Ukraine-in-a-thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

The "officials of DPR" say that now they are authorized to adopt such an act. Isn't it ridiculous to support that which doesn't exist? They also say that they are not going to separate from Ukraine. What on earth was the use of holding referendum?

---

The purpose, I presume, is to put pressure on Kiev, because the official line was that they're dealing with foreign mercenaries and terrorists. The referendum shows that the greater autonomy is indeed the wish of the majority of population, and Russia can use it to demand representatives from the east on the negotiating table.

The legality of it is dubious, I agree. Even with the best of intentions, polling in what is a basically a war zone is bound to be difficult to pull off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironside

It's also a parody of an election. To show that everything is going on correctly to the journalists, they had the voting boxes transparent and no envelopes. You know, so everyone could see exactly what you voted.

Kremlin will of course consider it legitimate.

---

So? You fold the piece of paper a few times before putting it in the box. That's how we voted Milosevic out, and that's how elections are done in Serbia all the time. Every single one of them, after Milosevic, was judged free, democratic and transparent according to all relevant international organizations.

I'm also willing to bet that general elections in Ukraine before were done in a similar way.

What kind of protection would an envelope provide against someone who wants to alter the votes after the polling stations have been closed, anyway?

Envelopes are a waste of money and CO2. I've never used an envelope but we don't use transparent boxes here so my vote might just get shredded inside...

There are some more serious concerns about the validity of this referendum:

1. The low number of poll stations. Those already indicate, that the turnout stated by the separatists is unlikely.

2. Aged voters' registers. Those used were mostly from 2012, in some places even earlier.

3. No closets for voters. Especially given the fact, that armed separatists are present in a lot of places and do everything to intimidate people opposing them, it is fairly reasonable for people not to show their opposition against the separatists.

4. No proper identification of voters and "voting for family members". In a lot of places, people had not to show any documents in order to vote. ALso voters were allowed to vote for their absent wifes, parents etc.

After all, we can agree, that this referendum and its outcome are in no way legitimate or representative for the whole population of the Donbass.
However, we must not deny, that a large proportion of the local population indeed went there and voted for independence from Kyiv. I think numbers in the range from 20-50 % might be resaonable, taking into consideration the results of earlier polls.
The government in Kyiv is widely not accepted as the legitimte government and with every day of the current status, this worsens. Those citizens, who want to stay in Ukraine are appalled by the fact, that their government is not able to protect them. Many of those , who probably not accept the current government and want a stronger federalization of Ukraine, yet still stay there, might be driven to a more radical opinion by the use of violence and de-facto occupation of their towns by the national guard.
I think there is a myriad of in-between opinions amongst people in Eastern Ukraine, and using only two labels, "Pro-Ukrainian" and "Pro-Russian" does not cover this complexity at all. People maybe cheer for Putin, but still want to stay in Ukraine. They maybe hate their government and oppose the use of military force in their area, but still do not want to become a part of Russia.
More interesting is the question, how this will go on. In my opinion, it is very important for Ukraine to get a) a more legitimate government ASAP by holding the elections in two weeks and b) to start talks with represenatatives of the DPR, preferably not the ones commanding armed gangs of terrorists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GenosseGeneral

There are some more serious concerns about the validity of this referendum:

1. The low number of poll stations. Those already indicate, that the turnout stated by the separatists is unlikely.

2. Aged voters' registers. Those used were mostly from 2012, in some places even earlier.

3. No closets for voters. Especially given the fact, that armed separatists are present in a lot of places and do everything to intimidate people opposing them, it is fairly reasonable for people not to show their opposition against the separatists.

4. No proper identification of voters and "voting for family members". In a lot of places, people had not to show any documents in order to vote. ALso voters were allowed to vote for their absent wifes, parents etc.

After all, we can agree, that this referendum and its outcome are in no way legitimate or representative for the whole population of the Donbass.
However, we must not deny, that a large proportion of the local population indeed went there and voted for independence from Kyiv. I think numbers in the range from 20-50 % might be resaonable, taking into consideration the results of earlier polls.
The government in Kyiv is widely not accepted as the legitimte government and with every day of the current status, this worsens. Those citizens, who want to stay in Ukraine are appalled by the fact, that their government is not able to protect them. Many of those , who probably not accept the current government and want a stronger federalization of Ukraine, yet still stay there, might be driven to a more radical opinion by the use of violence and de-facto occupation of their towns by the national guard.
I think there is a myriad of in-between opinions amongst people in Eastern Ukraine, and using only two labels, "Pro-Ukrainian" and "Pro-Russian" does not cover this complexity at all. People maybe cheer for Putin, but still want to stay in Ukraine. They maybe hate their government and oppose the use of military force in their area, but still do not want to become a part of Russia.
More interesting is the question, how this will go on. In my opinion, it is very important for Ukraine to get a) a more legitimate government ASAP by holding the elections in two weeks and b) to start talks with represenatatives of the DPR, preferably not the ones commanding armed gangs of terrorists.

