• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Ukraine erupts in riots and general strike.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was possibly being too generous.
From wiki
Just to add couple of points which seem to be missing from that wiki quote. Before the Constitutional Court overturned the 2004 constitution Yanukovich had replaced the judges with his allies. And before the Feb 21 voting Yanukovich had gone missing and was nowhere to be found to actually sign the laws he had agreed to. Feb 20th his advisor Hanna Herman said to sign them on his behalf but she didn't have authority to do it.
 
Last edited:
I was possibly being too generous.

From wiki



ETA: The impeachment procedure was unchanged

Yeah, but failure to follow impeachment procedures, even symbolically, legitimizes the idea that the current government was born in coup. Unfortunately, Kiev did a serious miscalculation when they failed to follow all protocols.

Ukraine may have unwittingly legitimized Moscow's arguments against them.
 
There are 3 very simple reasons why the new regime will fail in the long run.

1.) Most of the individuals who took power in Kiev after the disposition of Yanukovich are right-wing nationalists. There was a serious failure to build a coalition government that included major support from the east, and as such bred fear at the intentions of Kiev. This more than anything else will come to bite Kiev in the ass. Kiev has managed to put a few eastern supported oligarchs in power over various oblasts, but they have failed to put them in national offices to ensure trust.

2.) Kiev has already made serious moves on the Russian speakers of Ukraine, by removing some language rights guarantees for Russian speakers. There is serious fear that there will eventually be sharp reprisals against the Russian speakers of Ukraine. Kiev for now, manages to keep a tight leash on the nationalist sentiment of western Ukraine. I suspect that this tap dancing act will end sooner rather than later.

3.) If there is even slight evidence that nationalists have manipulated the upcoming elections in May it will result in more mass riots and protests.

As it stands, the factions which gain the most from the disposition of Yanukovych are the right-wing and ultra-nationalists parties of Ukraine. Ukraine is heading on a path of civil war fast, unless the current regime can make some swift changes.

I suspect after May that there will be more riots and mass protests. This time coming from the east.
 
Last edited:
There are 3 very simple reasons why the new regime will fail in the long run.
1.) Most of the individuals who took power in Kiev after the disposition of Yanukovich are right-wing nationalists.
Some of them may be (for example apparently Andriy Parubiy) but most? I think not. But they certainly aren't pro-russia nationalists supporting annexation to Russia - which for some may count as right wing nationalism or even fascism. I for one will hold my judgement of the new government until I see their actual policies.

Apropos seceding to Russia, how about this pro-Russia protest leader and the self proclaimed 'people's governor' of Donetsk - Pavel Gubarev and his Russian National Unity party.

Russian National Unity (RNU) or All-Russian civic patriotic movement "Russian National Unity" (Russian: Всероссийское общественное патриотическое движение "Русское Национальное Единство"), is a far right political party and paramilitary organization based in Russia and operating in states with Russian-speaking populations.

Y19KSAv.jpg


oPV7hOS.jpg


Gotta love those Russian anti-fascists.

2.) Kiev has already made serious moves on the Russian speakers of Ukraine, by removing some language rights guarantees for Russian speakers.
By now you should be aware that this didn't actually happen.

3.) If there is even slight evidence that nationalists have manipulated the upcoming elections in May it will result in more mass riots and protests.
Are you referring to Russian nationalists, Ukrainian nationalists or both?

I suspect after May that there will be more riots and mass protests. This time coming from the east.
And Moscow would likely support that. They have been building the network of pro-Russia right-wing nationalists for years, and not only in Ukraine. And for example the Putin-TV seems to love that fascist thug romantic panslavist Pavel Gubarev and his pals:
http://www.vesti.ru/videos?vid=582716 -- people's leader of Donbass
http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=1352251 -- civil activist Pavel Gubarev, named by locals "people's governor"
http://en.itar-tass.com/world/722470 -- people’s governor of eastern Donetsk
http://www.1tv.ru/news/world/253623 -- elected on Donetsk veche people's governor
 
By now you should be aware that this didn't actually happen.

Kiev did not just remove Russian as a second national language?

Are you referring to Russian nationalists, Ukrainian nationalists or both?

Let's not be quaint. We both know who I'm referring to. Your earlier comment about the current cabinet of Ukraine indicated this.

And Moscow would likely support that. They have been building the network of pro-Russia right-wing nationalists for years, and not only in Ukraine. And for example the Putin-TV seems to love that fascist thug romantic panslavist Pavel Gubarev and his pals:
http://www.vesti.ru/videos?vid=582716 -- people's leader of Donbass
http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=1352251 -- civil activist Pavel Gubarev, named by locals "people's governor"
http://en.itar-tass.com/world/722470 -- people’s governor of eastern Donetsk
http://www.1tv.ru/news/world/253623 -- elected on Donetsk veche people's governor

The point of the previous post was to say that anti-Russian nationalists will not get very far in their pursuits. Russia still has the upper hand, and will play it accordingly if Kiev becomes diametrically opposed to the aims Moscow. We both know this.
 
What was the article?

