More on the mess.
Once again, I stress on the gross error in promoting atomized narrow ethnic nationalisms - eschewing participation in a more broad pan-European alliance.
The Ukrainian "ultra-nationalists" seem to be making many errors, using bad judgement (hey, are they part pf the American "movement?"), and also making the essential mistake of defining themselves by hostility toward another European ethny (Russians). They also are focusing on maximizing territorial integrity, rather than maximizing ethnonationlism - narrow ethnonationalists who aren't even pursuing an optimized ethnonationalist strategy.
These are all problems that could be for the most part avoided if these folks were part of a reasonably well integrated pan-European movement based on the principles of universal nationalism.
On the other hand, I have a somewhat different viewpoint than this article, when it comes to Russia/Putin. Putin may be defending the interests of Russia as an abstract national entity, but he certainly isn't defending the ethnic interests of Russians as a coherent people. And although the Neocons have a historical grudge against Russia, that hasn't stopped Trad Vlad from becoming increasingly pro-Jewish.
The failed "movement" with its too-narrow particularlisms loses again - both the Ukrainian and the Russian nationalists are being defeated by the forces of globalist multiculturalism, while they define each other as the primary enemy.
As Yockey pointed out, if you misidentify who your enemy really is, and fight someone not really your enemy, you will ultimately lose long-term, regardless of what short-term "victory" you apparently achieve over that "enemy."