---

Based on opinion polls and other information, I'd say between 30% and 50% of people is for independence.

However, if the question is more autonomy within Ukraine, I'd say 70%+ of people would support it in a heartbeat.

Irregularities aside, it is a clear indication that people in the east want more autonomy and that dialogue must be started. I'd also add that before anything else, Ukrainian army or national guard, I'm not sure what it is anymore, should stop attacking and blockading towns. That should be a priority before a dialogue can start.

What it shows is that we (the west) will not have a clear mandate to go in. If we go in, it will be because we are anti-Russia and want to do something to oppose Russia. It won't be because we are pro-anything and want to do something constructive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

So? You fold the piece of paper a few times before putting it in the box. That's how we voted Milosevic out, and that's how elections are done in Serbia all the time. Every single one of them, after Milosevic, was judged free, democratic and transparent according to all relevant international organizations.

I'm also willing to bet that general elections in Ukraine before were done in a similar way.

What kind of protection would an envelope provide against someone who wants to alter the votes after the polling stations have been closed, anyway?

---

That's why so few of them did fold anything.

The envelopes are there so that the state can't know how I voted. They know that I voted and how the people in this poll station voted, but they don't know my vote. That's a quite useful cover for retaliation, in particular if there's armed factions involved.

It's not a game breaker, but if that's the parts you show off for the propaganda, that's bad.

Oh look: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27369980

Russia backs the militants and their referendums.

At this point, without UN troops, Ukraine has entered into terminal collapse, I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Oh look: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27369980

Russia backs the militants and their referendums.

At this point, without UN troops, Ukraine has entered into terminal collapse, I think.

---

And what do you expect UN troops to do? Go in there without an agreed on mandate and unilaterally impose their set of rules which a significant part of the country they're hosted in won't agree with? Were you a fan of Tony Blair's foreign policy, Iraq and all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

And what do you expect UN troops to do? Go in there without an agreed on mandate and unilaterally impose their set of rules which a significant part of the country they're hosted in won't agree with? Were you a fan of Tony Blair's foreign policy, Iraq and all?

---

I would venture that you are both correct. Without a countervailing military force, the course for Ukraine is set. Putting that military force in there, however, would become a decade-long venture that would define itself as it went -- with all of the attendant problems thereunto appertaining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Oh look: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27369980

Russia backs the militants and their referendums.

---

:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by article headline

East Ukraine separatists back union with Russia

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by in the article

Russia has called for dialogue and "implementing" the result, but Ukraine and the EU declared the poll illegal.
[...]
Russia has called for dialogue between the militants and Kiev with the participation of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

---

How exactly do you arrive at the conclusion that Russia backing the separatists at all is somehow new or noteworthy at this point?
Russia has been calling for talks for almost a week now and nothing about that has changed. What also hasn't changed is that Kiev doesn't want to negotiate anything, even Yanukovich was more willing to sit down with the people opposing him than they are now.

I'm not sure what kind of sensation you're trying to present here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I would venture that you are both correct. Without a countervailing military force, the course for Ukraine is set. Putting that military force in there, however, would become a decade-long venture that would define itself as it went -- with all of the attendant problems thereunto appertaining.

---

And this time, it won't be a fragmenting Yugoslavia or Iraq that the UN/Anglo-American troops would be dealing with, but a country next door to Russia that the Russians would have a reasonable claim to influence in. All the shouts for intervening in Ukraine have no realistic ideas of what we're working towards, but are based solely on what we're working against (Russia).

“And as for me, I don't vote against anyone, I vote for someone.” :verycool: That is because you don’t have habits of democracy…

“Don't forget that there are nazis at power in Ukraine.” I will certainly not allow you to forget it.

“Svoboda got 10.44% which is much less than 17% of Le Pen.” My point: we didn't have Nazi in government when they represented 17%, you have them when they represent 10.44% (according to you).

“I was not addressing you in this post”: I am really surprised and shocked…

"At this point, without UN troops, Ukraine has entered into terminal collapse, I think." No, according to a German Newspapers (Bild am Sonntag) , 400 US mercenaries are now fighting with the very democratic government of Ukraine.~:)
I wonder if they wear Uniforms?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

And this time, it won't be a fragmenting Yugoslavia or Iraq that the UN/Anglo-American troops would be dealing with, but a country next door to Russia that the Russians would have a reasonable claim to influence in. All the shouts for intervening in Ukraine have no realistic ideas of what we're working towards, but are based solely on what we're working against (Russia).

