Off Topic Ukraine

[colognehornet]

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.

You must log in or register to see images

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

Rather than reading through all of this, which i promise I will do - it would be more instructive to direct us to ''recent interviews with Noam Chomsky'' and to commentaries on them - and to the ''body of his interviews'. So that readers can make up their minds based on those.

 

[Hornet-Fez]

For a clever bloke, Chomsky is a bit of an idiot. His interviews are generally impenetrable tosh hiding a few kernels of truth. I'm not surprised by what the Ukrainians have said regarding his views.

 

[yorkshirehornet]

Rather than reading through all of this, which i promise I will do - it would be more instructive to direct us to ''recent interviews with Noam Chomsky'' and to commentaries on them - and to the ''body of his interviews'. So that readers can make up their minds based on those.

Here is one....
https://rozenbergquarterly.com/chom...ia-has-left-the-domain-of-rational-discourse/

Putin is a criminal.. no more or less...... and there is NO excuse for his destruction and murder in Ukraine

 

[yorkshirehornet]

I am currently reading Putin's People...a brilliant exposition on why you should not let the Secret Service run a country.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...a-groundbreaking-study-that-follows-the-money

A rather timely birthday present,,,

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Hornet-Fez]

You must log in or register to see images

... and soon to be murdered in a mugging / fall out of a chairlift / fall victim of poisoning / killed in a tragic car crash / die suddenly of "natural causes"... deleted as appropriate.

 

[colognehornet]

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.

You must log in or register to see images

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

I can say that I have ploughed through this and also a couple of Chomsky interviews - Chomsky is very long winded and takes 100 words to say what could be said in 10, though having ploughed through I can say I agree with more or less all he says - or at least I cannot contradict it. I only take issue with where he places his emphasis. However the reply delivered here doesn't stand up very well to scrutiny - if it has become the dominant viewpoint this tells us more about the effectiveness of the Ukrainian propaganda machine than it does about reality.
1. the Euromaidan toppled a democratically elected government with help from Svoboda (in fact wothout their involvement the coup would never have succeeded). The interim rule (Coup) annulled the Budapest memorandum. The Crimea panicked at what was going on in Kiev and of the role of Neo Nazis in this and declared independence - it was a democratically elected government which made this declaration. This was recognized by Russia - if this unilateral recognition of an independence declaration was against international law then, by the same token, many EU countries had done the same thing with Slovenia and Croatia before it all kicked off in Yugoslavia. Had the Russians not moved in to the Crimea then the ukraine would have moved in to suppress the independence declaration. As it was the whole thing was done without unnecessary bloodshed.

2. The USA has been arming the Ukraine and training its army since 2000 - the only time this wasn't the case was under Obama. The CIA had been present in the Ukraine from that date up until the Russian invasion. The Coup was also with active American support, and the Americans were well aware of the influence of Neo Nazi movements in its success. The verbal promises made to Gorbachov were not ''alleged ones'' - the use of such language to describe them is simply to cast doubt on the truth and bring a bit of fog into the whole thing. As for the Denazification theme which Putin has - of course heavily over exagerated. but, at the same time, has been brushed under the carpet by the West. Of course there are neo Nazis everywhere - but the Ukraine is the only country where they form a tank regiment - they were also over active in making sure the Coup succeeded, and also active in shaping national policy - particularly in preventing any peacefull solution to the 2014-2022 Dombass War (primarily because that's exactly where the Azov regiment were). With regard to that forgotten war this was also against agreements made by the Ukraine which pledged autonomy to the Russian populated areas. Whilst on the subject of Fascism it should also be noted that the Ukraine bans the use of Russian and Hungarian in all public places, denies the 30% Russian population all representation in Parliament, has subsequently banned all opposition parties, and closed all critical radio stations - thus conforming to many of the conditions of a country which, if not Fascist, is at least ultra nationalist.

Remember - after this if the West gets it's wish and the Ukraine actually wins and Russia is humiliated, then you will still have a highly divided country with lots of weapons which has acted as a magnet for the far right in Europe for many years. And incidentally, has also become the World's biggest source of black market weapons because the Americans cannot monitor where their weapons actually end up. Anyway I've poked holes in this article enough and there are other things I could pick up on but I'll leave it there.

