Anyone who knows the former Soviet space well understands the crucial difference between “grazdanstvo” – citizenship – and “narodnosc” – nationality. It featured on all identity documents, including passports, in the Soviet Union and on post Soviet national passports, at least until countries joined the EU.
I don’t know if it is currently retained on Ukrainian passports, or if not when it was dropped – perhaps someone might advise.
Everybody in the post Soviet sphere knew the distinction. In Uzbekistan, an inhabitant of Samarkand would almost certainly enter their citizenship – grazdanstvo – as Uzbek and their nationality – narodnosc – as Tajik, for example.
There has been a strange failure to counter the myth that the inhabitants of the Donbass are mostly Russian. They are not, and have not been so for many centuries.
The last census in Ukraine was in 2001, conducted under the pro-Russian president Leonid Kuchma. These are the narodnosc results as percentages for the regions Putin has just annexed.
Donetsk Region
Ukrainians 56.9
Russians 38.2
Greeks 1.6
Belarussians 0.9
Tatars 0.5
Armenians 0.3
Jews 0.5
Azerbaijanians 0.2
Luhansk Region
Ukrainians 58.0
Russians 39.0
Belarussians 0.8
Tatars 0.3
Armenians 0.3
Kherson Region
Ukrainians 82.0
Russians 14.1
Belarussians 0.7
Tatars 0.5
Moldavians 0.4
Armenians 0.4
Crimean Tatars 0.2
Zaporizhzhia Region
Ukrainians 70.8
Russians 24.7
Bulgarians 1.4
Belarussians 0.7
Jews 0.2
Armenians 0.3
Tatars 0.3
Georgians 0.2
In none of the regions Putin has just annexed were Russians a majority in 2001, let alone a 99.7% majority. Apparently 6.4 million Ukrainians have simply vanished.
For completeness here were the 2001 results for Crimea:
Russians 58.3
Ukrainians 24.3
Crimean Tatars 12.0
Belarussians 1.4
Tatars 0.5
Armenians 0.4
Jews 0.2
Poles 0.2
Moldavians 0.2
Azerbaijanians 0.2
There is an extremely important validation of these results available. They only show small changes from the last Soviet census in 1989. In all of these regions (bar Crimea) a majority identified their nationality as Ukrainian in the Soviet census too. So it is not a factor of Ukrainian independence.
Here is the region with the highest concentration of Russians – Donetsk – in the Soviet census in 1989.
Donetsk 1989 Soviet Census
Ukrainians 50.7
Russians 43.6
Greeks 1.6
Belarussians 1.4
Tatars 0.5
Armenians 0.2
Jews 0.5
Azerbaijanians 0.1
As I said, there has never been a Russian majority in the Donbass.
There may have been a slight Russian speaking majority. 14.8% of those, Ukraine wide, who identified their nationality as Ukrainian, gave Russian as their first language. This was higher in the East and lower in the West. But those who self-identify as Ukrainian but speak Russian as their first language, are no different to English speaking Scots. Russian speaking was advantageous in the Soviet Union.
There has never been a Russian majority in the Donbass. Never. The Russian minority in Donbass is mostly derived from the great population movements of 1946, when the Polish city of Lvov became Ukrainian and German cities like Breslau and Posen became Polish.
The Russian minority in Donbass is heavily urban, concentrated in the cities. The Ukrainian majority in the Donbass is heavily rural. The Russians are thus much more concentrated, visible and easy to mobilise. That is why it is genuinely possible to mobilise a pro-Russian demonstration in the cities of Luhansk or Donetsk. It is why journalists visiting those cities get a false impression of the wider population of the region.
That urban/rural split is of course not absolute, and just one factor in patchiness of distribution. Some eastern portions of the Donbass probably did have a Russian majority population.
Farmers cling to their land, and a surprising number of rural Ukrainians remained even within the minority proportion of the lands of the Donbass that became a Russian military enclave post 2014. Most of the land of Donbass, outside the Russian controlled areas, became even more Ukrainian as some population exchange between the areas occurred.
The majority of the territory of Donbass has been conquered by Russia only within the last six months and the population there certainly remains majority Ukrainian. Only in the easternmost areas, the post 2014 enclaves, is there at this moment almost certainly a Russian majority. But even they still have some Ukrainian rural populations.
The notion that the entire Donbass voted 99% to join Russia is just so ludicrous that I don’t know what to say to people who believe it, except that they are so blinded by ideology and hatred of western governments that they have quite literally stopped thinking.
I probably dislike western governments in a deeper and more informed way than they do; it just does not lead me to the ridiculous illogicality of believing that because the west is bad and run by warmongers, rival warmonger Putin and his oligarchs must be better.
You see Vanessa, I do know better. I speak Russian and Polish, have lived in St Petersburg and Warsaw, and have almost certainly both spent more time in Ukraine than you, while I have very definitely forgotten more Ukrainian history than you will ever know.
The idea that in Zaporizhzhia – where 24% of the population self identify as Russian – or Kherson, where 14% are Russian, 97% of the population voted to join Russia is so ludicrous that I can’t believe I find myself explaining it. I have friends in Kherson.
Equally ludicrous is Vanessa Beeley’s idea of election observation. Knowing nothing of the country or its history – and I am quite certain she has no idea of the above census facts – you cannot fly in for a few days and judge a democratic process free and fair.
There are international rules for election observation, long established by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe and more recently by the United Nations. These include that observers should not be funded by the host country or by any party involved or be dependent on either for logistics, transport, accommodation and communications. Observers should not be accompanied by any officials when observing.
I have asked Vanessa a few questions on the absolute basics of international referendum observation 101. Let me expand on those a bit here:
What electoral register was used? When was it taken?
What was the supervising body of the referendum? Where are its published rules? How independent was it?
Which people or organisations represented each side of the referendum question? How were they registered?
How long was the campaign period?
What broadcast debates were held?
How was equality of airtime on local broadcast media implemented? how did the observers monitor it?
What were the spending limits for each campaign? How much was spent? How was it audited?
Was each side able to campaign freely without fear and intimidation?
How were the observers dispersed geographically? How many in rural how many in urban areas? For how many weeks?
What campaigning was seen? Where is the observers’ photographic evidence of democratic campaigning by each side?
That is the basic work of any monitoring mission. Democracy is a process, not merely a vote. Only after that do we get to secrecy of the ballot, access to voting, intimidation at polling stations, security of the count etc.
The plain truth is that I resemble a Ducati motorbike more than what happened in Ukraine resembled a democratic process. Anybody who claims otherwise is simply an appalling liar. I was amused by a comment from Eva Bartlett, for whom I generally have much respect, who said she did not meet anybody opposed to the annexation.
If you think carefully, Eva, that is not the win you think it is.
These annexations are deeply unhelpful. They go way beyond anything to which Russia can have the slightest reasonable claim. I could see a negotiated settlement around Ukraine acknowledging Russian sovereignty over Crimea, and perhaps those parts of the Donbass within the control line as at February 2022.
