Comparing the Ukraine and Vietnam Wars: Donbas is Recognized as a Legitimate State Under US Public Law 86-90

In-depth Report:

Could US Senator John McCain find North Vietnam on a map during or before the period he spent 5 years as a POW in Hanoi? Could you? The answer is no.

North Vietnam only existed in Public Law 86-90. Some of the other countries we also recognize that are enshrined in the law did not exist concretely until 1991.

The Vietnam War and Ukrainian war are intrinsically and inseparably tied together by Public Law 86-90. Like Cossackia (the generic western geo-political term recognizing Donbas’ legitimacy), the problem with North Vietnam is it never existed! Even Wikipedia shallowly recognizes this. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV; Vietnamese: Việt Nam Dân chủ Cộng hòa),[a] generally known as North Vietnam…”

When we recognize North Vietnam as a country or North Vietnamese as the army we fought in Vietnam, we have no choice but to recognize “Cossackia” and the republics in Donbass. By extension, we must also recognize the right of the other regions (republics) inside Ukraine to break away like they were promised by the Ukrainian Nationalists.

Following up on the Public Law 86-90 story at entitled “US Congress and President Obama Officially Recognize Donbas’ Freedom! “Sputnik International interviewed Frank Costigliola, University of Connecticut Professor of History and editor of the Kennan Diaries.

The point of the interview was to ascertain the validity of the US recognizing Donbass on the basis of “Cossackia” according to the Captive Nations Proclamation of 1959.

During the interview professor Costigliola stated

The 1959 US Captive Nations Resolution was meant to antagonize the Soviet Union and has no bearing on United States policy, editor of the diaries of the leading Cold War US diplomat George Kennan, Frank Costigliola, told Sputnik…He noted that the resolution does not reach the significance of a formal recognition of the listed countries by the State Department. A decision to recognize the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lughansk “is a huge, huge step beyond the passage of this Captive Nations Resolution,” Costigliola argued. Moreover, the State Department could not have acted on the Captive Nations Resolution,..

Professor Costigliola has gone even further in a NY Times editorial giving president Obama sound foreign policy advice from the perspective of George Kennan. It’s worth the read. But is he correct to say that the Captive Nations Act has no impact on foreign policy?

If Public Law 86-90 has never had an effect on foreign policy, I am in respectful agreement with the professor. If Public Law 86-90 has been acted on, I am in respectful agreement with the professor that it should never have been able to happen. The law as Stepan Bandera had it written should not have been enacted.

But if it did happen, the genie is out of the bottle and I’m sure any court will agree once the precedent has been set, the law is applicable on all counts.

The problem with the Sputnik interview is it started with the presumption that the law was never acted on and Donbass would be setting a precedent. I respectfully request that professor Costigliola review the abridged history found in this article that he could not have known and comment based on what would have been the correct question.

If precedent had been set as early as the Vietnam War and can be shown in State Department policy affirmations, wouldn’t the same law apply to Donbass?

From his New York Times editorial, Costigliola notes “In 1946-47, Mr. Kennan laid out his containment policy, intending to limit its application to the major power centers of the world, particularly Western Europe and Japan. He grew horrified as containment exploded into a global venture miring the United States in areas of marginal strategic importance, such as Vietnam.”

Vietnam the pre-History of the war

In this short case study of the Vietnam War, the professor’s assumptions are proven wrong. Dead wrong, to the tune of 58,220 American soldiers dead wrong. Proven, it shows Law 86-90 has unquestionable authority or at least enough for Americans to die for.

In the professor’s defense, he wasn’t being disingenuous in the least. He was asked a question from the perspective of being a George Kennan scholar. Kennan stood against this happening. His “Containment” policies started being replaced by the policy of “Annihilation” as early as 1949.

The story of how America got involved in Vietnam starts in 1951 when Stepan Bandera took leadership over the world’s nationalist governments in exile. He had already consolidated Eastern Europe to the point that even Wikipedia makes the links betweenall the Eastern European and Baltic States to their SS Nazi origins in the Captive Nations article. By making it a world encompassing effort Bandera knew even his OUN would eventually gain support.

In 1951, Bandera set the agenda for what would eventually be “The Captive Nations.”

This was reported in the January 1952 Ukrainian Weekly. From the article- On November’30, 1951 the representatives of the peoples of Eastern Europe and Asia (comprising the countries of Azerbaijan, Byelorussia, Georgia, Idel-Ural Cossackia, Crimea, North Caucasus, Turkestan and Ukraine) gathered in Munich and issued a joint appeal to the free world asking for help and support for their liberation from Soviet Russian tyranny.- link from George Mazni, former UCCA Arizona president and Ukrainian Nationalist extraordinaire

Notice in the article even at that date “Russian” was interchangeable with Soviet and both had to be destroyed.