 

[yorkshirehornet]

I can say that I have ploughed through this and also a couple of Chomsky interviews - Chomsky is very long winded and takes 100 words to say what could be said in 10, though having ploughed through I can say I agree with more or less all he says - or at least I cannot contradict it. I only take issue with where he places his emphasis. However the reply delivered here doesn't stand up very well to scrutiny - if it has become the dominant viewpoint this tells us more about the effectiveness of the Ukrainian propaganda machine than it does about reality.
1. the Euromaidan toppled a democratically elected government with help from Svoboda (in fact wothout their involvement the coup would never have succeeded). The interim rule (Coup) annulled the Budapest memorandum. The Crimea panicked at what was going on in Kiev and of the role of Neo Nazis in this and declared independence - it was a democratically elected government which made this declaration. This was recognized by Russia - if this unilateral recognition of an independence declaration was against international law then, by the same token, many EU countries had done the same thing with Slovenia and Croatia before it all kicked off in Yugoslavia. Had the Russians not moved in to the Crimea then the ukraine would have moved in to suppress the independence declaration. As it was the whole thing was done without unnecessary bloodshed.

2. The USA has been arming the Ukraine and training its army since 2000 - the only time this wasn't the case was under Obama. The CIA had been present in the Ukraine from that date up until the Russian invasion. The Coup was also with active American support, and the Americans were well aware of the influence of Neo Nazi movements in its success. The verbal promises made to Gorbachov were not ''alleged ones'' - the use of such language to describe them is simply to cast doubt on the truth and bring a bit of fog into the whole thing. As for the Denazification theme which Putin has - of course heavily over exagerated. but, at the same time, has been brushed under the carpet by the West. Of course there are neo Nazis everywhere - but the Ukraine is the only country where they form a tank regiment - they were also over active in making sure the Coup succeeded, and also active in shaping national policy - particularly in preventing any peacefull solution to the 2014-2022 Dombass War (primarily because that's exactly where the Azov regiment were). With regard to that forgotten war this was also against agreements made by the Ukraine which pledged autonomy to the Russian populated areas. Whilst on the subject of Fascism it should also be noted that the Ukraine bans the use of Russian and Hungarian in all public places, denies the 30% Russian population all representation in Parliament, has subsequently banned all opposition parties, and closed all critical radio stations - thus conforming to many of the conditions of a country which, if not Fascist, is at least ultra nationalist.

Remember - after this if the West gets it's wish and the Ukraine actually wins and Russia is humiliated, then you will still have a highly divided country with lots of weapons which has acted as a magnet for the far right in Europe for many years. And incidentally, has also become the World's biggest source of black market weapons because the Americans cannot monitor where their weapons actually end up. Anyway I've poked holes in this article enough and there are other things I could pick up on but I'll leave it there.

Holes are easy to poke through.....and I take various points made above

However it does not justify invading another country and raping murdering and looting ...does it......

 

[colognehornet]

Holes are easy to poke through.....and I take various points made above

However it does not justify invading another country and raping murdering and looting ...does it......

I never said that the Russian invasion was justified Yorkie - I condemn it, and I want to make that clear. But by so doing I also condemn the US invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Yugoslavia and Libya......and several others. Whilst one is no less evil than the other the main difference has been the World reaction and the role of the media - we never had the graphic pictures of civilian war dead in those other countries because it wasn't in the West's interests to circulate them. Nonetheless there were more civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan than there have been in the Ukraine. How many civilian deaths have been caused by US drone attacks over the last 10 years ? - but we never see the graphic details and that is the difference. This is why countries such as China, India and most other non alligned countries have taken more of a neutral stance here - they condemn it but recognize that it is a part of a chain of invasions. Unfortunately once war has begun it has it's own dynamic and war crimes will happen. I know that sounds very glib to say that but it's the truth. Technically my father would have been a war criminal by todays standards in as much as that he served on a firing squad in World War 2 and the victim was a civilian - this was in North Africa and the victim was placed behind a white sheet where they couldn't see him. My father wasn't a monster but people become brutalized in these situations. It's also the case that soldiers then were mostly on drugs ie. pep pills or ''performance enhancing'' drugs such as the German ''Panzerschokolade'' - the Americans were using amphetamines and the Russians had their own drugs. Many members of the Wehrmacht were addicts by the time the war ended. These practices have not changed much in the meantime - so a lot of the young Russian soldiers (and Ukrainian) will be dosed up to the eyes with something in order to keep going, so their vision of what is moral or just will be blurred to say the least. I am certain that Putin is the main villain here - but at the same time I am not going to lionize Zelenskiy the way others are doing - he is not a hero, and this is not a David vs Goliath scenario. So often the West has jumped into situations where they saw things as all black or all white - the goodies vs baddies and all that. they thought that the enemy of their enemy must be their friend and, in so doing, made heroes of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein (who was a hero as long as Iran was the enemy). We can't let history repeat itself - Putin is not a democrat, but neither is Zelenskiy.

