Simon Says! – On Communist Patriotism – Issue No. 1

Recently, debate has erupted throughout the American left regarding the idea of Communist Patriotism and the controversy around this debate has fractured many left wing circles both online and in-person. The discourse is chaotic and unorganized as nobody can seem to agree on the definitions of various relevant terms, and many people on both sides of the debate–the primary sides being those who advocate for Communist Patriotism and those who advocate against it–have reduced their arguments down to moralistic pandering rather than basing them on solid analysis. As is true of any issue, it falls upon principled Marxists to analyze the issue of Communist Patriotism from an objective, material standpoint. I have been working on a much lengthier piece that tackles the same issue and will be essentially boiling the arguments made in that piece down to their essential elements for the purposes of this column.

As far as I can tell, the attention this debate has received originates primarily from statements made on the subject by various online political personalities on both sides. Some say that Communist Patriotism is a default position for Marxists globally and that the American question is no different to that default. Others claim that the US is a settler colonial state and, as a result, American patriotism is incompatible with Marxism or Communism. These arguments arrive at different conclusions based on both different analysis and different definitions, and those of the after opinion seem to conflate certain terms.

In the larger piece mentioned above, I began to tackle the question of Communist Patriotism by outlining the definitions of all the relevant terms (primarily by tracing their historical and contemporary use) and, to support this, cited a number of authors and dictionaries. For the purposes of this column, I will skip the lengthy analysis used to arrive at the definitions and provide the definition for both ‘nationalism’ and ‘patriotism.’ I chose these terms in particular because the debate has largely centered around the question of whether American Patriotism is inherently nationalistic/chauvinistic.

Nationalism is the doctrine or ideology that places moral or hierarchical emphasis on one’s own national character, unified language, national territory, and/or economy as opposed to the national character, unified language, national territory, and/or economy of other nations. Essentially, a person or idea is nationalistic if it depicts one’s own nation as being superior to other nations.

Patriotism, on the other hand, is the doctrine or practice of loving one’s place of origin, the people who inhabit it, and a compulsion to protect these brothers and sisters, as well as bring prosperity to them. Patriotism, while in colloquial use being synonymous with nationalism or chauvinism, is a much broader (and older) term that does not necessarily refer to any strict ideological or political structure, nor does it refer to a nation specifically.

It is obvious from these definitions how one could get confused as to their differences. It is of course possible for nationalist to be patriotic (in fact, I’d say most nationalists at least think they are patriots). It is, also, possible for a patriot to be nationalistic. However, the terms are not synonymous. Believing your nation is superior to another is not necessary for you to love your country or it’s people. In fact, in the American case specifically, loving our country and wanting the best for her people would run counter to the nationalistic line because our countries nationalistic and chauvinistic policies have historically harmed those abroad and at home.

A perfect example of this is the imperialist interventionism that the US has routinely engaged in since the end of WWII. Imperialistic wars such as the invasions of Vietnam, Korea, Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan have always been predicated on the superiority of American society in comparison to other societies. Vietnam and Korea were invaded in fear of the Communists taking power and disrupting US interests; all of the conflicts mentioned above were framed in such a way as to imply the superiority of US liberal democracy to whatever sociopolitical structure existed in these nations. As such, these wars were certainly nationalistic (even if the US does not neccessarily constitute a nation in the Marxist sense) and chauvinistic. If nationalism and patriotism were synonymous, then these wars would have been patriotic as well (i.e. they would have been fought on the behalf of and in the interest of the American people). It is obvious, however, that these wars did not benefit the vast majority of Americans. Young Americans were conscripted against their will to fight in Vietnam and Korea and the inherent mechanisms of economic imperialism (that is, the conversion of domestic productive capital into finance capital and the exporting of production into imperialized countries) are harmful to American workers, since they revoke jobs that once existed domestically and throw working Americans into the clutches of unstable precarious labor.

Notice that pointing out the harm done to American workers as a result of imperialism does not come at the expense of imperialized countries; one can recognize the horrible atrocities committed under the banner of US imperialism as well as understanding that imperialism has also done harm domestically.