But by declaring as Russian territory large regions of Ukraine to which Russia has no valid claim whatsoever, Putin has made a negotiated settlement almost impossible. He has also bitten off far more than he can chew. As I keep explaining, Russia is not the military superpower NATO wants us to believe in order to keep us fueling the military industrial complex.
Putin is playing into the hands of the United States’ strategy, to bleed Russia and degrade its military whilst expending only Ukrainian lives. Western military technology is vastly superior to Russian. Putin is sending 300,000 conscripts into a meat grinder. As more and more of that western weaponry reaches Ukraine and becomes operational, the Russian conscripts will neither see nor have a chance to fight the person killing them from way over the horizon.
The dangers of escalation towards the nuclear are becoming very real. I fully acknowledge and condemn the toxic nature of much Ukrainian nationalism, the glorification of Nazis, the banning of opposition parties and of Russian language teaching and media. I utterly oppose NATO expansion. Of course it was not Russia who blew up the Nordstream pipeline or shelled the nuclear power station they were themselves occupying.
I absolutely get all of that.
But unless Armageddon appeals to you, and if you have the slightest respect for truth over ideology, the cheering on of Putin has to stop.
————————————————-
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
I was waiting on your analysis of Russia welcoming those regions into it’s national borders.
I agree with you that the referendum wasn’t carried out under normal democratic process. How could it ever have been so…
I’ve been following Eva through the months of conflict and for sure she is giving voice to the Russian people who have been under serious attack in Eastern Ukraine for the past 8 years.. We all know of that and how many 1000’s have been slaughtered by the Ukraine Nazis.
The stakes are unbelievably high. More than any of us can express in words. I actually agree with Putin on this matter, given the nature of what’s playing out and the fact that so many of the people living in this region are Russian. I suspect that a high % of the people who identify as Ukrainian have more in common with the Russian people there, than they do with the aggressive militarised force that has been shelling them indiscriminately for years, with no end in sight.
He’s making a huge statement, both literally and symbolically against the war machine of the American industrial complex and NATO allies.
He will know that if he just sat back and done nothing it would only be a matter of time before an attack is carried out on Russia by NATO forces.
He has to go all the way in carrying out the mission he set out to accomplish and securing Eastern Ukraine (for however long) will be seen as a massive victory and a statement in time for the history books.
It’s been demonstrated that the western elite want him removed and they aren’t interested in brokering a peace deal which entails him being alive or still in power… So what is he to do?
Simply allow for Russia to be over run and taken over without a fight and doing his best by way of his public speech as part of the inauguration of those states in to Russia, knowing full well that it would be broadcast around the world, to highlight the war crimes of the USA and their hand in initiating this war in Ukraine.
Yes, it may lead to an escalation and nuclear armageddon, but in all honesty I feel we were heading in that direction anyway as the Western war hawks are delirious in their bloodlust which has been building for Putin and Russia for many years, and for as long as he is in power, then he may have to make the ultimate decision in relation to meeting that aggressive and quite frankly, to quote his words.. Openly satanic force which has been destroying the fabric of life for decades and is out of control.
One other piece of information that could skew figures but which is also a story in itself, is that according to the UN, over a third of refugees have gone to Russia.
Indeed, if you are a Ukranian, you support the Kiev government and you live in any of the four oblasts, what is the most sensible course of action when you see the Russian forces creeping ever closer? – you up sticks and move to another part of Ukraine, or follow what your fellows have been doing for years and leave Ukraine altogether, especially while western Europe was being particularly refugee-friendly.
It is true pro Ukrainians refugees would head to Europe as it is pro Russian would head to Russia. We are now heading towards half/half . The latest figures over the last two months have two thirds of refugees going to Russia.
CNN a few weeks ago showed the lines heading into Russian controlled Zaporizhzhia oblast loaded up. Two civilian convoys this week were hit by strikes with over 30 dead. Common sense tells you who did this.
Is the small percentage of Jews present today in Ukraine due to the ruthless murderous efforts of the now national hero Stephan Bandera and his right sector fellow fascist in the 1930/40?
why were these war criminals not included in the Nuremberg show trials?
especially when they started their Holocaust before the Germans even arrived.
Vanessa is as fallible as we all are; deletion via ignorance for 50 years does not help.
Heard today above Holkham Hall nature Reserve were dogfighting jets who for the last two weeks have been readying themselves to support the Biden/Nuland puppet regime in Ukraine.
We are sleepwalking into the scythe that is cutting down people every day in Ukraine, nobody wants peace and our psychos in power have no qualms for us to be sacrificed as well.
Indeed Nevermind..and Craig should respect Eva Bartlett Who is on Ukraine kill list
“We don’t want to fight, but by jingo if we do,
We’ve got no ships, we’ve got no men, we’ve got no money too”
Song from the last time we fought Russia updated for the next.
It’s amazing how many people swapped one propagandistic fairy tale (NATO/US/EU as noble world saviours) for another (Russia and Putin as noble world saviours).
The idea that any nation state, let alone early 21st century Russia, is a liberating force that will “save us” is absolutely ludicrous but quite a few people seem to believe just that and yearn for a ‘strong man’ father figure who will usher in a “better world.”
On the MoA forum, and maybe others, you will even find Europeans who think Putin should use nukes to “quickly win the war”. That said nukes might detonate above their keyboard warrior heads or close enough to irradiate their food and water and poison themselves and their loves ones apparently never occurred to them. The Russia/Putin cheerleaders are no less unhinged than the NATO variety.
Just unbelievable how easily even secular people accept the most irrational and illogical bullshite. Simply believing the polar opposite of whatever western media and politicians are peddling and uncritically accepting everything the “other side” says does not lead to truth and doing so makes you just as delusional as the people who believe everything the Guardian tells them.
Can’t say I’ve seen any such Europeans on MoA. Perhaps there’s one such nutter, max two, submerged by the mass of NATO trolls at the moment.
I completely agree – most of the people cheering Putin want him to do the heavy lifting of saving them from GloboHomo. I keep explaining that if you want liberation you gotta do it yourself like the Canadian truckers, Dutch farmers, and the people of Sri Lanka.
“It’s amazing how many people swapped one propagandistic fairy tale (NATO/US/EU as noble world saviours) for another (Russia and Putin as noble world saviours).”
It isn’t, really (amazing). History shows that there will always be people who find believing what they are told easier than actually thinking about it and that they are not few.
It’s remarkable how much better your blog posts are when you stick to something you understand.
Why haven’t I seen these facts anywhere else?
Well done and thank you.
Which of Craig’s points do you disagree with?
Just a guess – dearieme is a “Putin bad, NATO good” simplistic, partisan type. Can’t compute information if it challenges their world view. Upsets them. Very strange creatures indeed. Orwell describes their basic morphology in Notes on Nationalism
“Why haven’t I seen these facts anywhere else?”