 

[andytoprankin]

I am currently reading Putin's People...a brilliant exposition on why you should not let the Secret Service run a country.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...a-groundbreaking-study-that-follows-the-money

A rather timely birthday present,,,

Bush was Director of the CIA. Another example.

 

[yorkshirehornet]

I never said that the Russian invasion was justified Yorkie - I condemn it, and I want to make that clear. But by so doing I also condemn the US invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Yugoslavia and Libya......and several others. Whilst one is no less evil than the other the main difference has been the World reaction and the role of the media - we never had the graphic pictures of civilian war dead in those other countries because it wasn't in the West's interests to circulate them. Nonetheless there were more civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan than there have been in the Ukraine. How many civilian deaths have been caused by US drone attacks over the last 10 years ? - but we never see the graphic details and that is the difference. This is why countries such as China, India and most other non alligned countries have taken more of a neutral stance here - they condemn it but recognize that it is a part of a chain of invasions. Unfortunately once war has begun it has it's own dynamic and war crimes will happen. I know that sounds very glib to say that but it's the truth. Technically my father would have been a war criminal by todays standards in as much as that he served on a firing squad in World War 2 and the victim was a civilian - this was in North Africa and the victim was placed behind a white sheet where they couldn't see him. My father wasn't a monster but people become brutalized in these situations. It's also the case that soldiers then were mostly on drugs ie. pep pills or ''performance enhancing'' drugs such as the German ''Panzerschokolade'' - the Americans were using amphetamines and the Russians had their own drugs. Many members of the Wehrmacht were addicts by the time the war ended. These practices have not changed much in the meantime - so a lot of the young Russian soldiers (and Ukrainian) will be dosed up to the eyes with something in order to keep going, so their vision of what is moral or just will be blurred to say the least. I am certain that Putin is the main villain here - but at the same time I am not going to lionize Zelenskiy the way others are doing - he is not a hero, and this is not a David vs Goliath scenario. So often the West has jumped into situations where they saw things as all black or all white - the goodies vs baddies and all that. they thought that the enemy of their enemy must be their friend and, in so doing, made heroes of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein (who was a hero as long as Iran was the enemy). We can't let history repeat itself - Putin is not a democrat, but neither is Zelenskiy.

I think China India et al are remaining 'neutral' is for their own interests. Can a modern country really countenance the invasion, occupation and destruction of another sovereign country???
Don't disagree with the black and white media scenarios point.... again it predominates worldwide...... BUT there are so many instances of aggressors oppressing others and we must not dilute how we respond. I don't believe any nation has got it all right.....and any nation holds a plethora of views in any case too.

 

[colognehornet]

I think China India et al are remaining 'neutral' is for their own interests. Can a modern country really countenance the invasion, occupation and destruction of another sovereign country???
Don't disagree with the black and white media scenarios point.... again it predominates worldwide...... BUT there are so many instances of aggressors oppressing others and we must not dilute how we respond. I don't believe any nation has got it all right.....and any nation holds a plethora of views in any case too.

Not sure why so many countries are remaining neutral in this Yorkie - India, China, Iran, Israel, Turkey, South Africa, Hungary, Cuba, Nicaragua etc. etc. Maybe they have a different slant on World affairs. We've actually had more or less continuous war since 1945 - with a few short breaks in between. Maybe non alligned countries are more aware of this - For us in Europe War became something of the past - apart from Yugoslavia. The difference between this crisis and the others has little to do with its intensity but rather that it is a lot closer to home. It's also rather disturbing that this crisis has effectively divided refugees into 2 classes - we do everything for those from the Ukraine, but those from places like Afghanistan, Syria,etc. can move to the back of the queue .

 

[yorkshirehornet]

Politics, money, trade and self interest.... sadly, in the main, as a justification for 'neutrality'

My Muslim friends are very angry at the seeming racism of Europe re refugees Perhaps tho because they are closer to home and are 'European' and share a similar religious faith, fought on our side to some degree in world wars etc... all make a difference in the minds of many.......

 

[colognehornet]

Politics, money, trade and self interest.... sadly, in the main, as a justification for 'neutrality'

My Muslim friends are very angry at the seeming racism of Europe re refugees Perhaps tho because they are closer to home and are 'European' and share a similar religious faith, fought on our side to some degree in world wars etc... all make a difference in the minds of many.......

