O/T:- Ukraine [Incorporating 'Congrats to Russia' thread]

[drillerpie]

This is another bad faith argument. Ukraine is a democracy. No democracy is ever perfectly politically homogeneous on any big issue. But on balance, support in Ukraine for reducing corruption is high, and so is support for moving closer to Europe.

And so is support for continuing their defensive war against Russia's aggression.

Yes, I agree with you on all of that. Kind of obvious that not every single Ukrainian thinks the same way about EU membership, especially in the context of a conversation about violence between pro-Russia and pro-Maidan protestors, but there we are.

The Ukrainian constitution contains references to achieving the goal of EU membership, and the most recent survey I could find (which is also broken down by area of Ukraine, and the East area includes the parts of Donetsk and Luhansk not under Russian control) shows quite a lot of support for EU membership.

All in all I don't think it's dishonest to say that Ukraine and Ukrainians want to move towards Europe.





https://www.iri.org/resources/public...ts-of-ukraine/

[drillerpie]

I used to tune into RT or look at the website from time to time just to hear what kind of messaging they were putting out there. In my opinion a lot of it was very obvious propaganda strung together in a fairly amateurish fashion, and when you saw people like Alec Salmond and George Galloway prostituting themselves to get air time as main presenters, it was good reason to take the channel's content with a large pinch of salt, if not enjoy it on an ironically comedic level!

I do find it concerning, however, that the powers-that-be have decided for themselves that we should no longer be able to watch a channel such as RT at all, giving Russia a fairly easy and not entirely unjustified claim that our 'free press/media' is a myth. RT might have been a particularly unsubtle example of one viewpoint if not outright lies being presented as news, but you would have to be pretty brainwashed and naive not to believe that multiple western news broadcasters/newspapers (from various political perspectives) are not also indulging in such propaganda, and some do it to a degree not all that dissimilar to RT, if truth be told.

Should it not be up to the individual to decide what they wish to watch, and how they interpret it? I watched RT and concluded that a lot of its content was unreliable and very questionable if not easily disprovable crap, but at least back then it was my choice and my interpretation, not someone else making that decision for me.

Yeah I know they had trouble with OFCOM over the objectivity rules even before the war, but I don't know the value of a ban especially in a time when everything is available online anyway.

[andy6025]

Driller, those are very interesting surveys... from 2022. However we were discussing the situation on the eve of the Maidan mob's violent overthrow of the democratically elected government in late 2013 and early 2014.

The surveys below from the relevant period, conducted by the same organization, show a strongly divided country on many issues including European integration, joining NATO, the status of Crimea, and other questions. It’s clear that Western Ukraine very much wants European and nato integration, whereas eastern Ukraine is far less interested. Important to note is that for any results after the beginning of the civil war, the people in “occupied territories” including Crimea are not represented.



Above we see the country evenly split in late 2013 on EU vs Russian economic integration, with less than 50% of the country showing more interest in joining the EU compared to any alternatives.



Above we can see how the same question (posed in 2015) divides the country geographically.



Above we can see that even after the violent overthrow of the government in 2014, not only were less than 50% of the country interested in joining NATO, but more were decidedly opposed than in favour.



And above we can see how that same question divides the country geographically.



Here we see that only 50% of the country in 2015 firmly believed that Russia's annexation of Crimea ought to be considered illegal. Note that residents of Crimea themselves were not included in the survey.

Source: https://www.iri.org/wp-content/uploa...16-30_2015.pdf

[Another one]

Driller, those are very interesting surveys... from 2022. However we were discussing the situation on the eve of the Maidan mob's violent overthrow of the democratically elected government in late 2013 and early 2014.

But it is 2022 comrade so more relevant than data nearly ten years ago before Putin went mental.

[andy6025]

But it is 2022 comrade so more relevant than data nearly ten years ago before Putin went mental.

The public sentiments in 2013/2014 are more relevant because that is when the American backed ‘pro-European’s’ overthrew the government and launched the civil war and Russian annexation of Crimea.

The Western narrative would have us believe that Ukraine was rather politically homogeneous in looking westward, but was hindered by an authoritarian pro-Russian president that simply needed to get out of the way for the will of the people to be enacted.

