Off Topic Ukraine

We can argue the toss from the comfort of our armchairs but................... yes..... . and millions of people have been displaced by this action...and thank goodness Ukraine have a decent army..... thry need it.....

The behaviour of Putin breaks all laws including many many war crimes....

My heart goes out for the people of Ukraine....

 

Blimey - the BBC obviously don't listen to themselves up here then. The output from them is controlled by London HQ where the upper echelons are political appointments - and is so anti-Scottish government it's cringingly embarrassing.

 

I know I would be a Scottish Nationalist were I Scottish. Continually being controlled by the result of greedy and half-witted ‘southerners’ must be galling. As it is, though, whilst I understand the movement, I believe in our union - but on the basis of ‘southerners’ making better educated decisions for their nations, rather than their short-term selves. Which is why I am clearly an idealistic ‘dreamer’.

 

I should add that I agree about the cringeworthy media comments. That is so true.

 

Have you seen who's in charge of the BBC at various levels??? Tory party control by proxy.

 

Hard to believe that neither the Russian general nor any of his soldiers knew about the dangers of Chernobyl - talk about karma biting you on the bum...

 

please log in to view this image

 

Apparently Finland is importing tractors as fast as it can.

 

Jokes aside, Russian forces must be really weakened by now. Surely, they have suffered heavy losses. To me, it almost seems the tactic now was to lure them into Ukraine, supply the Ukrainians and weaken Russia.

 

I do hope so... so many people have died as a result of one man's avarice

 

please log in to view this image

 

Ukraine has not won yet. I worry that the media in the west forgets the sheer size of Russia compared to Ukraine. To my mind the only way that Ukraine will win is if the majority of Russians, or at least the influential ones, turn on Putin.

 

We are waiting to be matched. There are, apparently, more sponsors than guests. How much of that is the incompetence of the system and how much is the resilience of the Ukrainian people is open to discussion. We're in this for the long haul, three years we would imagine, maybe longer... so be it.

 

There can be no winners here NZ. Even if the Russians were pushed back there still remains the problem of the Dombass and Luhansk - it is the height of naivity to imagine that ethnic Russiands and Ukrainians can live peacefully in one country after this is over - particularly in a country which has become so heavy weaponized as the Ukraine has become. In the end we are looking at a type of India/Pakistan solution ie. a partitioning of the country - unfortunately this may be also Putin's primary goal.

 

There are many reports that cannot be verified, that Putin is seriously ill, possibly cancer. If he goes the dynamic could change very quickly with other leaders seeing the results from sanctions on the economy. It is very difficult to know exactly what is going on with state controlled media, but there are plenty of dissidents using social media to paint a picture of a leader approaching the end one way or another.

 

This is only speculation Frenchie - it also presumes that 'Putin' is the problem and with his disappearance all other problems would disappear. It is of course, difficult to know what is going on - but this is true on all sides, because everything which is fed to the West comes via Zelenski and he uses the media brilliantly. There's no point in me repeating here that the West has a share in the guilt for what has happened - NATO's eastward expansions have played a part in producing the present situation, but more so is the fact that Russia has been impotent in preventing this expansion, and has been wholly sidelined in all questions of inter state security for the last 30 years. This arrogance, primarily from the USA, in presuming that the West had won when the USSR collapsed, and that Russia was destined to play the part of an insignificant regional power thereafter has cast a long shadow - and Putin is the result. Unfortunately we can't turn the clock back to 1990 and do it all again - this time in a way which included Russia in all security planning. This would have required creative thinking and, at that time, the West was only drunk with its own apparent success. But to get back to the present point - do you think that there is any solution other than the partition of the Ukraine ?

 

Partition is not a solution to my mind. Look at N. Ireland. People who are caught on the wrong side of the dividing line never accept it, and what might be an international war turns into a civil one. I don't think that anything can be resolved with Putin in power, and the sooner he goes the better.
At the time of Mikhail Gorbachev the Soviet Union was regarded as a second rate economic power, and he attempted to bring it into the modern world with social democratic policies of a sort. Splits between those who wished to be more like the west, and those who didn't like the reforms of course stopped progress, and eventually his vision of a "Common European Home" was ditched.
Gorbachev believed Putin to be a democrat early on, but became more and more critical of him as he produced policies that were against his view of what socialism should be. This is from someone who had been at the highest possible level of government, and not the view from a US or EU leader.
Putin has done little to improve life for many, with conscripts from the east amazed to see streetlights for the first time, or tarmac roads. He could have continued the reforms that had been started, but has involved himself in something unnecessary, and to say that the expansion of NATO has anything to with it sounds an excuse for brutal invasion.