Isn’t that a bit of a red flag?
well, finally, I can agree with Craig, after reading his posts for the last two years 🙂
For your esteemed consideration:
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/10/03/patrick-lawrence-the-strong-and-the-merely-powerful/
Fascinating article by Patrick Lawrence.
Seems a multi polar world is the only possible future.
It would appear that Vanessa Beeley and around one-hundred other observers have come into the crosshairs of the EU parliament, and they could be sanctioned.
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/09/29/eu-parliamentarian-sanction-vanessa-beeley-donbass-referendums/
How dare they go there and report what’s happening on the ground, so the world can cultivate a broader perspective through many lens.
If only they had reported what was really going on.
How do you know they didn’t? Were you on the ground?
It wasn’t on the BBC.
“The cheering on of Putin has to stop”
Please address us, Craig, to where in mass media such cheering on is occurring. I see only the cheering on of NATO and the Ukrainian Nazis. Do you really want them to win? For years Putin tried to get the implementation of the Minsk agreements, but as Poroshenko has admitted they had no intention of implementing them. So what do you recommend next for Russia? Surrender? All this talk of democracy, legality, human rights is just so much cynical rhetoric. According to the Russians, their backs are to the wall. One side has to prevail: take your pick!
All that Putin needs to do is withdraw his Army to behind Russia’s internationally recognized borders.
Easy peasy.
If Putin’s back is to the wall, where is Zelenskyy’s?
And which man has shown more courage?
Has Putin visited his front line troops?
And let the nazis continue their genocide, good call, I wish we had been able to figure that one out for ourselves, but at least you’ve helped …
If Ukraine is a Nazi rump state (it isn’t of course) and Russia is beacon of cultural and political freedom (it isn’t of course), why is the UA fighting well and bravely?
And why are the RA running away?
Why did the Confederates willingly charge into entrenched Union lines at Gettysburg?
Courage doesn’t validate a rotten cause.
“why is the UA fighting well and bravely?”
The UA is fighting bravely, but not well. If you are in a position that it is impossible to hold, the sensible thing to do is retreat (what you call “running away”). The UA tends not to do this, but be forced out of their positions.
Zelensky’s back is not to the wall. He has bolt holes in Florida, London and Israel.
Putin has already in 2014 withdrawn his troops – didn’t bring peace, just emboldened the Nazis – but I agree he is a poor war leader, a dithering weakling, who was finally obliged to accept he could no longer procrastinate. Not my hero, but preferable to the Hitler-loving rabble around Zelensky. One side will have to prevail by force now. As for the hero, Zelensky, either the local Nazis will bump him off or he’ll skiddadle off to one of his bolt holes. I bet he’s salted away a few billion!
Of course Putin is no more a democrat than Biden, Truss, Nuland and co. I have not heard that he has introduced a special war tax on his Russian oligarchs, but maybe he has and it hasn’t got past our censorship; but at least he does not seem to be a fascist. Anyway, if the NATO Nazis continue their current policy, then a wider war seems to be inevitable. I point out again, as have so many, that the US has Russia and China surrounded by hundreds of bases, not the other way round. Something will have to give. Neither Russia not China is Iraq. They will not surrender now, and end up like that wretched place that used to be a country.
Ukraine is NOT a sovereign nation: it is a Western imperial satrapy.
If owning property overseas is the mark of a corrupt leader, perhaps the Putinistas here should check out their hero’s palaces in Russia and no doubt overseas.
I believe Zelensky has been given British citizenship.
May I point out, tomorrow, 5th October 2022, the new Russian Territories will defend themselves. With the full might of the Russian military. The gloves they have so far used, comes off.
Whether Europeans of English government recognise this fact is immaterial.
If anyone is daft enough to listen to the English media and believes there is any merit in the Tory government’s position, and as a firm believer in natural selection, a rifle is readily available for any that decide they wish to fight for the Nazi regime in Ukraine.
Perhaps the notion that Nazis and Nuland can create liberty, proves my point. I quote Nuland “f*ck the EU”!
Funny, isn’t it. Those of us who live in England know that everything the Government and the media (including the Guardian and other faux left wing outlets) is a patchwork of lies, damned lies, statistics and blatant hypocrisy. But everything they say about the official, US-appointed enemy and the wars, covert and otherwise, fought against them, is taken as the gospel truth, when in fact it is of a piece with the rest of their output. Please don’t tell me we are rational creatures living in a civilized society. The Food Banks and the waiting lists for hospital treatments tell me otherwise, for a start.
J Lowrie:
“Please address us, Craig, to where in mass media such cheering on is occurring”
In mass media no. But here on Craig’s blog – yes. You are doing it for one. It is quite astounding the mental gymnastics some are willing to go to justify that the people of Mariupol wanted to be bombed and to justify an invasion of another sovereign nation. Since Ukraine is a sovereign nation, Russia had no business interfering in Donets or Luhansk (Just as the west did not interfere in Chechnya). Until Feb 2022 there was peace in Mariupol and Kherson. Russia had no business entering into these territories. Russia doesn’t have to surrender as you put it – it simply needs to withdraw its troops outside of the internationally recognized borders of Ukraine. I would not call that a lose for Russia.
Peace in Mariupol? The H.Q of the Azov Brigade? Some peace.
Re Mariupol, yes, I suppose flattening a city to rubble is one way of bringing peace to it.
Putin … What a guy.
“it simply needs to withdraw its troops outside of the internationally recognized borders of Ukraine”
International recognition of borders is a flexible thing. Just look at Israel. Alternatively just study the last 120 years of eastern Europe’s history.
The territories that Israel occupied are not recognized even 50 years after they were taken and the international community continues to state that it is not legal to build settlements there.
I understand that prior to the creation of the UN charter at the end of the second world war borders were flexible and fought by wars. I also understand that the UN is entirely a western construction. It seems that you agree that this is just Russia attempting to take land by force based on the logic that international law is an artificial western construct. At least you are being honest about this (unlike some). Not everyone should agree the killing of others and bank robbery are immoral or crimes – indeed the ancient Greeks made heroes out of warriors and conquests.
“I understand that prior to the creation of the UN charter at the end of the second world war borders were flexible and fought by wars.”
Not only by war, borders have changed by treaty, as well, but it is not logical to suppose that thousands of years of history can be brought to a close by a few powerful countries laying down the law to the rest, especially when those same borders, now set in concrete, were so often the arbitrary decision of people in those same powerful countries. Look at most countries in Africa, or the Middle East. Closer to the subject of discussion, Crimea was given to Ukraine at the stroke of a pen. The Crimeans weren’t consulted about it. Now it is supposed to be an inviolable part of Ukraine, when there are still Crimeans alive who remember it being Russia, and even though the inhabitants have been trying to get their independence since Ukraine got its from the USSR.
Bayard writes:
“The Crimeans weren’t consulted about it.”