By this time in WDC, the émigrés had become the darlings of the cold war. They stood behind Joe McCarthy and the China Lobby. In America by the mid-1950s, if you didn’t agree with the China Lobby foreign policy, you were unelectable. Among the leadership of the China Lobby were Marv Liebman and Yaroslav Stetsko.

Causal Factors: Vietnam – Public Law 86-90 and the Foundation for War

In 1954 Ngo Dim Diem became South Vietnam’s 1st President. He, along with Chiang Kai Shek (Taiwan), and Syngman Rhee (South Korea) was among Stepan Bandera and Stetsko’s closest friends and supporters. Ngo Dim Diem, true nationalist that he was,killed over 12,000 people he found disagreeable in one year.

By 1958 Stetsko (Bandera’s émigré foreign minister) who had sworn allegiance to Hitler forever promised to deliver Nationalist (Nazi) states all over the world to guarantee the destruction of the Soviet Union for the United States. He was even able to make petulant threats to CIA director Dulles based on his relationship to Joseph McCarthy. Dulles didn’t want to meet with the nazi. In a letter petitioning Dulles for a meeting Stetsko closed with- “I am on and off in Washington, testifying before the House of Un-American Activities Committee and the House Committee for Foreign Affairs, and I feel assured that you, sir, will find the time to give me an audience.”

The combined émigré community proved to be the ultimate political foot soldiers for McCarthyism. They wrote the questions and provided the testimony for Senator Joe McCarthy’s Un-American Committee crusade. They were literally SS Nazis deciding who was a good American.

I wonder how much satisfaction the Ukrainian nationalists got out of labeling Jewish professionals “damn commies” and ruining countless lives just after World War II. Only a few short years before this they were murdering, raping, and throwing people into gas chambers at concentration camps. I guess they cooled their jets a bit to become more palatable in American society. These were the people America trusted to provide most of the intel (which was disastrous) for the Cold War.

In 1959 the Captive Nations Resolution described by Bandera in 1951 was passed by a unanimous vote in Congress. Stepan Bandera lived to see this, his crowning achievement before he was assassinated.

In July 1960, the nationalist émigré groups gained their first major victory in the fight to establish nationalism in America. New York City hosted the Stars and Stripes Gala Affair that punctuated the Captive Nations Week celebration. At the parade on the podium were every prominent Jewish leader, 87+ US Senators and US Congressman, New York’s mayor, the Governor, and the captive nations leaders, which included at least seven former Third Reich SS officers. The nationalist Ukrainians marching in the parade were from Banderas army in WW2.

By this time the China Lobby Congress was primed for war. The McCarthy years and the threat of an accusation for being a communist sympathizer had done its job. The threat of a threat across the world in addition to all the provocative and embellished intelligence Congress was supplied took America to the brink of an ultra-nationalism it had not known since the “Business Plot” of the 1930’s.

By 1960 this ultra-nationalism was so rampant in American politics that Nationalism (Nazism) was once again discussed as a virtue openly. It became the litmus test for electability.

And we have also been brainwashed with another Communist basic tenet. They insist that love of country, the pride of a people in their history, their ideals and their accomplishments is wicked nationalism. Ever since the war, the Communist fronts, and the beatniks and the eggheads, have conducted a national chorus of denunciation of this wicked nationalism. Manifestly our religious organizations and our agencies for character-building in our youth are giving devoted service to halt this slump in morals. These agencies have need of every assistance.

But there is a latent force in American life which could be of vital help. The nation needs a rebirth of a great spiritual force, which has been impaired by cynicism and weakened by foreign infection. You can call it nationalism if you will.

Former president Herbert Hoover 1960 Republican Convention

The Vietnam War Public Law 86-90 Its Use and Ramifications

In June 1954 Stetsko, Bandera’s second in command along with Marv Liebman founded the Asian People’s Anti-Communist League (APACL) in Taiwan. Its leadership was gleaned from Bandera supporters Chaing Kai Shek, Sygman Rhee, and Ngo Dim Diem among others. Liebman and Stetsko set the ideology and agenda for the group. This is important because they are the direct connection between Public Law 86-90 and the Vietnam War!

In May 1964 the Asian Peoples Anti-Communist League (APACL) demanded help from the world to fight for Vietnam, for US help to bring the war to the communists: “He said this stand of the APACL represents the “unanimous wish of the Asian people… Every free nation should support the Republic of Vietnam, which is waging the war for the “freedom of the whole free world.” Its not surprising Ukraine is echoing these same words today. -Taiwan Today -May 17, 1964 article “APACL Leader Backing Up Vietnam’s Appeal For Help”

Three months later the United States of America went to war against North Vietnam on August 2nd 1964. From this point onward North Vietnam existed according to its recognition as a state pursuant to Public Law 86-90.

By 1968 Stetsko had increased the scope of setting up nationalist states worldwide under the umbrella of the World Anti-Communist League. The APACL was his crowning glory at this point in history. WACL’s second conference was held in Saigon, Vietnam in 1968.

Public Law 86-90 Unleashed!