 

The Dombass/Luhansk regions have been involved in war for the last 7 years Frenchie, due to the Ukraine failing to honour the Minsk agreements. With thousands of civilian dead mostly unreported in the Western Press. The question is can Russians and Ukrainians live together in a united Ukraine after this in peace ? The evidence suggests otherwise so partition may be the only way of preventing civil war once the 'international' war has finished. Can you place your hand on your heart and say that NATO is only a defensive organization ? After Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Yugoslavia - it is nothing of the sort, but rather an organization which legitimizes invasions which the Americans want to happen. How would the USA react if one of their neighbours eg. Mexico or any other middle American country formed a military alliance with a perceived enemy state ? How have they reacted to such things in the past ?

 

I disagree that Ukraine failed to honour the Minsk agreements. To put the blame on one side is clearly wrong. Russia was a signatory to Minsk 2 then tried to claim in March 2016 that Russia was "not a party to the Minsk agreements". Why did DPR and LPR keep postponing elections that were agreed under Minsk 2, but have never taken place? It was Putin who just this year said that the Minsk agreements no longer exist.
The aim of the Russian intervention in Dombass was to establish pro-Russian governments that, upon reincorporation into Ukraine, would facilitate Russian inference in Ukrainian politics. All a Russian scheme to interfere and Nato is a simple excuse.

 

Open Letter to Noam Chomsky (and other like-minded intellectuals) on the Russia-Ukraine war

Yuriy Gorodnichenko, professor of economics | May 19, 2022

coauthored with Bohdan Kukharskyy (City University of New York), Anastassia Fedyk (UC Berkeley) and Ilona Sologoub (VoxUkraine)



Dear Professor Chomsky,

We are a group of Ukrainian academic economists who were grieved by a series of your recent interviews and commentaries on the Russian war on Ukraine. We believe that your public opinion on this matter is counter-productive to bringing an end to the unjustified Russian invasion of Ukraine and all the deaths and suffering it has brought into our home country.

please log in to view this image

Borodyanka, Ukraine, Wednesday, Apr. 6, 2022. Source: https://apimagesblog.com/russia-ukr.../6/day-42-rows-of-body-bags-in-ukraines-bucha

Having familiarized ourselves with the body of your interviews on this matter, we noticed several recurring fallacies in your line of argument. In what follows, we wish to point out these patterns to you, alongside with our brief response:

Pattern #1: Denying Ukraine’s sovereign integrity

In your interview to Jeremy Scahill at The Intercept from April 14, 2022 you claimed: “The fact of the matter is Crimea is off the table. We may not like it. Crimeans apparently do like it.” We wish to bring to your attention several historical facts:

First, Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 has violated the Budapest memorandum (in which it promised to respect and protect Ukrainian borders, including Crimea), the Treaty on Friendship, Partnership and Cooperation (which it signed with Ukraine in 1997 with the same promises), and, according to the order of the UN International Court of Justice, it violated the international law.

Second, “Crimeans” is not an ethnicity or a cohesive group of people – but Crimean Tatars are. These are the indigenous people of Crimea, who were deported by Stalin in 1944 (and were able to come back home only after the USSR fell apart), and were forced to flee again in 2014 when Russia occupied Crimea. Of those who stayed, dozens have been persecuted, jailed on false charges and missing, probably dead.

Third, if by ‘liking’ you refer to the outcome of the Crimean “referendum” on March 16, 2014, please note that this “referendum” was held at gunpoint and declared invalid by the General Assembly of the United Nations. At the same time, the majority of voters in Crimea supported Ukraine’s independence in 1991.

Pattern #2: Treating Ukraine as an American pawn on a geo-political chessboard

Whether willingly or unwillingly, your interviews insinuate that Ukrainians are fighting with Russians because the U.S. instigated them to do so, that Euromaidan happened because the U.S. tried to detach Ukraine from the Russian sphere of influence, etc. Such an attitude denies the agency of Ukraine and is a slap in the face to millions of Ukrainians who are risking their lives for the desire to live in a free country. Simply put, have you considered the possibility that Ukrainians would like to detach from the Russian sphere of influence due to a history of genocide, cultural oppression, and constant denial of the right to self-determination?

Pattern #3. Suggesting that Russia was threatened by NATO

In your interviews, you are eager to bring up the alleged promise by [US Secretary of State] James Baker and President George H.W. Bush to Gorbachev that, if he agreed to allow a unified Germany to rejoin NATO, the U.S. would ensure that NATO would move ‘not one inch eastward.’ First, please note that the historicity of this promise is highly contested among scholars, although Russia has been active in promoting it. The premise is that NATO’s eastward expansion left Putin with no other choice but to attack. But the reality is different. Eastern European states joined, and Ukraine and Georgia aspired to join NATO, in order to defend themselves from Russian imperialism. They were right in their aspirations, given that Russia did attack Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014. Moreover, current requests by Finland and Sweden to join NATO came in direct response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, consistent with NATO expansion being a consequence of Russian imperialism, and not vice versa.