---

So you were not of the opinion that "Saddam is bad" was enough justification for Gulf II? Even with the "An Al Queada member once changed planes in Bagdad" add-on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

:laugh4:




How exactly do you arrive at the conclusion that Russia backing the separatists at all is somehow new or noteworthy at this point?
Russia has been calling for talks for almost a week now and nothing about that has changed. What also hasn't changed is that Kiev doesn't want to negotiate anything, even Yanukovich was more willing to sit down with the people opposing him than they are now.

I'm not sure what kind of sensation you're trying to present here.

---

Well, over the weekend it was "no, hold the Referendums later" now it's "implement the result."

As these were referendums on independence it would seem Russia now wants those regions independent of Ukraine, and those regions say they want to join Russia - even though 48 hours ago the Kremlin was saying it wasn't the right time to be holding referendums.

the guys in the Kremlin Press Office must has whiplash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Well, over the weekend it was "no, hold the Referendums later" now it's "implement the result."

As these were referendums on independence it would seem Russia now wants those regions independent of Ukraine, and those regions say they want to join Russia - even though 48 hours ago the Kremlin was saying it wasn't the right time to be holding referendums.

the guys in the Kremlin Press Office must has whiplash.

---

I could swear that Putin already said about a week ago that once the referendums are done, the results should be implemented.
And now it seems like the pro-russian hardliners have manifested their power in the east to a large degree, what would it look like if these regions were to stay with Ukraine? Should a bunch of violent protesters with a real chance to become presidents of their own banana republics including a militia/army just give up their power and shut up? I find that rather unlikely, should have negotiated earlier instead of treating the concerns of the eastern regions with a higher dose of army.

Let eastern europe surrender to Putin. Western Europe has been the only ones who really understood what liberty was about. Even then, the English are only ones who had the common sense as to how to implement proper governments to protect it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Let eastern europe surrender to Putin. Western Europe has been the only ones who really understood what liberty was about. Even then, the English are only ones who had the common sense as to how to implement proper governments to protect it.

---

Yes, sometimes the tree of liberty just has to be watered with the data of innocents.
I do wonder though, how a sense can be common if only the English had it?

Hah. If common sense was an english attribute UKip wouldnt be prevelant.

Unfortunately, as outside observers we are dependent on "reports".
We are at the mercy of whatever data or communications the factions wish to release.
If I had control of data and communications for Alberta, I could easily make the case that 90% of Albertans wish to be annexed by Newfoundland, Quebec, or Texas; depending on which group of loonies I restricted my collection to.
I treat reports from the Ukraine as seriously as I treat reports from the Flat Earth Society.

So, we have now a "Kosovo" solution in Crimea (which now look a mild solution comparing with a possible civil war- Crimea, not Kosovo-) and a "Bosnianisation" of Eastern parts of Ukraine (belonging to Ukraine but strong links with Russia). And this is the optimistic view, short off civil war, refugees, ethnic cleansing and others niceties...
Well well well.
So, a part of the usual "Putin is responsible of it" and the "hired" "so-called" and others offensive and misleading vocabulary, does someone has an idea how to resolve this crisis (excluding the bombing campaign usual one which has good perspectives to fail)?

Because the matter is not to know if the results of the consultation are lawful, legitimate or not, but if they are true, at up to which level. Let's say if "only" 20% of the population would be for Independence, the police solution would be a solution. Not easy, but a solution. More than 20%, it starts to be tricky.

The denial and the stigmatisation of what we call the Pro-Russians didn't really addressed the problem. So, what to do to convince these Ukrainian citizens that they are Citizens of Ukraine? Short of batons and baseball bat I mean.

On Russian Cossacks in Ukraine:

Quote:

---

The Wolves' Hundred, a Russian paramilitary force with a dark history, is carrying on the fight in eastern Ukraine in the place of Russian soldiers. TIME interviewed its commander and his men about their motives and links to the Russian state


About a month ago, soon after arriving in eastern Ukraine, a group of Russian paramilitaries known as the Wolves’ Hundred seized an old truck from a local police station and used some spray paint to give it a makeover. They did not remove the blue siren from the roof, as it seemed to lend them an air of authority as they drove around the towns that they control. But on the hood of the black, Russian-made Hunter SUV, they drew their insignia — the snarling head of a wolf in profile.

---

Quote:

---

It was only after the collapse of the Soviet Union that they saw a state-sponsored revival. In 2005, Putin signed a law reinstating the Cossack tradition of service in the Russian armed forces. They were given the right to guard the national frontiers and serve alongside the Russian police and military as an official militia force with government paychecks.