But that would be a lie - propaganda, if you will. Instead, *some* Ukrainians indeed were looking westward, while many others still looked east to Russia. And as the survey shows, not only they were evenly split, but geographically divided. Nor was the government an authoritarian dictatorship like it is now. Instead, it was democratically elected in what all observers agree was a free and fair election.

What happened in the Maidan revolution (or western backed coup - depending on your perspective) was Ukraine’s equivalent of the Jan 6 attempted overthrow of the American government. But with the backing of the United States, the Ukrainian mob won!

The eastern Ukrainians were appalled and in turn demanded more autonomy from the new regime in Kiev. The new regime disagreed -in their view they could overthrow the previous government, but eastern Ukrainians weren’t entitled to overthrow their authority. Apparently what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander. Civil war broke out.

Following that, the ‘collective west’, led by the United States began arming and training Ukrainian government forces to crush the rebels, while hypocritically crying foul that Russia might be arming the autonomists. Again, one rule for thee and another for me!

Since Russia’s invasion in February, the two sides almost reached a deal (verified by Turkey who was mediating). According to the Russians, the deal would allow Ukraine to pursue EU membership, but not join NATO. This was said to be agreed by both parties until Boris Johnson flew to Kiev (likely at the behest of the Biden Administration), and scuttled the deal.

There’s also a lot of important detail to the history Ive left out here - particular details of the trade agreement being negotiated with the EU that the democratically elected Yanukovych ultimately rejected - partly because it contained clauses that made Ukraine de facto members of NATO, as well as how the trade agreement would have worked given that Ukraine is sandwiched between Russia (Ukraine’s largest trading partner) and Europe, that many see would have been extremely detrimental to the Ukrainian economy. I’m happy to discuss these details with anyone genuinely interested in the topic.

[Jampie]

You neglect to mention, Andy, that in your own supplied graphs, the trend over time was very strongly toward Europe. Unsurprisingly given Russia's behaviour since, that trend has only strengthened and so now an overwhelming majority of the country looks to the west as the future.

No doubt that's why you're only interested in statistics on opinions from 8+ years ago - everything since puts the lie to your narrative.

"The public sentiments in 2013/2014 are more relevant because that is when the American backed ‘pro-European’s’ overthrew the government and launched the civil war and Russian annexation of Crimea."

Russia launched the annexation of Crimea. Blaming that on anyone but Russia is dishonest. Again.

[Jampie]

Since Russia’s invasion in February, the two sides almost reached a deal (verified by Turkey who was mediating). According to the Russians, the deal would allow Ukraine to pursue EU membership, but not join NATO. This was said to be agreed by both parties until Boris Johnson flew to Kiev (likely at the behest of the Biden Administration), and scuttled the deal.

Evidence for this claim? I've seen none whatsoever.

[andy6025]

An interview from 2 days ago with Jeffrey Sachs who is an American economist, academic, public policy analyst and former adviser to Gorbachev, Yeltsin, 3 UN Secretary Generals, and Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma:

https://youtu.be/QrmWpI_s7rc

[jackal2]

French President Emmanuel Macron: "One of the essential points we must address - as President Putin has always said - is the fear that NATO comes right up to its doors, and the deployment of weapons that could threaten Russia".

I don't always agree with Macron (to say the least!) but he's right about this. As Sachs says in the interview above: "Much of this war has been about NATO enlargement from the beginning".

In no way does that mean Putin's actions in the Ukraine are justified or strategically intelligent. On the contrary, having once been a very astute player of the international political game, Putin has made a huge mistake invading Ukraine, handing a massive PR and strategic advantage to the NATO and the West, and putting ally China in a position they didn't need.

[Jampie]

I mean it's correct in the sense that Putin's invasion of Ukraine has almost certainly brought NATO right up to his borders.

Otherwise I don't find that credible. If Putin was actually worried about NATO he would still have at least semi-credible defenses on his borders with Europe, and he certainly wouldn't have been willing to deplete Russia's combat power to the extent that he has in futile ground operations in Ukraine.

As for Mr. Sachs, as a military analyst he makes a good economist...