In addition, we disagree with the notion that sovereign nations shouldn’t be making alliances based on the will of their people because of disputed verbal promises made by James Baker and George H.W. Bush to Gorbachev.

Pattern #4. Stating that the U.S. isn’t any better than Russia

While you admittedly call the Russian invasion of Ukraine a “war crime,” it appears to us that you cannot do so without naming in the same breath all of the past atrocities committed by the U.S. abroad (e.g., in Iraq or Afghanistan) and, ultimately, spending most of your time discussing the latter. As economists, we are not in a position to correct your historical metaphors and, needless to say, we condemn the unjustified killings of civilians by any power in the past. However, not bringing Putin up on war crime charges at the International Criminal Court in the Hague just because some past leader did not receive similar treatment would be the wrong conclusion to draw from any historical analogy. In contrast, we argue that prosecuting Putin for the war crimes that are being deliberately committed in Ukraine would set an international precedent for the world leaders attempting to do the same in the future.

Pattern #5. Whitewashing Putin’s goals for invading Ukraine

In your interviews, you go to great lengths to rationalize Putin’s goals of “demilitarization” and “neutralization” of Ukraine. Please note that, in his TV address from February 24, 2022, marking the beginning of the war, the verbatim goal declared by Putin for this “military operation” is to “denazify” Ukraine. This concept builds on his long pseudo-historical article from July 2021, denying Ukraine’s existence and claiming that Ukrainians were not a nation. As elaborated in the ‘denazification manual’ published by the Russian official press agency RIA Novosti, a “Nazi” is simply a human being who self-identifies as Ukrainian, the establishment of a Ukrainian state thirty years ago was the “Nazification of Ukraine,” and any attempt to build such a state has to be a “Nazi” act. According to this genocide handbook, denazification implies a military defeat, purging, and population-level “re-education”. ‘Demilitarization’ and ‘neutralization’ imply the same goal – without weapons Ukraine will not be able to defend itself, and Russia will reach its long-term goal of destroying Ukraine.

Pattern #6. Assuming that Putin is interested in a diplomatic solution

All of us very much hoped for a cease-fire and a negotiated settlement, which could have saved many human lives. Yet, we find it preposterous how you repeatedly assign the blame for not reaching this settlement to Ukraine (for not offering Putin some “escape hatch”) or the U.S. (for supposedly insisting on the military rather than diplomatic solution) instead of the actual aggressor, who has repeatedly and intentionally bombed civilians, maternity wards, hospitals, and humanitarian corridors during those very “negotiations”. Given the escalatory rhetoric (cited above) of the Russian state media, Russia’s goal is erasure and subjugation of Ukraine, not a “diplomatic solution.”

Pattern #7. Advocating that yielding to Russian demands is the way to avert the nuclear war

Since the Russian invasion, Ukraine lives in a constant nuclear threat, not just due to being a prime target for Russian nuclear missiles but also due to the Russian occupation of Ukrainian nuclear power plants.

But what are the alternatives to fighting for freedom? Unconditional surrender and then elimination of Ukrainians off the face of the Earth (see above)? Have you ever wondered why President Zelenskyy, with the overwhelming support of the Ukrainian people, is pleading with Western leaders to provide heavy weapons despite the potential threat of nuclear escalation? The answer to this question is not “Because of Uncle Sam”, but rather due to the fact that Russian war crimes in Bucha and many other Ukrainian cities and villages have shown that living under Russian occupation is a tangible “hell on earth” happening right now, requiring immediate action.

Arguably, any concessions to Russia will not reduce the probability of a nuclear war but lead to escalation. If Ukraine falls, Russia may attack other countries (Moldova, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Finland or Sweden) and can also use its nuclear blackmail to push the rest of Europe into submission. And Russia is not the only nuclear power in the world. Other countries, such as China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea are watching. Just imagine what will happen if they learn that nuclear powers can get whatever they want using nuclear blackmail.

Professor Chomsky, we hope you will consider the facts and re-evaluate your conclusions. If you truly value Ukrainian lives as you claim to, we would like to kindly ask you to refrain from adding further fuel to the Russian war machine by spreading views very much akin to Russian propaganda.

Should you wish to engage further on any of the above-mentioned points, we are always open to discussion.

Kind regards,

Bohdan Kukharskyy, City University of New York

Anastassia Fedyk, University of California, Berkeley

Yuriy Gorodnichenko, University of California, Berkeley

Ilona Sologoub, VoxUkraine NGO