That is in fact not true. All regions of Ukraine were consulted in 1991 regarding independence. The results are https://twitter.com/InUAOfficial/status/1577195313282002944 . In Crimea it was closer than other regions but they did choose to become a part of Ukraine. Putin also ratified the final border between Ukraine and Russia in 2004 – there was no dispute at that time about whether Crimea should be a part of Russia.
The legacy of European colonization in Africa is really a whataboutism. Neither China nor India want to go back to an era where borders are determined by warfare – so this isn’t just the will of European powers. Even in Africa I don’t think there is much call for this. You will have noticed that western powers are determined to respect Russia’s internationally recognized borders – no serious person is calling for a Finland style sacking of Moscow as retribution. The UN was created to put an end to sovereign nations fighting one another. In the European sphere that has been largely successful – until 2022 most people (including me) didn’t think a major war was even possible – it is why the Germans had persistently cut back on defense spending and didn’t have an issue with being almost entirely dependent on Russian gas for energy.
“That is in fact not true. All regions of Ukraine were consulted in 1991 regarding independence.”
Crimea became part of Ukraine in 1956. Crimean independence from Ukraine wasn’t an option in 1991, only independence from the Soviet Union as part of Ukraine.
“The legacy of European colonization in Africa is really a whataboutism. Neither China nor India want to go back to an era where borders are determined by warfare – so this isn’t just the will of European powers.”
This is completely missing the point. ALL borders, including those arbitrarily drawn by colonial powers in Africa and the Middle East, were fixed by the UN charter. Whether India and China want to go back to when borders were fixed by warfare is irrelevant. Nobody wants to go back to those times, but if warfare is the only mechanism to change borders, then warfare will be used. Being intransigent about arbitrary borders fixed at a particular moment in time “because it was done by the UN” is what makes warfare to be the only option. In any case, post independence, India split into India, Pakistan and Bangladesh and China, once the imperial powers had stopped impinging on it was happy to take over Tibet.
Prior to the United Nations, the League of Nations (its forerunner) was destroyed by these same military dictatorships, France, England and America.
I to a certain point agree with you!
But speak to a reader of the most-read paper in these sovereign nations and in these islands.
They believe everything the BBC states!
They think they are playing with a full deck of cards and nothing could be further from the truth!
The mail
With the greatest respect to you, For the very first time I totally disagree with you.
The best wishes to you and your family.
Highlander
Oh the coup! Let’s be clear the west did not supply weapons to the Maidan protestors – not a single RPG or Javelin was fired. Nor did we send in troops. Whatever happened in Maidan was internal to Ukraine – it was Russia who sent in armed militia (Girkin at al.). Zelensky was elected since then. Are you claiming that Zelensky’s election was rigged in some way – or are you just saying that democratically elected presidents are not fair in a multi-polar world? I understand there are those that will blame US and Western nations for everything; apparently we are now responsible for the protests in Iran – nothing to do with the regime creating conditions that the young don’t accept. The west isn’t responsible for young people growing up wanting freedom.
Andrew H
Victoria Nuland: US has invested $5 billion in Ukraine (25 Apr 2014) – YouTube (8m 46s) – RussiaSupplyChainTV
You ok when US and other western nations do this in Ukraine, Iran and so on? You ok if Iran, Russia do the same in let’s say…UK and the US?
Of course Zelensky’s election was “rigged” in the sense it was brought forward through a coup. And he and his cronies will have that power for years, decades, to come since he banned every party oppositional to him.
I’m fed up of hearing EuroMaidan being referred to as a “coup”. There were persistent street demonstrations, with some violence, that resulted in Yanukovitch fleeing to Russia. There were then elections, that brought Zelyinsky to power. Yanukovitch was felling his own people; he had been elected on a platform of closer links to the EU; immediately on being elected, he changed his mind. Hardly surprising that voters were angry.
It may well be that Western powers were involved in instigating the demonstrations; countries are constantly interfering in their neighbours’ politics. But we don’t call it a coup when street demonstrations lead to the fall of a government.
A coup is what happens when the army (or some part of it) removes the duly-appointed government using military force. The army didn’t unseat Yanukovitch. He tried to pull a bait-and-switch, and Ukrainians weren’t having it.
Jimmeh
Of course it was a coup. An elected leader was illegally ousted.
And no, Yanukovich was not elected as the pro-EU candidate, he was pro-Russian, and that is why he was disliked by the west.
With your logic, Ukrainains have the right to topple Zelensky, with the aid of Russia, since Zelensky was elected on the basis of making peace with the Donbass people.
Jack,
“by your argument, Ukrainains have the right to topple Zelensky”
Of course they do. Ukraine is a free country.
Russians toppling Putin, however, is a different story. You get put away for ten years just for holding up a placard.
Neil
Trying to oust a leader with foreign help is illegal in every country on this globe. However when US interefere it is suddenly ok.
The anti-Yanukovich clientele simply did not respect the vote and that is why they ousted him: because it is only through ballots you change leaders in a democracy.
It was Yanukovich who didn’t respect the vote, unilaterally going for a deal with Russia and ditching the one with the EU that had been agreed with parliament.
Neil
There was no deal done, Russia simply delivered a better deal. Then EU and its supporters could not take that and ousted Yanukovich. The new EU-backed coup leaders then signed the deal.
Jimmeh
You’re fed up of it being called a coup because it forces you to confront the reality again that your media and politicians are deeply untrustworthy.
Very disillusioning.
Even if Russia had offered a better deal Yanukovitch had no right to agree to it until had been agreed by the Ukrainian parliament.
Whether he agreed to a deal or not was irrelevant, it still needed to go through the parliament, but Yanukovich was ousted before this could be done.
Re Zelenskey’s election: I’d like to clarify a few things about it for you:
So yeah any Russian-speaking/sympathising Ukrainians who voted for him on his platform of ending the war and re-uniting the country were duped.
With respect, you should start your posts with…… once upon a time…..!
You only deflect…..I suppose the truth hurts, but burying your head in the sand is no substitute.
The simplest way to (at least partially) reconcile your assertions with those of Ms. Beeley is to ask where the polling stations were located. If the majority are placed in the urban centers where the Russians hold sway and clearly marked, and the rural ones are located as sparsely and inconveniently as possible, and not well advertised, then there doesn’t need to be any overt tampering. Any given polling station examined will be determined to be fairly run, but the election will still be unfair.
This seems an obvious possibility to me, but perhaps that’s because I’m an American and such tactics are very common here.
This is ridiculous. Why are the ballots that are being counted blank? https://twitter.com/krandisorem/status/1574853227136356366
There are many other videos showing the counting process – the results are entirely falsified.
43 vigilator says you’re wrong!
But obviously those facts don’t feed your bias.
