Putin on the role of the US and the CIA in the Maidan regime change and why, "unprofessionally," didn't the CIA do there what Putin wanted them to do?

Ahead of his visit to Italy, Vladimir Putin gave an interview to the Italian newspaper, Il Corriere della Sera. 

There are significant ethical, strategic, and political issues with some of the statements made in this interview to some of which I already reacted in my tweets and the crux of which may be expressed as follows: Putin (speaking on behalf of Russia) has nothing and no one to defend from anything, not to mention the Nazis and their terror, in Donbass and Eastern Ukraine and, therefore, Putin does (officially and thus politically and ideologically) defend no one and nothing in Donbass and Eastern Ukraine.

At first, Putin tried to present himself as an utterly baffled, uncomprehending leader who cannot understand what the West has been doing in Ukraine for the last 25 years and during the whole current crisis and why the West has been doing it (and so systematically and deliberately):

We have never viewed Europe as a mistress. I am quite serious now. We have always proposed a serious relationship. But now I have the impression that Europe has actually been trying to establish material‑based relations with us ... but if we do the same in the territory of the former Soviet Union, they try to explain it by Russia's desire to restore an empire. I don’t understand the reasons for such an approach. ...

What are the roots of the Ukrainian crisis? Its cause seems to be completely disproportionate to what has become an utter tragedy today claiming many lives in southeast Ukraine. What sparked the crisis? Former President Viktor Yanukovych said that he needed to think about signing Ukraine’s Association Agreement with the EU ... The new authorities announced that they were going to sign the Association Agreement but would delay its implementation until January 1, 2016. The question is: what was the coup d'état for? Why did they need to escalate the situation to a civil war? The result is exactly the same [really???]. ... How is it possible to completely ignore this, to treat it with utter disrespect? I simply cannot understand that. ...

I don’t understand why this was done. I have asked many of my colleagues, including in Europe and America, about it [one can wish that Putin's partners or colleagues had taken the time to offer some additional class]

I don't believe that Putin will score some sympathy by presenting himself (and Russia) as a naive, completely perplexed victim (or a lover abandoned by his mistress-prostitute--the EU--with whom he wanted to have a "serious relationship"). 

Moreover, such a pretense does not suit him well, and it shows his weakness as a leader. Furthermore, this is also reminds me of Lavrov's recent pronouncement, which seems to describe not only the basic modus operandi of the NWO elites, but also the essence of Lavrov's own diplomacy and Putin's own approach to Ukraine and the war in Donbass: "Everything depends on our ability to pretend that we don't understand what is going on."

However, soon after, Putin himself blew a hole in this pretended posture of a kid who does not know why the other gang of (older) children decided to beat him up or punish for not fitting well into their club. In doing so, Putin actually dropped quite a bombshell. He asserted that the Maidan regime change was controlled on the ground by a CIA resident:

If those colleagues [France, Germany, Poland] were used for the sake of appearances and they were not in control of the situation on the ground, which was in fact in the hands of the US ambassador or a CIA resident, they should have said: “You know, we did not agree to a coups d'etat, so we will not support you; you should go and hold elections instead.” The same could be said about our American partners. Let’s assume that they also lost control of the situation. But if America and Europe had said to those who had taken these unconstitutional actions: ”If you come to power in such a way, we will not support you under any circumstances; you must hold elections and win them” – (by the way, they had a 100‑percent chance of a victory, everybody knows that), the situation would have developed in a completely different way. So, I believe that this crisis was created deliberately and it is the result of our partner’s unprofessional actions. 

Thus, according to Putin, the Maidan regime change (and much else) has been deliberate ... well, of course. And the deliberation and the control over the process has been in the hands of the US and its very intelligent agencies. However, Putin seems to plead his ignorance as to what purpose all these deliberate actions (prepared and planned over all these years) were and are to serve. For all these agencies, the US and the resulting Banderite, Nazi regime are still his "partners," aren't they? Hiding himself behind this posture, Putin then does not know anything better than to call the great success of the US/CIA strategy and action "unprofessional." Yes, it is very "unprofessional" of them that they did not do what Putin would want them to do. Taking control nearly of the whole of Ukraine is very "unprofessional," especially if done by your own partners whom you always wanted to be more than just a promiscuous, unfaithful mistress.

Putin in his own words again: "I would like to say that it is not that we feel deceived or treated unfairly. This is not the point. The point is that relationships should be built on a long‑term basis ..."

Apparently, Putin did believe the he was and even still is part of "the Family." After all, at the Seliger youth camp last year, he was the one who told "the secret" (to be precise, "it is not even a secret, but a story ...) that he and his government always supported and supports those in power.

But Novorossiya was supposed to be an anti-oligarchic revolution of national liberation ... which would not have happened, had the US or the CIA only acted more "professionally." By this standard, one would need to expect a much higher degree of professionalism on the other side ... and Ukraine firmly friendly with Russia and rejecting already the very idea of war on the sacred memory of the Great Patriotic War and on Russia as the most unholy and insane.

Here is the "mistress part" of the interview: 

Paolo Valentino: ... and there is an opinion that Russia feels betrayed, abandoned by Europe, like a lover abandoned by his mistress. What are the problems in our relations today? Do you think that Europe has been too dependent on the United States in the Ukrainian crisis? 

Vladimir Putin: You have certainly asked a lot of questions, with an Italian flair. (Laughs)
First, about the mistress. In this kind of a relationship with a woman, that is, if you assume no obligations, you have no right to claim any obligations from your partner.We have never viewed Europe as a mistress. I am quite serious now. We have always proposed a serious relationship. But now I have the impression that Europe has actually been trying to establish material‑based relations with us, and solely for its own gain. ... I don’t understand the reasons for such an approach.