I’m just showing these comments I saw earlier, which were interesting. Since it is true, that we’ve been hearing that “Russia is cornered”, since the invasion started. I personally just want this shit to end.

These comments are relating to an article from this week.

I wonder if we will ever know what truly happens on the ground (i.e. when it comes to casualties and many other things)

  • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ukraine’s government was overthrown in 2014, and the new government banned certain opposition parties, which alienated a lot of people in eastern Ukraine, many of whom have cultural ties to Russia, and a seperatist movement seized control of Donbas. The two sides signed a cease-fire, Minsk II, but Ukraine violated that cease-fire by shelling civilian targets, causing Russia to answer the request for aid by the seperatists.

    The perspective of NATO supporters is that the seperatists are just a Russian proxy while the Russian perspective is that Ukraine’s new government is a NATO proxy. It’s difficult to evaluate what people actually want, but the fact that Ukraine felt the need to ban opposition parties and the fact that there are a bunch of people with Russian ties in the disputed territories indicates that the seperatists have some genuine support.

    There were many diplomatic off-ramps that could’ve been taken to avoid the conflict, such as upholding the cease-fire, or perhaps giving the disputed territories a referendum to leave. As it stands, the war has reached a standstill and the general perspective here is that Ukraine can either give up some territorial concessions now, or give up some territorial concessions after throwing a bunch more lives into the meat grinder. Peace now is the best option for the Ukrainian people, but likely US pressure will keep the war going because it’s profitable for the defense industry.

    Also, Ukraine has a significant Nazi problem, including both paramilitary groups and the government itself. For instance, Ukraine had to fire their ambassador to Germany after he engaged in Holocaust denial right on TV.

    • Alterecho@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thank you for the reply! This has been super helpful in guiding some reading and providing some context. It’s very interesting that there was quite a bit of criticism from all sides about the laws outright banning discussion and support of communism. Following that, there didn’t seem to be much in the way of responsiveness to that criticism. Even the Venice Commission was pretty highly critical of it, and of conflating Communism with Nazism.

      • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Afaik, no far-right parties were banned under the law. There are a lot of Banderites in Ukraine and that’s where “Slava Ukrani” comes from. Bandera worked for Nazi military intelligence and wanted an independent Ukraine closely allied with Nazi Germany, and enthusiastically performed pogroms on his own initiative (denying his role in the Holocaust was specifically what happened with the Ukrainian ambassador). The only thing was that Hitler didn’t want Ukraine as an ally but under his direct control, so that’s where they came into conflict.