To be a patriot, one must fight for the policies and principles that will best uphold the interests of the American people. And for us to do that, we must reject nationalism, chauvinism, and every other reactionary ideology utilized by the ruling class to justify it’s atrocities. Exporting labor to the Global South harms US workers. Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on imperialist wars while US infrastructure and healthcare crumbles harms US workers. Subjugating indigenous nations and using their land to expand corporate profits harms US workers. Since all of these things harm the people of the US, it then follows that a good patriot must vehemently oppose all of these things.

It is quite convenient, then, that American communists (such as myself) do, in fact, oppose all of these things. And not only do we oppose these things but we also openly advocate for the policies and principles that would end all of these things. American communists support the end of imperialist conflicts that destroy developing nations and use them for cheap production. We support spending taxpayer money on infrastructure and healthcare rather than further engorging the bloated Military-Industrial Complex. We support the recognition of indigenous self-determination in a way that gives indigenous people (and not massive corporations) sovereignty over tribal land.

From this we can conclude that, yes, Communist Patriotism is the correct line for principled Marxists. Further, American communists must be patriots; to love one’s people is necessary in loving all people. American communists must be city builders who seek to end the rampant destruction caused by US imperialism. We are proudly communist and we are proudly patriotic. Loving the American people, for us, is the first step in the dismantling of the bourgeois system and marching onward towards the progression of mankind

The Prosecution of Alex Saab: The Latest Attempt to Strangle Venezuela

A businessman and diplomat now sits in a US Federal Detention Facility in Miami awaiting trial, part of the latest move in continuous US efforts to destabilize South America.

Writing for the Wall Street Journal on May 24, 2018 Anatoly Kurmanaev wrote: “When I arrived in Venezuela in 2013, the party was still on. Oil was fetching $100 a barrel, and Mr. Maduro’s populist government was showering petrodollars on everyone. The Caracas skyline was dotted with grandiose construction projects, steakhouses were buying vintage Scotch by the container load and hotels had to be reserved weeks in advance.”

The cliché right-wing narrative that Venezuela has been on the brink of starvation ever since it adopted the godless totalitarian ideology of Communism couldn’t be further from the truth. When Hugo Chavez was elected in 1998, Venezuela only had 12 public universities. Now it has 32. The rate of poverty was cut in half between 1995 and 2009. Adult Illiteracy, long a plague on working class communities throughout the country, has been wiped out. The Housing Missions have provided affordable, high quality modern housing to millions of people.

The widely highlighted problems that have hit Venezuela, most especially since 2014, are a direct effort of foreign meddling in their political affairs. Banks throughout the world have frozen or seized the assets of the Venezuelan state. US sanctions have made it nearly impossible for Venezuela to import needed products such as food and medical supplies. The Westminster Foundation for Democracy, a UK foundation has spent over $345,000 since 2016 on “funding journalism” to work against the Venezuelan government.

Rex Tillerson, the CEO of Exxon-Mobile, is reported by the Washington Post to have a personal vendetta against the socialist government after Chavez stood up to him, asserting domestic control over Venezuela’s oil resources.

A number of attempts to violently overthrow the Venezuelan government with a military coup have been linked to the United States, with ex-Green Berets and US-linked military contractors involved. On August 14th, 2020 a gathering where Venezuelan President Maduro was speaking was targeted by a drone.

Yet, despite economic warfare, internal subversion and military threat the Venezuelan government remains solidly intact. Why? The military, trained in Cuba and ideologically loyal to Marxism, stands behind Maduro. A network of communes, collectivos and Bolivarian community militias also enforce the governments policies on a local level. A solid core of Venezuelan people from the country’s urban centers and working class neighborhood can recall the days before healthcare was widely available and millions of Venezuelans had no running water or electricity. They are committed to preventing a return of neoliberalism and backing up the project of construction led by the United Socialist Party.

The latest attempt to strangle the Venezuelan state has come in the form of extraditing Alex Saab, a Columbian businessman and diplomat. Saab was on his way to Iran on June 12, 2020. He was pulled of his plane at the Amical Cabral International Airport in Cape Varde’s island of Sal. He was held in Cape Verde, often in inhuman conditions, until he was extradited on October 16th.