My wife's daughter in law works at the central reception centre in Bochum (for all refugees alloted to NRW) as an interpreter. She comes from Serbia and the Slavonic languages are more similar to each other than ours in the West. So if you speak Serbo Croat then you understand a lot of Polish and Ukrainian - she also studied Russian at school. The biggest problem there are the vaccination regulations. The Ukraine has the 4th highest TB incidence in the WHO European region, and the country has the 5th highest incidence of cases of drug resistent TB Worldwide. Obviously treatment programmes in the Ukraine have been largely disrupted by the invasion - this makes it all very difficult for us here - such mass movements of people spells potential trouble.

 

[colognehornet]

Politics, money, trade and self interest.... sadly, in the main, as a justification for 'neutrality'

My Muslim friends are very angry at the seeming racism of Europe re refugees Perhaps tho because they are closer to home and are 'European' and share a similar religious faith, fought on our side to some degree in world wars etc... all make a difference in the minds of many.......

Politics,money, trade and self interest ? I feel inclined to turn that on its head and say that the countries most keen on supporting the Ukraine here are those which have the closest contacts to the USA. The non alligned so called 'Third World' countries don't appear that interested in the whole thing.

 

[yorkshirehornet]

Politics,money, trade and self interest ? I feel inclined to turn that on its head and say that the countries most keen on supporting the Ukraine here are those which have the closest contacts to the USA. The non alligned so called 'Third World' countries don't appear that interested in the whole thing.

Interesting that when talking about neutrality you talk about it in this way...
I think it is the European countries that are most pro Ukraine as it is on their doorsteps... hear the Polish PM for example....

India want to trade with Russia and get cheap oil....it has always played the 'west' off.... I know about this a bit from living over there and contacts in the Embassy first hand..they still quietly talk about the great game..... India now 'refusing' to export wheat....

Your list: India, China, Iran, Israel, Turkey, South Africa, Hungary, Cuba, Nicaragua

Russia cosying up to China now....Russia and China just this evening have done a joint military exercise over Japanese waters

The other countries you list all have pro-Russian interests.

I sense you are painting the US in a particular light here.... when,,, for me... the issue is...and always has been.... the illegal invasion...

The murder needs to be stopped...........................

 

[Hornet-Fez]

erm, Islam isn't a race - it's a choice. Same as Christianity, Bhuddism, Sikhism, atheism.

 

[colognehornet]

Interesting that when talking about neutrality you talk about it in this way...
I think it is the European countries that are most pro Ukraine as it is on their doorsteps... hear the Polish PM for example....

India want to trade with Russia and get cheap oil....it has always played the 'west' off.... I know about this a bit from living over there and contacts in the Embassy first hand..they still quietly talk about the great game..... India now 'refusing' to export wheat....

Your list: India, China, Iran, Israel, Turkey, South Africa, Hungary, Cuba, Nicaragua

Russia cosying up to China now....Russia and China just this evening have done a joint military exercise over Japanese waters

The other countries you list all have pro-Russian interests.

I sense you are painting the US in a particular light here.... when,,, for me... the issue is...and always has been.... the illegal invasion...

The murder needs to be stopped...........................

I can agree with your last sentence - aren't all invasions illegal ? But the question is how to bring this to an end - none of those who want to continue this proxy war can come up with a satisfactory answer to that one. If favouring a diplomatic solution means that I am neutral then so be it.

 

[yorkshirehornet]

I can agree with your last sentence - aren't all invasions illegal ? But the question is how to bring this to an end - none of those who want to continue this proxy war can come up with a satisfactory answer to that one. If favouring a diplomatic solution means that I am neutral then so be it.

I don't disagree ..but emotionally I feel for the terrible things being done to the Ukrainian people NOW...and I agree with my totally non political goddaughter...someone should just take Putin out..... don't care who... to stop this terrible war

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

Different countries will have different reasons for reacting in the way that they have. It may be that by joining NATO they will feel that they will be safer from invasion by Russia. The USA is wanting to show that it is returning from the America first policy of the last President. France is currently in an election cycle and is trying to stay on side with both left and right, while Germany is faced with losing the dominant presence of Merkal and just working out a foreign policy towards the role it should be taking in an illegal invasion. In the UK the current government is just grateful to have something different to focus on to turn attention away from the mess it has created for itself. Countries such as India will see an opportunity to gain economic benefit. Lots of self interest at stake, so it is surprising that the response to Putin has been as unified as it has.
I would prefer people within Russia to remove Putin from power as I do not like the idea of negotiating with a war criminal. If it means that he is removed in a more violent way, I would say better than seeing countless more lives lost.