Look at Andrew’s faux indignation. Of course the ballot will be falsified. Putin has been doing this for years. The Communist vote in Russia is always rigged. It isn’t in Ukraine though, for there they have banned that party along with others and killed some of its members. As Aristotle pointed out long ago, election by ballot is the mark of an oligarchy, as the rich will usually win thanks to their superior wealth. I have no doubt that Bolsonara and his oligarchic cronies are rigging the vote in Brazil. Money rules. It is normal for a ballot to be rigged. One wonders what planet Andrew inhabits.. I rather suspect Putin did not have to rig this ballot, but his supporters on the spot will just have carried out the usual procedures.
May I point out the Scottish referendum…. no not the 2014 referendum! But this to can easily see for those willing to look. No, the 1979 referendum, but didn’t it help sway elections by getting rid of paid officials i.e. Impartial Returning officers.and giving the job to outsourced parties!
Remember…… once upon a time……
Andrew H
What is your argument? You gave us a link, there is ballots, one cannot see if there are a cross or not or if people just voted blank which is an option itself.
There is a video in your link too, where a woman that have already counted the ballots show the same ballots for the public as she is laying them down on the table.
What is the issue? You are simply misunderstanding what is going on and trying to make a false point.
From 1997 Putin has stated his red lines, Putin had nowhere to go after America reneged on all nuclear agreements! When America sponsored the colour revolution in Ukraine. When the political parties were banned. When American organised to overthrow of the Donbas and Lugansk people when they wouldn’t accept the Americans overthrow of the “democratically elected” government of Ukraine. The declaration that Ukraine’s government was going to build a nuclear weapon being the last straw for Russia.
Putin represents Russia….. in a democratic role, his decisions are made by the sovereign nation, for its protection, territorial integrity of sovereignty.
So decrying Putin, is a simply stupid emotion. Everything has changed. Power dynamics have changed ….forever! The sooner we all realise this pertinent fact, the better we all will be!
NATO must go, the western financial power and institutions, used to usurp the sovereign rights of every sovereign person and nation (both home and abroad), who’s integrity they have undermined, and who they’ve corrupted, have also gone.
Russians wouldn’t accept slavery instead of freedom. Culture education and passion, instead of wokeism and greed; profit instead of a balanced fair society.
Mr Murray. As a long time admirer of your work, and modest financial supporter, I’m appalled and puzzled by this vicious ad hominem attack on Vanessa Beeley. Your response to her would have been far more useful if you’d just stuck to a well-argued, evidence-based response to the claims she made in her tweet. If, that is, you actually have that evidence (not the ‘certainty’ based on your bragged-about superior language skills, knowledge and experience). And I’m also assuming that you have the answers to the questions you directed at her. If so, perhaps you could share them with us.
“Ad hominem” is a term characterising an argument based on who one’s adversary is, rather than what they say. Craig’s remarks addressed what Beeley did and said, not who she is. That is not an ad-hominem attack.
Being a modest supporter, doesn’t buy integrity.
Craig has shown by word and deed, his impartiality, his integrity and inner strength, and his thinking, and even if you think him wrong, do not, the facts, he expressed show his reasoning, as for getting a response, just look at the marginalisation of Alex Salmond, and his inability to reply because of court-appointed injunctions and restrictions.
I fully understood Craig’s submission and the implied deceit of council and the implications to our sovereign
rights and freedoms.
Pardon me, but you really fail to understand that it does not matter how people ID themselves in ethnic sense, it only matters how they vote.
PS: Where are the Cossacks in your data? Let me remind you, Craig, that even Mazepa was not a “Ukrainian”. He was a Cossack.
Keep telling it like it is, Mr Murray.
I won’t say you haven’t done your bit to encourage this anti-west, pro-Putin fanaticism in the past, but good on you for taking the right stand now.
No matter how bad some of the west’s actions, if you are for human rights and personal freedoms, and against state abuse of power, theft of national resources, use of the world’s financial system to rob the poor and enrich the few, then Putin and his gang of cronies are up there with the worst of the worst. He obviously is, and always has been, a sociopathic, kleptocratic, authoritarian thug. Now you might add deranged or unhinged to the list of adjectives, which is even more troubling.
“The enemy of my enemy is my hero” just does not make for logical reasoning.
Putin was regarded as a good guy in western capitals when it was assumed he would be Yeltsin Mk II, serving up his country to the west. His war crimes in Chechnya were condemned in the west only by derided fringe politicians, the same ones who condemned our Iraqi ally’s gassing of the Kurds before it became fashionable.
Only when it became clear Putin wasn’t going to be another Yeltsin, refusing even to participate in destroying Iraq etc, did he start to be demonized and presented to the suggestible as “a sociopathic, kleptocratic, authoritarian thug”.
I’m not sure about presenting to the suggestible, but he is what he is and his actions speak for themselves.
In The UK, the widening of the wealth gap, the lack of real democratic choice, the government support of their cronies in business and finance is bad enough. You want to go and live in Russia, though?
I pointed out the narrative on Putin changed dramatically when it became clear he wouldn’t be another Yeltsin. … you respond by asking if I want to live in Russia.
Here’s a couple of non-sequitur questions for you.
1) do you think people in Russia preferred life under de facto western control in the 1990s?
2) how long would our non sociopathic leaders tolerate encroachment of a hostile military alliance onto their borders denouncing them as the source of all evil, esp if they’d almost been destroyed by invasion multiple times?
1) I’ve no idea. They don’t seem to be given a choice either way.
2) What’s that got to do with whether Putin is a a sociopathic, kleptocratic, authoritarian thug? There are plenty of other postings by Mr Murray analyzing the failings and inequities of western governments, particularly the UK government, most of which I wholeheartedly agree with.
My point is, whatever the failings of western states, both internally and on the world stage, that doesn’t forgive idolizing Putin as some sort of savior beyond criticism when he displays many of the same failings and then some.
Do you see me idolizing him or presenting him as a saviour? No. I simply pointed out to you that Putin wasn’t portrayed as a sociopath by our leaders or media until he refused to be another Yeltsin.
I get it’s an unsettling thing for you to recall. As are the questions I then posed you. Better to just ignore them and never think about them again.
Uwatt, I think you’ll find he started to be seen as “a sociopathic, kleptocratic, authoritarian thug” when he started behaving like one.
Good that you’ve completely failed to understand Uwatt’s point.
Didn’t your mother teach you to read? Where did I claim that Russia did something that is right?
I specifically asserted that Craig’s demand for referendums to be according to some rules – developed by the West and later broken on multiple occasions by the same West- is not logical and self defeating as an argument.
I disagree. Putin was disliked from the very beginning. This is why the 2nd Chechen War was strongly condemned in the West, in contrast with the First, which was almost ignored. I was subscribing to WaPo back then and I was shocked how much bad press Putin got in the US.
Well..why some people vote a certain way has not only to do with ethnicity in my view.
It is about language, culture; it is about thinking they will be better off if their region belongs to Russia; it is the belief that they will have peace if they belong to Russia.
Who came out and voted? The pro-russian of course.
Take this map, that is where people voted the most for (pro-russian) Yanukovich in 2010:
http://suffragio.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Screen-Shot-2014-04-17-at-1.26.53-PM.png
See a pattern? Likely, the people in the east/south have voted along the same line in these referendums: Not necessarily because of ethnicity.