“The Key” for a “Loose Alliance of Nations”

Saab was arraigned on Monday in Miami’s Federal Court. The charges against him are that he allegedly worked to circumvent US sanctions to help Venezuela’s housing mission program. Forbes magazine described the charges against Saab writing: “For the U.S., Saab is the key that unlocks the Venezuelan monetary mystery—that is, how a country facing sanctions from the U.S., the U.K. and the European Union—is still able to export things like gold and oil.” The article goes on to describe how Dev Odedra an “anti-money laundering expert” spoke of Alex Saab being “an “instrumental player” in the loose alliance of nations like Venezuela and Iran, both living under U.S. sanctions, countries that are in need of mutual trade in gold, oil and gas to “prop up the regime(s) against the backdrop of imposed sanctions.”

The detention and prosecution of Alex Saab in Cape Verde violated international treaties and norms, as he had a diplomatic passport and should have been granted immunity as is standard for international envoys. UN organizations and human rights groups throughout the planet have raised their voices against this blatant act of aggression from the United States.

Many are watching the case closely because the implications are massive. Prominent lawyer and legal expert Nancy Hollander explained: “The US takes the position that anyone who manages to get past the sanctions is violating the sanctions, which makes the sanctions worldwide.”

If Alex Saab is convicted and imprisoned in the United States, the result is putting almost everyone who does business with Iran, Russia, Cuba or any of the 29 countries under US sanctions at risk of abduction and prosecution. The results for millions of people in terms of access to medical care, food, supplies and other necessities of life could be detrimental. Even Forbes admits that “for many in Venezuela, this is not criminal—Saab is a hero, and his efforts overseas are the actions of a man trying to feed and house the hungry and homeless.”

Many voices around the world have demanded that Saab be immediately released. His wife fears for his safety, and October 17th read the following statement to the press on behalf of her husband: “I am not suicidal. Just in case they murder me and say that I committed suicide, something I would never do.”

Many across the planet are paying close attention to what happen to Alex Saab as remains locked up in Miami, awaiting trial.

Posted in Uncategorized

The Outrageous Facts of the Alex Saab Case

Alex Saab was transported from Cape Verde to the United States on October 16th. He has been charged with money laundering in US Federal Court and is being held in Miami. He had been in Cape Verde since local authorities pulled him off a plane destined for Iran.
On Sunday, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets of Caracas to support a man who was trying to arrange for food to reach Venezuela. Protests took place across the hemisphere, as far away as Times Square in New York City.

Despite the international outcry, US media remains largely silent about the case. Aside from an article here and there, the mainstream voices in the US are trying to avoid drawing attention to the case. Why? Because of the outrageous facts of the case. A basic overview of the facts lays out how blatantly illegal the actions of US and Cape Verde authorities have been throughout the process.

First, Alex Saab is a diplomat representing Venezuela with a diplomatic passport. Pulling him off an international flight on June 12, 2020 violates a number of international agreements and norms. Diplomatic immunity should apply. Five different UN Special Rapporteurs, United Nations Human Rights Committee, the Justice Court of the Economic Community of West African States and a UN working group have condemned Cape Verde for detaining Saab at the behest of the United States.

On October 16th, Saab was taken from the home where he was staying in house arrest. His defense team was never informed that he was being handed over to US authorities and transported to the USA. Throughout his time in Cape Verde, Saab’s defense team was sabotaged by local officials who moved him to different facilities and otherwise denied them access to their client. It was made extremely difficult for Saab’s relatives to visit him, and a number of official letters from the Venezuelan embassy were simply ignored.

The allegation is that somehow Saab was working to arrange for food and medicine to be purchased from Iran and sent to Venezuela, doing so in violation of US sanctions. US Federal Courts have no jurisdiction in Iran or Venezuela. Meanwhile, the blocking of humanitarian supplies is a blatant violation of international law.

The precedent being set by Alex Saab’s case is massive. In essence, US officials are declaring their right to detain and prosecute anyone, anywhere in the world, who does business with a government they unilaterally choose to sanction.

With Alex Saab now in Miami, many international voices and legal experts are raising the alarm about a case that could change the nature of global trade and international human rights for decades to come.

Posted in Uncategorized

A look at Cape Verde regime holding Alex Saab

The archipelago nation officially called the Republic of Cape Verde is not large. It is home to over half a million people. However, this small country is currently at the centre of an international controversy.