Dunno, but for example this happened to a Bulgarian journalist in Crimea:

According to the journalist a van pulled up, men with uniforms and masks came out, went into the coffee shop and started pulling people out and trowing them inside the van. He started filming the events. The masked guys saw him, attacked him and stole his camera and cellphone. The video is CCTV.

This was the article I originally intended to link.
 
Worth pointing out that Putin has been denying that Russian troops are involved

ETA: I have heard of "plausible deniablity", but that is implausible deniability
 
Last edited:
Apparently the EU is fast-tracking a deal with Ukraine.

This will definitely divide the population and spark some more separatist sentiment. Things will definitely heat up after the March 16th referendum.

Russia will not budge until it at least acquires eastern Ukraine.

The immediate impact of this conflict seems to be that western Europeans are scurrying to get off Russian gas, and Russia is now trying to divert the potential loss of revenue to China.
 
Last edited:
Kiev did not just remove Russian as a second national language?
No. Language laws are just as they were, and the unconstitutionally adopted and lopsided Ukrainian Law on Language Policy of 2012 pushed forward by Yanukovich is still in effect.

In 2012 the law was criticized by OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities as its "approach to language policy is deeply divisive and is likely to lead to future polarization of society. Indeed, the disproportionate favoring of the Russian language, while also removing most incentives for learning or using Ukrainian in large parts of the country, could potentially undermine Ukraine’s very cohesion". He was also concerned that the legislation was not adopted in accordance with Ukrainian constitutional and procedural law. The Council of Europe stated (1, 2) that the legislation failed to provide a proper balance between the development and use of a state language as a unifying factor in society and the development and protection of minority languages in accordance with European standards. The law was also criticized by Ukrainian legal scholars, the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and other academic institutes, and numerous ministeries within the Yanukovych government as divisive and failing to protect the rights of all Ukrainians irrespective of their ethnic background.
 
Last edited:
IIRC, the president had got changed the constitution (AFIK, fully legally) so that there was no impeachment possible. The previous constitution has been reinstated.

His own party voted against him. But it wasn't a democratic change of power.

The president abandoned his post so he couldn't be impeached and was removed from office without impeachment as a result. Dunno, but the removal sounds just democratic to me. You can't avoid an impeachment by abusing a technicality and claim to be the democrat.

It was more democratic and more legitemate than any election in Russia in recorded history. Almost. I don't know how problematic the elections in the 90s were, but certainly better than anything before or since then.

McHrozni
 
I note that the Putin;s Useful Idiots ,who are so obssesed by all those Evil Ukrainian Fascists, are hand waving away or ignoring all the evidence that Facism is even more powerful and influential in Russia.
I also love the way they are stringent legalist when it comes to the Ukranian Government, but are ignoring Russia's blatent disregard of treaties and international law in it's invasion of the Ukraine.
It must be great to be a fan of a thug like Putin.
 
You know what's funny? American has something called the Monroe Doctrine, in which we reserve the rights to intervene in conflicts (across the Americas) that we consider risks to our territorial integrity and national security. Any time a democratically elected government arises that we deem hostile, we've arbitrarily inserted ourselves into conflicts. We've abused this doctrine time and time again for almost the past two centuries. We've ousted democratically elected governments and such.

Now that Russia is doing something similar we complain. We complain that Russia has enough commonsense to protect its national security interests.

I bet my detractors will provide a billion reasons as to why U.S. interventions over the last 50 years were so much more meaningful and just than the current Russian one. :rolleyes:

I chuckle at the subjective application of morality.
 
Last edited:
When was the last time you disagreed with the state department?

I'd be interested in learning what you think an appropriate disagreement rate should be. Should one always take a counter-position to the US State Department? More than half? Less than half? Only disagree on certain issues? Then maybe add a brief explanation of why?
 
You know what's funny? American has something called the Monroe Doctrine, in which we reserve the rights to intervene in conflicts (across the Americas) that we consider risks to our territorial integrity and national security. Any time a democratically elected government arises that we deem hostile, we've arbitrarily inserted ourselves into conflicts. We've abused this doctrine time and time again for almost the past two centuries. We've ousted democratically elected governments and such.

Now that Russia is doing something similar we complain. We complain that Russia has enough commonsense to protect its national security interests.

I bet my detractors will provide a billion reasons as to why U.S. interventions over the last 50 years were so much more meaningful and just than the current Russian one. :rolleyes:

I chuckle at the subjective application of morality.

Is it ok to argue against a Russian invasion if I disagree with past American invasions as well?
 
Hopefully some kind of agreement can be made. Ukraine needs to trade with Russia, and a deal could have been made a long time ago without any need for a Russian invasion.

The problem is that irrationality, impunity, and ridiculous propaganda is supported in Russia. That is why the country has such a problem with corruption, and why they make such terrible decisions like they have in Crimea.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/ukraine-putin-tv-and-the-big-lie-104261.html#.UxtpZWeYa01
But all that is a far cry from Nazis taking over Kiev, an image now being stamped into the brains of Russian and East Ukrainian audiences 24 hours a day on Kremlin mouthpieces from television to newspapers, websites to official statements. Never mind that Kiev’s pro-democracy movement was overwhelmingly liberal, tolerant and, toward the end of it, increasingly Russian-speaking: to Putin’s propaganda machine, it’s all an American and European plot to destabilize Russia and turn the Russian people into slaves of the West...