It’s important to take a balanced view. Make sure to read the reports and opinion from the UK press, Guardian and BBC et al, and compare with the view of the Russian press such as RT.com and Sputnik News. Get to hear from both sides.
Oh wait, you can’t, because the UK government has banned your access to the TV channels and websites of those latter two. That tells me all I need to know about who is the tyrant.
Whereas alternative/independent media is not banned in Russia, which proves that … Oh, wait.
Well, there is the media of the Communist party. Highly critical of Putin. Suppressed in Ukraine of course.
Neil
Which alternative/independent media are banned in Russia?
psst, check out I got a secret for ya: https://swentr.site
Thanks Ronton – well aired
“Well..why some people vote a certain way has not only to do with ethnicity in my view.”
I would suggest that it has almost nothing to do with ethnicity. Europe is not Africa. If everyone in Europe voted according to their ancestry, Scotland would be independent by now.
Actually, how to cancel payments? Is there an option on the website? Or I just cancel with PayPal
Was glad to support Craig, when he fought for justice and especially when he was imprisoned on fake pretext. And I’m not regretting it.
But something changed about him recently. Cannot pin it down. Latest articles just not cutting for me. In this article he is talking about some rules and right way to do it. But this is moot, as rules were used as toilet paper by West and no-one was punished for it.
As a Diplomat he should have also realised the meaning behind the Helsinki accords was most crucial in ensuring stability. And the key point there was not right for self-determination and freedom to choose your own system of governance. It was a crucial point of not advancing your own security at the expense of the security of others. I really expected him, with his knowledge, to focus on that part and explain the rubbish about the right of Ukraine to join any alliance they want. And he should have explained at least to his readers what is the route cause of this conflict. But instead he is talking about meaningless things. Sad actually.
Didn’t your mother ever teach you “two wrongs don’t make a right?” The lack of basic democratic processes being applied by NATO interventions does not make the clearly structurally biased referendums run by Russia any better. As one commentator put it, 99% of people wouldn’t vote for free ice cream, never mind in such a contentious electoral choice.
I don’t agree with everything Craig says either, including his overly legalistic approach to things and his Scottish nationalist perspective. Nonetheless he’s one of the few real voices of independent journalism in the UK. Similarly on the Ukraine conflict although he’s wrong on much (e.g. his analysis of the military situation), he’s one of the few voices trying to do real journalism, not just spouting propaganda for either side, both of whom are awful. So my small contribution stays.
Didn’t your mother teach you to read? Where did I claim that Russia did something that is right?
I specifically asserted that Craig’s demand for referendums to be according to some rules – developed by the West and later broken on multiple occasions by the same West – is not logical and self-defeating as an argument.
As Elon Musk proposed:
“Musk posted an outline of his plan on Twitter on Monday, suggesting that Russia “redo elections of annexed regions under UN supervision,” with Moscow withdrawing from these areas if voters choose.”
Additionally he said:
“Crimea would remain Russian, and Ukraine – neutral, the tycoon has suggested”
https://swentr.site/russia/563988-elon-musk-ukraine-poll/
In my view this is the realistic outcome to make peace. Ukraine could of course continue fighting but risk losing more land and Ukrainians. For what?
“suggesting that Russia “redo elections of annexed regions under UN supervision, “with Moscow withdrawing from these areas if voters choose.” “
Not going to happen though is it?
You are not talking about Palestine? No, I thought not!
Pears Morgaine
Not going to happen no its not, I’d imagine Russia doesn’t trust the UN, the UNSG has already overstepped his remit with regards to the conflict on multiple occasions.
Then we have the IAEA trying to force Russian forces to leave the ZNPP, even though Ukrainian forces have been shelling the largest nuclear energy plant in Europe hoping to cause a nuclear disaster that could be blamed on Russian forces.
Then we have the OSCE observers caught spying for Ukraine.
Also, the OPCW fired inspectors who reported that there was no chemical attack in Douma.
I can understand why Russia doesn’t trust Western bodies such as the above.
The UN no longer monitor elections but there are other organisation such as the EU or the Council of Europe (of which Russia was once a member) who could’ve provided legitimacy to the referenda; if they actually had any of course.
Pears Morgaine
I’m sure Putin would trust the EU after the Germans allowed the set up a 300+ personnel (Nato) forward Command base in Germany, to support Ukraine in all manners, never mind the EU countries (though not all of them) supplying weapons, aid, intelligence, and training to the Ukrainian forces not to mention special service troops now in the country.
The Council of Europe is an official United Nations Observer.
In Inverness the now unemployed returning officer (as all impartial returning officers were made redundant), helps Americanise the “representations of the people’s act”, to mitigate elections and voting patterns, to oligarchs, let’s decide who will win!
This gentleman works in the same capacity for…… and on behalf of……the United Nations!
Good enough for African countries…… but not…… Scotland, England, Ireland, or Wales!
That’s your English appointed democracy for you!
It’s laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.
Thanks ROS for the heads up – Ukraine has targeted the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant by shelling and created fires around the area by remotely detonated explosives. My own sources suggest that Ihor Murashov, Director General of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) had been solicited by British intelligence, this after an SBS lead Ukrainian naval force of more than 250 troops attempted to land on the coast of a lake near the nuclear plant in southern Ukraine at around 11 p.m. local time on September 2.
I have assumed the game plan was to create a nuclear incident that could be spelled out as Russian nuclear terrorism.
“If voting made any difference, they wouldn’t let us do it.”
Since the UN has been taken over by the USA, as has most of its associated bodies. Why would anyone trust these bodies and give away their gains ? Total nonsense, Musk should stick to producing pimped up milk floats.
The new reality is Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia and Crimea are now Russian, that ain’t gonna change. The West and Ukraine had multiple chances to prevent this in the last decade – but that’s not the agenda being pursued.
IMO it’s also the last chance saloon for Odessa and Transnistria. Negotiate or die, it’s that simple.
And here’s the reason that Putin’s war against the US must be supported:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/57259.htm
The Yakla massacre conducted by the US Joint Special Operations Command ICH reports in your link Jams reminds us of the sadness and hopelessness in Yemen.
Eva Bartlet said in a tweet, “Where is the outrage for the people of Yemen?”
IN MEMORIAM:
I don’t suppose that any nation’s secret services are any better. It’s the problem with having secret services. Secrecy and accountability are diametrically opposed. Possibly the CIA is worse set up than other secret services, but, those services being secret, it’s hard to tell.
But what rights do we have to murder innocents and their sovereign country and their democratically elected leaders, civilians, unarmed men women and children.
Just as Shell and BP about their military contracted security in various oil rich countries in Africa!