On June 12, 2020, authorities in Cape Verde arrested a passenger who was flying from Venezuela to Iran. The passenger was a Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab whose life now hangs in the balance as he continues to be held pending extradition to the United States.

While the issue of who Alex Saab is, allegations of money laundering and the nature of his diplomatic mission seem to be the focus of the media coverage, an overview of some basic facts about the country where it all began are worth reviewing.

The rate of infant mortality in Cape Verde is a staggering 24.1 deaths per 1,000 live births. Compare that to 5.25 in the United States and 4.19 in Cuba. Statistics from the CIA World Factbook indicate that 13 per cent of adults in the country have never received a formal education and are illiterate.

At least 35 per cent of the population was listed as living below the poverty line in 2015, though these numbers have most likely increased since the Covid-19 pandemic on a group of small islands where tourism is a major economic factor.

Slave trade

The islands were uninhabited when the Portuguese first arrived in 1456. The colonisers almost immediately began using the country as hub in the international slave trade.

Today, 98 per cent of the population describes their ethnicity as either African or Creole. After being granted independence following the 1974 political upheaval in Portugal, the former colony was ruled by a western-backed authoritarian regime until free elections were allowed in 1990.

While the population on the islands is just over 550,000, this is largely because citizens of Cape Verde continue to migrate elsewhere. Cape Verdeans represent over 15 per cent of the foreign nationals living in Portugal.

None of this information indicates good governance on the part of the island nation’s leaders. As a result of underdevelopment and likely longterm mismanagement of the country’s economy, the population remains under-educated, without access to basic services, and dispersed across the planet to neighbourhoods where conditions are only slightly better.

The regime responsible for such conditions is the one that ultimately carried out the arrest of Alex Saab in response to a “red notice” from Interpol regarding charges of money laundering from the United States.

Doing America’s dirty work

Reliable sources indicate that the mastermind behind the arrest of Alex Saab is Paulo Rocha, the Interior Minister. Rocha has visited the island of Sal where Saab is being held far more frequently than usual after the detention began. Rocha always strives to please US officials.

In 2019, he oversaw a partnership with the United States which included matching the small country’s police forces up with the Police Department of the US City of Boston.

While there could be a possibility of him being directly paid off, it is clear that increasing American investment and existing partnerships with the US is something that must be constantly weighing on Rocha’s mind.

Whether he was arm twisted or his pockets were padded is not clear, but there’s no question that Rocha didn’t dream up pulling a passenger off of a plane simply on his own.

Jose Landim, the Attorney General, is also involved in the Alex Saab affair. He has also visited Sal much more frequently since Saab’s arrest, and seems to be doing his utmost to sabotage Saab’s legal defense.

Official letters from the Venezuelan embassy to the Ministry of Justice have been ignored. Diplomatic flights have been delayed. Saab’s lawyers were only allowed to enter the country a week after he had been arrested, and then only given five days to meet with him and strategise, all supposedly due to Covid19 health restrictions.

Despite the fact that Saab is a Venezuelan diplomat, the Venezuelan ambassador to Cape Verde has only been allowed to meet him once on June 20 briefly.

Integrity

Saab’s lawyers have filed a criminal complaint in response to the conditions of their client’s detention, describing “offence (sic) to physical integrity, torture and cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment, theft of personal property, abuse of power, and attack against foreign authorities, corruption and kidnapping.”

However, concerns about the manner in which the prominent detainee is being held, including erratic moves to different facilities on different islands, are not being taken seriously.

The defense of Saab focuses on a lack of jurisdiction, arguing the US has no legal basis for scrutinising transactions between Iran and Venezuela.

US officials seem to be arguing that they have the authority to prosecute people in any corner of the globe in order to enforce international sanctions and further foreign policy goals. Investigations into Alex Saab’s finances in Switzerland went on for 3 years but ultimately couldn’t find any wrongdoing.

Since Saab has already been cleared in one country over investigations into the same financial transactions cited by prosecutors in Miami, Cape Verde’s law against “double jeopardy” i.e. charging an individual with the same crime more than once, should secure his immediate release.

While the US power structure may find a way to reward Landim, Rocha and other officials in Cape Verde for their collaboration in going after a significant figure in Venezuela, the case doesn’t reflect well on the small country’s government.

While the population suffers in poverty, leadership seems to be focused on fighting the battles of the US State Department.

