, that shows the USA are completely inside Ukraine's politics. 20 years ago, as Ive said above, Ukraine was ruled by Leonid Kuchma who considered as pro-Russian even though he's never been so. Anyway he was much more independent, this is first. The second, all these so-called "non-governmental organizations" which are funded by US government proxies under cover of CIA - democracy foundations and so on - at that time weren't so spreaded all over Ukraine. Though Russia was bankrupt and led by drunk the USA had much less leverages in the new countries of former USSR. Simply because not enough time passed since Moscow with all its KGB and other special services lost control over Ukraine and over other former Soviet republics. If we talk about Ukraine then this country was ruled by so-called "red directors" - the heads of big industrial plants, Soviet industrial managers (exactly this part of social elite made Kuchma the president). The Ukrainian part of Soviet legacy included 700.000 army, the airforce that was fourth in the world by quantity - after USA, Russia and China, and also nuclear weapons. So, I don't think the USA had a big wish to get involved wich such country. making social experiments like revolutions in a country with nuclear bombs may worth too much. Now it's different. No nukes, no army, no KGB, no red directors, no state actually. I suppose your judgement about "20 years ago" is superficial and not enough thought out.