Nestled inside the Captive Nations Proclamation is the only reference up to that point in history for the country of North Vietnam. It didn’t exist but was constantly referred to throughout the war and even today, 50 years later. This document is the only one of its kind. It recognizes a North Vietnam and a North Vietnamese people before the Vietnam War.

Who were the American military fighting in Vietnam? America fought the North Vietnamese as per Public Law 86-90 showing it in play for the duration of the war through our current days.

The United States Government Archives also refer to North Vietnam as a country where US soldiers died. The US Gov Archives confirm the validity of Public Law 86-90.

58,220 American soldiers fought and died fighting in a war against a country that first existed in the mind of Stepan Bandera and Yaroslav Stetsko.

Why did America Fight the Vietnam War? The Real Reason Confirmed

According to president Johnson who made these decisions:

“I knew Harry Truman and Dean Acheson had lost their effectiveness from the day the Communists took over in China. I believed that the loss of China had played a large role in the rise of Joe McCarthy. And I knew that all these problems, taken together, were chickenshit compared with what might happen if we lost Vietnam.” Van Demark, Brian (1995). Into the Quagmire: Lyndon Johnson and the Escalation of the Vietnam War. Oxford University Press, p. 25

Against the backdrop of history, president Johnson’s reason for sending our troops to Vietnam was to protect Democracy. It wasn’t Vietnamese democracy, which didn’t exist in a fascist nationalist state. Our troops died in Vietnam to protect American democracy in the USA.

President Johnson’s gambit was to put off the takeover or complete makeover of the United States of America and give our country a chance to step back, reflect, and hopefully choose Democracy.

President Richard M. Nixon

President Nixon deserves a write up of his own. Nixon at the very beginning was one of the early supporters of the China Lobby and the émigré populations. He was a friend to Chiang Kai Shek and Yaroslav Stetsko. He personally made sure the social fabric of our nation would start to embrace nationalism. With over 20 years of glad-handing and friendships with nationalist’s world-wide, once he got into office Nixon backed America away from the nationalists and ended the Vietnam war in spite of his long history with the émigrés.

Nixon’s China policy infuriated them to the point he feared retribution from them. This is a sitting president of the United States fearing retribution from “anti-communist groups?!!” That alone should give you an idea of how large they have become. Over 100 countries were represented by this group led by Bandera’s Stetsko.

Nixon was afraid at the next election cycle they would destroy him by supporting his opponent. The president of the United States walked on eggshells around them after supporting them for over 20 years.


Its true! Cossackia and North Vietnam only exist in Public Law 86-90. Trouble in both countries threatened the peace and stability of the entire world. Our war dead from the Vietnam War are heroes. Soldiers always are.

Neither Cossackia nor North Vietnam should have been enshrined in our law for the past 56 years, but both are. Trouble in both countries was brought to our doorstep thanks to homegrown nationalists in the House and Senate listening to the émigré community. Neither country ever existed, but the people do. Because of the law both countries are recognized.

If America presses on with the Ukrainian lies we will be at war with a country that didn’t want war with us. The Ukrainian émigrés will get what they always wanted which is an American body count in a war with Russia. They openly state these things, its time you believed it.

The precedent has been shown in this one war. Does it need to be shown again in the one that preceded it? How about the ones that followed? It’s there. Research “the Middle East Solidarity Council.”

As sure as the legal precedent has been shown in Vietnam, Donbass has been recognized by the United States of America just like North Vietnam was. Should we dishonor 58,200 families in America by telling them their loved one died fighting in a fictitious country against a people that didn’t exist?

The most persuasive argument coming from the nationalists is that some people are critical of the law. The reason for this is the glass house argument. Ukraine is a country that didn’t exist before Stalin. They reject Stalin. Shown in the Global Research article, all the countries that make up Ukraine want their freedom as the payment they were promised by Bandera.

The final implosion of the Ukrainian nationalists is not worth American time, lives, or tax dollars. Taking part in their war crimes by supporting them will clearly be a very costly economic mistake for those personally involved. Those that hope to duck underlengthy International Criminal Court proceedings need to take notice.

The Glove Didn’t Fit

I don’t even need to say a word directly about what that sub-title references. You know already. When the glove didn’t fit the civil suits certainly did. But this time even the glove is a perfect match.

The ICC has no business inside American law proceedings, which is much faster and has a history of dealing with large-scale class action suits. This will undoubtedly be the proper venue given the list of Federal law that has been broken. Since members of both Houses of Congress are also citizens, they may figure out the legal and political fallout fairly quickly.

President Obama, it is the honor of your presidency at your own word to recognize the Cossack republics of DNR and LNR. It is as simple as honoring our war dead from Vietnam. US Public law intrinsically ties them both together. I know you didn’t have this information before this but now it’s in your hands. It’s time to stop the crimes of the Poroshenko regime and be the Americans we tell ourselves we are, once again. 

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: George Eliason

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]