A reputation for doing America’s dirty work and torturing wealthy diplomats is unlikely to attract many new investors.

Originally published on Nation.Africa

Posted in Uncategorized

The Trumanite Counterrevolution and its Consequences

Many, when analyzing the Cold War, conclude that it was inevitable. The result of an irreconcilable ideological divide between the capitalist and socialist countries. While right on the surface, very few look beyond this simple framework. Nothing is inevitable in history or life. The Cold War was not inevitable and its origins go back to a terrible day in history. July 21st, 1944. The Vice Presidential Nomination of the Democratic Party.

In 1944 the free world was in a death struggle against fascism. The Soviet Union, China, Britain, and the United States fought against the genocidal terror states of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. The Soviets were liberating Eastern Europe, the Western front had opened up, and the Japanese were losing in the Pacific. The postwar era was looking to be one of republics working towards an anti-imperialist multipolar world. The United States under the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt and Henry Wallace pushed forward the idea of the United Nations and decolonization. Henry Wallace was seen as the successor to FDR’s vision and with FDR’s health failing, a Wallace presidency seemed inevitable.

In 1942, Henry Wallace gave his address Century of A Common Man in which he advocated for an end to poverty, war, and fascism internationally. Along with this and unlike FDR, Henry Wallace was firmly against segregation and advocated for Civil Rights. Overall, Wallace sought to continue the New Deal, supported a multipolar world, and wanted to move towards a New America. This for the Eastern Establishment, Southern Segregationists, and British Imperialists was a terrifying prospect. These cliques both within the US and abroad would simply not let Wallace succeed FDR.

Higher-ups in the Democratic Party scrambled to sabotage and stop a Wallace nomination at the July Convention. The most notable figures within this effort were Robert E. Hannegan, a Southern Segregationist and party insider. Another critical conspirator was Edwin W. Pauley, a capitalist who later worked with Hoover and the FBI on disrupting anti-war organizers in California during the 60s-70s. At the Democratic Convention, Wallace won far more delegates than Truman. But due to the delaying of a vote, divide and conquer and relentless anti-Wallace maneuvering. The Democratic nomination was stolen from the American people and secured for Harry Truman. FDR at this time was incredibly ill and could do little to help his preferred nominee, Wallace, to win.

Truman in terms of vision was the exact opposite of Wallace. Truman was an old-school Dixiecrat, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, and a fervent reactionary. When the Soviet Union was invaded by the Axis in June of 1941 Truman commented, “If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible”. This type of pro-fascist rhetoric is shocking when one considers this man became President of the United States right after Roosevelt, who fought against these political forces which Truman represented. The Klan during the 30s opposed Roosevelt ferociously. So much so that a faction of the Klan called the Black Legion conducted terrorist attacks in the Midwest against Progressives, Labor organizers, and African Americans. It is also suspected that the Black Legion was responsible for the murder of Malcolm X’s father.

Truman after coming to power immediately began to reverse the foreign and domestic policy created by the Roosevelt era. It began with the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These bombings and the hundreds of thousands of deaths that accompanied them were entirely unnecessary. The Soviet Union with its liberation of Manchuria and destruction of the Kwantung Army already resulted in the Japanese sending peace feelers to both America and the Soviets. This move was a passive-aggressive move as Truman told Stalin about the existence of the bomb at the Potsdam conference. After the disaster caused by this bombing and immediately after WW2, the Trumanite reaction continued. Vietnam during WW2 was liberated from the Japanese by the Vietminh in collaboration with Roosevelt’s OSS. In 1945 out of desperation, the British Empire used Japanese POWs to reoccupy Vietnam on behalf of France. Truman and the US government went right along with the British in the reconquest of colonies post WW2. Malaysia, Indochina, Korea among other nations fell victim to this reaction.

At home, the Trumanite reaction expressed itself in the fullest sense. Women who worked in the factories producing critical arms for the war effort were soon out of a job and put back in the home. This can be explained by the need for capitalism to maintain unemployment to shore up a reserve army of labor. African-Americans after spilling blood in service against fascism came home to face a new form of fascism. Lynchings, unemployment, and systemic racism continued to plague African-Americans and still do to this day.