This is how Markov justifies the Russian invasion of the Ukrainian region of Crimea in an interview with one of Russia’s most popular tabloids, Komsomolskaya Pravda: “Had Russia failed to interfere, Crimea would have come under pressure from police forces controlled by radicals and from neo-Nazi militants. Within a month, they would have established their government in Crimea and within one or two years they would have driven out almost all Russians.”

Having explained the horrors awaiting his Russian audience, Markov reaches a crescendo. “Crimea is not their main target, they really don’t care about it,” he continues. “Their main goal is to turn Ukraine into an anti-Russia within three years, install a Kiev version of [former Georgian President Mikheil] Saakashvili as president and then to start a rebellion in Russia proper.”

“Had Putin failed to request permission [from parliament] to use force [in Ukraine], NATO would have gone much further than Rostov and Kursk—it would have been in Moscow. The goal of those who staged a coup d’etat in Kiev is to bring the likes of [Russian opposition leaders] Nemtsov and Navalny to power in Moscow. Russia would have been simply carved up,”

Sure, that may seem crazy to the rest of the world, but there are people who actually buy into it. A lot of people.

In Ukraine, Putin's pride was hurt, so he invaded the country, where he is still holding people hostage at gunpoint. He than set up a puppet regional government, and had that puppet government declare the area a new part of the invading force's country.

Obviously, that is not a situation that would hold up internationally, but Putin is not accustomed to having to answer serious questions. In Russia, in response to a serious problem of corruption, his response is to put those who protest against it in jail, like Alexei Navalny. With a little ridiculous propaganda, his lap dogs give him a free pass again.

In Ukraine, a serious dialogue could have easily fixed the situation, but Putin does not have a history of rationally handling situation like that. Protesters who disapproved of the intense corruption of the previous Russian puppet regime were subjected to a violent crackdown and more ridiculous propaganda. According to the Russian propaganda machine, they were "worse than Nazis."


Obviously some kind of solution has to be made, and hopefully cooler heads in Russia will convince Putin to get back in touch with reality in this case. It is in everyone's interests to reach a solution. Many Ukrainians, including those in Crimea are not going to accept a Russian military takeover.

Tensions Remain High in Crimea Amid Renewed Effort to Mediate
After days of pro-Russian protests in Crimea, supporters of the new government in Kiev also rallied in the regional capital, Simferopol, confronting Russian demonstrators and volunteer militiamen. The rival protests showed that support for seceding from Ukraine is not universal in the region.

Several hundred men and women, carrying Ukrainian flags and blue and yellow flower-shaped balloons, marched through the city’s center to deliver tulips to Ukrainian troops in celebration of Women’s Day. At the base, two female soldiers came out to meet the demonstrators who handed them flowers and chanted “Crimea is Ukraine.”

“I don’t want to live in Russia,” said Igor Klimenko, who took part in the demonstration. “Russia is not a free country — in Russia I can’t come out here and express myself like this.”

In Bakhchysarai, the historic center of what was once the Crimean Tartars’ homeland, several hundred protesters, mostly Tatar women and children, marched against integration with Russia, waving Ukrainian and Tatar flags, and chanting “We’re for peace,” “Ukraine is inseparable,” and “Russian soldiers, go home!”
 
Now that Russia is doing something similar we complain. We complain that Russia has enough commonsense to protect its national security interests.

So you believe the USG's interventions in SA were cases of "America having enough commonsense to protect its national security interests"? Because I sure don't. Which is why I took part in a demonstration against Reagan's SA interventions in NY a long time ago. Which is why my parents belonged to an organization opposing US counter-revolutionary activities in Cuba (even though neither of them trusted Castro as far as they could throw him).

Why do the "anti-interventionists" support Russia "having enough commonsense to protect its national security interests", but not the United States? Could it be those folks aren't really anti-interventionists at all? I chuckle at the selective application of "morality".
 
Last edited:
Why do the "anti-interventionists" support Russia "having enough commonsense to protect its national security interests", but not the United States? Could it be those folks aren't really anti-interventionists at all?

It's about supporting a "side" not championing an ideal.
 
LYS: are you sure you have read the Monroe Doctrine? :confused:

Here is the text, in case you have not.

I think I could offer a decent argument that, having participated in WW I, the Monroe Doctrine was rendered at least in part moot. The general tone of that document was

"you European powers stay on your side of the pond, and we'll stay out ... so you make sure you stay out of our side of the pond."
 
Last edited:
Just for fun, here's a slanging match on the subject of Russia and Ukraine, in which Michael Heseltine says the UK and Europe ought to stay out of it, the Russian former Kremlin advisor puts forward the Russia Today narrative and David Aaronovitch mocks both of them for reneging on a treaty that was signed by governments that both of them actually worked for:

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom