between Ukraine, the CIA, and MI6,” Benz explained. Such a swift alliance with Western agencies could be seen as a lifeline—or a leash.
Critics of progressive foreign policy might argue that this level of involvement undermines the very freedoms the U.S. claims to champion. When intelligence services are rebuilt under foreign direction, whose interests are truly being served?
The narrative spun by Posobiec and Benz paints a picture of a Ukraine caught in a geopolitical tug-of-war, with its democratic foundations shaken by external meddling. While the Obama-era hostility toward Russia provides a backdrop, the real question is whether such actions provoke more conflict than they resolve.
Perhaps it’s time to rethink the cost of these so-called democratic interventions. If the Maidan Revolution was indeed a Western-orchestrated event, as these commentators suggest, the implications for international trust and stability are profound—and not in a way that inspires confidence in global leadership.