Politically, the Trumanite counterrevolution got worse as the 40s progressed. The Red Scare began in the late 40s throughout the mid-50s. Progressive forces were smashed, with their leadership arrested, erosion of membership, and destruction of militant labor unions. The AFL-CIO purged itself of its left flank which won the Flint Strike among other massive labor struggles. Actors, artists, musicians, organizers, workers were all repressive in this terror which American politics still has yet to recover from. The names of the victims of McCarthyism are countless. Paul Robeson, William Z Foster, Benjamin Davis, Lillian Helman, Henry Winston, Langston Hughes, The Rosenbergs, among thousands of others. Victims from all backgrounds lost their livelihoods, jobs, families, sight, and even lives. The Trumanite reaction casts long shadows to this day. American and global politics were irrevocably impacted by this disaster. It will be up to future generations to undo the damage of this counterrevolution.

Conflict in Ukraine: Clashes in the East

[PressTV] The Ukrainian army has accused pro-Russia separatists of targeting military positions along the Eastern border with mortars, grenade launchers, and machine guns, reports PressTV. This is the fourth Ukrainian casualty in three days as tensions with pro-independence fighters have resurfaced in the country’s east. Accusations from Kiev of Russia arming anti-Ukraine fighters have arisen after the Crimean Peninsula was rejoined into the Russian Federation in 2014. Moscow denies these accusations. Author Jim Cavanaugh and Center for Political Innovation correspondent Keaten Mansfield discuss the situation.

“Your guess is as good as mine,” Cavanaugh replied to a question about how long the fighting in Eastern Ukraine would continue, “It’s important to recognize that Ukrainian forces have been shelling the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk over the past few months. This is not something that started from the Ukrainian side, this is a conflict that’s gone on since the coup, the insurrection that overthrew the constitutionally elected government and imposed a regime in Kiev which includes literal Hitler-loving fascists. And the people in Eastern Ukraine don’t want any part of that, and they’ve been fighting against it… So we have this ongoing conflict and [Ukrainian president] Zelenskyy [has] declared that the policy is for Ukraine to take the Crimean Peninsula. So Zelenskyy has been threatening all out war over, essentially, ‘getting back,’ Eastern Ukraine. And also we have to understand that, if anything, Russia has been holding back Eastern Ukraine from just declaring itself a separate state or doing as Crimea did and joining with Russia. So this is going to go on because Zelenskyy is under a lot of pressure from the fascist right in Ukraine to take back and assert sovereignty over Eastern Ukraine, to take back Crimea. The United States is in the background, wanting to keep a low-level conflict with Russia going on, but not wanting a full-out war with Russia. So, [for America], it’s good for this to keep going on forever, and the Russians are reluctant to force the question themselves. It’s likely that this is going to go on for quite a while [and this could only end] if there was a really serious Ukrainian attack on the Eastern provinces that was generated by pressure from the right-wing, fascist groups in Kiev.”

“The people of the East, of Ukraine, Russia, [and] Belarus, remember the atrocities of Germany, remember the atrocities of World War II or [The Great Patriotic War],” explains Keaten, “So it doesn’t seem like the fighting for independence and re-unification with Russia will end in Ukraine until the Ukrainian people are able to return to the homeland, to the motherland, that they want. The people of Ukraine, especially in Eastern Ukraine, are not going to tolerate a regime, a president, who is putting up statues of SS officers who committed atrocities across the breadbasket of Eastern Europe, and [they] are going to fight tooth and nail for the ability to join Russia, to join a country that is going to protect them as a religious (Russian orthodox) entity, protect them as an ethnic and cultural people who are much closer aligned and familiar with the Russian nation and government than they are with the Ukrainian, pro-fascist Zelenskyy government. So it seems no cease-fire, no peace deal, is going to bring an end to this conflict until the Eastern Ukrainian Donbas region is able to rejoin it’s true government, it’s true nation, which is Russia.”

The ongoing conflict in Russia is ideal for US imperialist interests as it keeps pressure on Russia and it distracts from peaceful relations in Eastern Europe. They will try to keep Kiev’s fascist forces from full-on attack, explains Cavanaugh, while continuing to accuse Russia of undue aggression for maneuvering within its own borders. CPI’s Keaten Mansfield showed his full support for self determination within the Donbass region and Eastern Ukraine.