I was wondering what did this whole thing remind me of. And then Wikipedia helped:
“Independence was strongly favoured by Bosniaks and Bosnian Croat voters, while majority of Bosnian Serbs boycotted it. Voter turnout was 63.6 percent, of whom 99.7 percent voted for the independence”
Kettle calling the pot black. I wonder how adamant and angry was Craig during those days. Or maybe now?
And I think Croatia didn’t even bother about referendum. Slovenia I think had close to 90% votes towards independence.
But this is different and not worth mentioning, I’m sure
It was Kosovo which was forced to independence by the US without a referendum. And then a fig-leaf vote was passed after the fact, which was then boycotted by those opposed to independence.
Croatian Parliament declared independence.
Slovenia had 88% and is very “Slovenian”
Biggest mixture of people is Bosnia and Herzegovina!
There are so called Croats (Catholics) there are so called Serbs (Orthodox) and there were Muslims. The so called Muslims
become Bosniaks and I believe they are ethnicity now. Ethnicity is BS, IMO! Ethnicity is just irrational belief of being a part of something bigger( clan tribe and not that long ago nation) Same kind of people living for centuries together believe that they are different nation narod narodnjost ethnikk citizenshib and other BS.
What I am trying to say is that I will pay about 40% of DNA cost of experiment to establish anonymously who is more English or Scottish or Russian or French etc. or Arsenal fan than me. I have Arsenal fan gene in me
It sounds like Mic Drop comment. Good Job?
Looking forward for Piers M,John Kinsella our host CM and others to explain this!
I think even more interesting will be to hear their responses on why Republika Srpska was not even allowed referendum. ?
What’s your question Pigeon?
For CM it is hard to understand that most of Scots don’t want independence unlike many others.! If England did something really bad opinion would change and CM does’t understand that!
You should post this as an answer to Michael and his Ice cream analogy!
Dear Craig,
It is inaccurate to say there has “never been”a Russian ethnic majority in those places or there hasn’t been one for centuries. You can even check Wikipedia to see that Odessa and Kharkiv had majority Russian populations in 1900 and it was not even close. The majority in both Mariupol and Donetsk was greater than that. This information may not change your overall argument, but it does call into question the sources for your understanding of Ukrainian/Russian history.
Furthermore, to be sure the fact the referendum voting was not fair or valid because of the absurd percentages reported is understandable. However, this does not mean that the majority of people in some of those regions, particularly in the Donbass, wouldn’t vote to join Russia in a free election. There are many reasons to think they would.
Craig is using outdated figures from 1989 and 2001 to try to make his point.
However, since the US coup of 2014 there has been a huge change in the demographics of the regions due to a civil war and the wider SMO since late February.
The Donbass and Crimea had similar results to the referendums held in 2014.
Millions of citizens have fled either east or west.
It is very likely that the citizens remaining in the areas controlled by Russia and the LPR/DPR are totally sympathetic to Russia and it’s no surprise that 90+% voted for Russian citizenship.
Because of the civil war and the SMO since February it is impossible to hold well defined to legal norms referendums because of the security situation.
The results however confirm what everyone knows and that is the entry of these regions into the Russian Federation is totally legitimate within the desires of the people who voted.
The fact that there is hardly anyone left in those regions who is opposed to Russia was why there was no opposing campaign.
Anyone who was opposed could have voted NO.
All those voting couldn’t give a damn whether the West feel it was legal or not.
They certainly don’t care what Craig thinks with his outdated census results.
Geoff B
Excellent post. Well said!
One can also argue that the people that did not want to join Russia stayed home to large extent and did not respect the election at all – and thus the “No” became very small in the final result.
Also people involved (voters too?) with the referendums were threatened with reprecussions by ukrainian government which also surely made an impact on the result:
“Ukrainians involved in ‘referendums’ face prison terms, says Kyiv”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/27/ukrainians-involved-in-russia-referendums-face-prison-terms-says-kviv
Excellent points, Geoff B, for Murray to quote demographic data from the distant past is silly, many of the Ukrainians previously living in Donbas emigrated, ironically mostly to Russia since 2000 and even more so after 2014, they were seeking jobs, spoke Russian, hence Russia was the preferred country to emigrate to.
Murray also totally ignores the totalitarian nature of today’s Ukraine, it’s akin to North Korea, certainly close to it, yet the MSM poodles never mention it.
The successes on the killing fields the Ukrainian Forces are having, are due solely to the direct involvement of the NATO forces. They are already there. It’s no longer only intelligence, reconnaissance and guidance: the NATO personnel is involved in commanding the Ukrainian troopers, often operating some of the more sophisticated gear. Unfortunately it’s impossible to post any of the videos; it’s all blanked.
Moscow’s military involvement in Ukraine has generated an inordinate slew of ‘shock & awe’ sanctions on Russia, after Syria and Iraq (now removed). This sanction load has the potential, as experienced in everyday rising basic costs and more, to destabilize the global economy and roll back decades of economic progress,
In addition to being useless, destructive and harmful to poor innocent people causing massive suffering, sanctions or economic warfare are also an obnoxious form of interference in the affairs of other nations.
Sanctions are almost always placed and enforced by countries such as the US which have the power and privilege to punish those who don’t toe their line. They are a means to either control, repress, weaken or browbeat nations and entities for political and/or economic means to achieve foreign policy objectives.
The higher moral ground, humanitarian or ethical argument is just a diversionary tactic. Otherwise, you would have seen EU sanctioning US for the many military misadventures undertaken all over our world such as Iraq, Syria and Libya which caused considerable destruction of life, property and the environment.
Such repulsive constraints on ordinary innocent humans cause war and I blame American leaders for their tunnel vision, historical ineptitude and lack of insight and perception. Even a perfunctory look at the event horizon reveals the Megarian Decree: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megarian_Decree – considered one of the first uses of economics as a foreign policy tool.
I think the problem with this article is its tone rather than its content, which reinforces binary thinking on these complex issues. So you get the usual gang of Russia hating Ukraine stick it up and at ’em crowing with delight with the evident support for their one -sided view. On the other you get people who are offended by the accusation that they are cheerleading Putin because they are looking at the issues from a different perspective.
It must be remembered that Eva Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley and others who are acting a slight counterweights against the juggernaut of the western media’s pumping out continuous lies and distortions are putting themselves in jeopardy by simply reporting what they experience in that part of the world. Bartlett is on the infamous Myrotvorets hit list, which recently celebrated the murder of another journalist doing her job, Darya Dugina. There are no grounds for thinking that she was reporting other than honestly what she was finding. One can disagree with what was being reported but that is a different issue.
As an aside:
Don’t Extradite Assange (DEA) has organised a protest outside parliament on Saturday 8 October. Supporters of Assange will form a “human chain” surrounding the UK’s centre of so-called democracy.
https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2022/10/04/thousands-are-planning-to-protest-for-assange-on-saturday-8-october/
Must watch! Jeffrey Sachs say that it is likely that it was the americans that sabotaged Nord Stream, an obvious claim…but the statement caused a bad feeling in the mainstream newsroom.
” “We are on a path of escalation to nuclear war, nothing less” – Jeffrey D. Sachs “
https://youtu.be/o5m8m9RNxjw?t=286
Craig has lost it again and there is a reason why I discontinued my financial support to his activism.
The so called “annexations” are just another inevitable consequence of the West irresponsible, double-standard and ultimately inhumane policy on Ukraine.
Putin and Russia did everything they could to devise and implement a reasonable settlement of all involved parties’ interests in Ukraine, and that was the Minsk Agreements.
Who is responsible for their failures? Ukraine, under the monstrous blackmail of the US-UK block.
And of course, (allegedly) slaughtering Albanian minorities in former Yugoslavia is a crime against humanity, but doing so against Russian minorities in the Donbass, as Ukraine did for over 8 years in the Donbass, with the full backing of the US and England, is not, and cannot possibly elicit the same response.
Whoever has un unbiased and informed view of the true background of the Ukraine crisis, also knows that there was no other way to protect Donbass from West-backed Ukrainian slaughter than a Crimea-style solution.
How do we think the Eastern provinces of Ukraine could be protected if the West supported (neo)nazis groups had their way in that region? Do we really believe, after eight years of silence, that anyone in the international community would dare to do anything substantial to protect them?
It is the completely misguided policy of the West that pushed Russia on the brink.
They are now reaping the consequences.
Spot on, Dario, you could have mentioned the Feb 2014 coup in Kiev as well with the US Ambassador Pyatt saying in a reordered conversation with Nuland: ‘We are in play’, and in play they’ve been since then, arming Ukraine, getting her ready to begin attacking Russia, all a part of a plan to contain Russia, balkanise her, expropriate Russia’s natural resources.
Murray seems to be blind to what proceeded the invasion, he is also wrong quoting ethnicity figures from the past in the eastern regions, when the USSR disintegrated Ukraine had some 50mn inhabitants, today the population is well below 30mn, those living in Donbas are overwhelmingly Russian, the Ukrainian diaspora emigrated, ironically mostly to Russia.
Like it or not we are and have been at war with Russia for decades. On the killing fields of Ukraine will be decided if we move from a Unipolar World still dominated by the Collective West or a new Multipolar World in which the populations of the Global South get to have any chance to accrue any benefits of their resources that we have plundered for centuries. Reading Professor Michael Hudson the free lunch we have enjoyed and grown fat on is coming to an end. The war is not about the invasion of Ukraine but of the last throws of Empire. Latin America, Africa and Asia support Russia. Their populations have never had the benefits of their own resources and commodities, we have! Our financialised casino fiat economies have conjured up wealth from nothing. All the time feeling superior and basking in our great democratic civilised splendour. It is we who control language itself and the meaning of words. It is we that can crush countries at will and with impunity. There is no discussion allowed, only hatred and personal attack. We can experiment on biological weapons designed to only kill Slavs. We can shell nuclear power plants at will. We can blow up pipelines at will. As Nicaragua! Ask Iran! Our educated populations are fully propogandised and the information war won!? The actual War to cling on is, however, lost.
The American Governing Elites have had a solo husbandry of the world since the implosion of communism in the East in 1990, Wikikettle, they thoroughly fugged up, the doomsday clock has never been closer to midnight before, it’s time for the American hegemony to end, and end it will, if not in Ukraine then certainly China will ensure the world moves to a multipolar mode of leadership, the sooner the better as the Americans seem desperate now, have moved from sanctions to banditry what with the blowing up of the N-2 gas pipelines.
You my friend have a clear grasp of the facts and express clearly the historical facts on the ground, which both Craig deflects and the BBC avoid. Let’s be honest, not a chance the bbc would actually be able to make a truthful statement.
Interesting and useful. However, I can think of some points on the other side of this discussion.
Big events change things. If I recall correctly, the communist coup triggered Ukraine’s departure from the Soviet Union (and possibly the only solidly “pro-Ukrainian” vote by Crimeans, ever). The Maidan overthrew a government that the south and east had fairly elected (according to the OSCE), by solid majorities in most of the south, and by huge majorities in Donbas, repeating a very consistent political pattern. The shock of the Maidan coup must have been significant.
Subsequent events involved lots of violence against those perceived as (or identifying as) “Russians” or Russo-Ukrainians. The Odesa Trade Union Hall massacre announced loudly that the ultra-nationalists would henceforth rule absolutely. Even worse was the failure (so far as I know) to prosecute anyone for this atrocity – comparable to murdering 40+ Black Lives Matter protestors (rioters, if you prefer) and not only getting away with it scot free (forgive me!), but continuing to determine the overall direction of the country. This was followed by seven-eight years of Ukraine’s trying to resolve its political and constitutional quarrel with the rebels only by armed force.
The parallel that occurs to me–which of course may not be very exact–is with the Easter Rising in Ireland. Most Irish initially saw the 1916 rebels as idiots, hotheads, or – worse – backstabbers (Britain being at war with Germany at the time). But the violent British response changed that in a matter of weeks. The rest, as they say, is history.
Thank you, Craig — your thoughts welcome!
Thought-provoking analogies. We are strongly discouraged from ever considering events from the perspective of groups our rulers have designated baddies/ enemies. I have sometimes wondered too how Eastern Ukrainians must view the Kyiv government’s tolerance (to say the least) of literal Nazis. About as positively as the Irish people viewed the British government’s tolerance of the Black and Tans I suspect. There are many things need to be taken into account when considering this vote.
“The parallel that occurs to me–which of course may not be very exact–is with the Easter Rising in Ireland. “
Another parallel is Britain’s loss of the American colonies, as so well delineated by Margaret Tuchman in her book, “The March of Folly”. Again the imperial government managed to change a majority support for them into a majority support for the rebels.
By the principle of your analysis of ethnicity in the East and South of Ukraine I expect you would not believe a Scotsman could vote to remain part of Great Britain. The reasons that the referenda are likely to have favoured Russia is really very obvious. Firstly the population mix in those regions is likely to have changed significantly this year. Secondly Russia’s economy is not the trainwreck that exists in the Ukraine. Russian’s GDP per capita is about 5 times that of Ukraine (and that was before this war). Thirdly we do not know the population percentage that voted. It remains that, as you have stated previously, populations have a right of political self determination. I am sure NATO knew of the same data you have presented so why did they not support these referenda and support international supervision.
Looking at these matters from the other side of the world I am always surprised by the anti-Russian stance of the British. It seems that you could not imagine that someone might choose a Russian home.
I don’t think he is saying that we implement English democracy, in a real democracy you have the right to vote as your conscious dictates.
These referendums have nothing to do with citizenship or nationality. The question on the form is basically;
Do you want War or Peace?
They have not got peace from Ukraine for the last eight years. That is their experience. Most people living in these regions couldn’t really care less who is running the place. China, Nigeria, Patagonia. Who cares! Just peace! So, 99% of folk choose to try to stop being shot at/shelled? What a suprise.