---

Quote:

---

Their aim, as professed by the fighters themselves, is to destroy the state of Ukraine and absorb most, if not all, of it into Russia. “Write this down: There is no such thing as Ukraine,” says Mozhaev, who goes by the nickname Babay, or Bogeyman. “There are only the Russian borderlands, and the fact they became known as Ukraine after the [Bolshevik] Revolution, well, we intend to correct that mistake.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Hah. If common sense was an english attribute UKip wouldnt be prevelant.

---

Only Brittish party that actually does have common sense. I would vote for then in an instant if I could, Nigel Farrage is a boss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

So, we have now a "Kosovo" solution in Crimea (which now look a mild solution comparing with a possible civil war- Crimea, not Kosovo-) and a "Bosnianisation" of Eastern parts of Ukraine (belonging to Ukraine but strong links with Russia). And this is the optimistic view, short off civil war, refugees, ethnic cleansing and others niceties...
Well well well.
So, a part of the usual "Putin is responsible of it" and the "hired" "so-called" and others offensive and misleading vocabulary, does someone has an idea how to resolve this crisis (excluding the bombing campaign usual one which has good perspectives to fail)?

Because the matter is not to know if the results of the consultation are lawful, legitimate or not, but if they are true, at up to which level. Let's say if "only" 20% of the population would be for Independence, the police solution would be a solution. Not easy, but a solution. More than 20%, it starts to be tricky.

The denial and the stigmatisation of what we call the Pro-Russians didn't really addressed the problem. So, what to do to convince these Ukrainian citizens that they are Citizens of Ukraine? Short of batons and baseball bat I mean.

---

Why are you so obtuse about this? You're smarter than that.

The majority of the current unrest is because of Russia's tacit support of the Rebels, if Russia refused to countenance the breakup of Ukraine the unrest following the political crisis in February would be managable.

Instead, Russia annexed Crimea and moved into an offensives stance on Ukraine's Eastern border. Now Russia deploys Cossacks and probably Spetznaz in Ukraine, and supports independence referendums. Several towns in Dontesk refused to hold the referendum, demonstrating that the region is not homogeneous and currently there is no effective Civil administration.

Deployment of Western troops in large numbers on Ukraine's western border begins to look necessary, war with Russia becomes a real possibility, or we just let Russia annex whatever it wants from Ukraine once the country breaks up.

Given Western unwillingness to act - due to public exhaustion - there will be no military option, at all.

What will happen will be that Russia will expand to take Ukraine's natural resources and its armament factories, the major T-80 production plant was in Ukraine before the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia will want that to enhance their military capacity and they'll be able to supply components like ceramic modules for the armour that Ukraine has been lacking.

The West now needs to move into "damage limitation", buttress as much of the Ukrainian state as possible, use economic guarantees to make Ukraine at least as appealing as Russia for the mildly discontented, and facilitate the evacuation of Ukrainians from Cossack-held areas.

^ This is so full of fail I don't know where to begin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

^ This is so full of fail I don't know where to begin.

---

Come back after Russia has dismantled Eastern Ukraine and the bloody, beaten, rump has been absorbed into NATO.

Ultimately, the defining moment was the Russian decision to annex Ukrainian territory before a Presidential Election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Come back after Russia has dismantled Eastern Ukraine and the bloody, beaten, rump has been absorbed into NATO.

Ultimately, the defining moment was the Russian decision to annex Ukrainian territory before a Presidential Election.

---

Would the Maidan protestors have accepted this elected president, or would they overthrow him again like they did the last one that was elected?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Based on opinion polls and other information, I'd say between 30% and 50% of people is for independence.

---

The observers (inofficial, of course) claim that in Donetsk region the turn up number was around 33%, in Lugansk region - 24%. The northern half of the latter is an argicultural area (unlike the mining and industrial south) and it stays pro-Ukrainian, allows no separatists on its territory and participated in no referendum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

I'd also add that before anything else, Ukrainian army or national guard, I'm not sure what it is anymore, should stop attacking and blockading towns. That should be a priority before a dialogue can start.

---

They neither attack nor blockade. They hold Slovayansk under siege (which proves to be not very efficient). Otherwise they watch the roads and man the checkpoints. In Mariupol the National Guard responded to a SOS from the local police attacked by terrorists. After the attack was repulsed it withdrew from the city which is now patrolled by local druzhinniki (a kind of militia). The National Guard (or any other governmental armed forces) don't stay in the towns from which terrorists were evicted (Kramatorsk, for instance). The problem is that when they leave there is no one to keep order as local authorities and police often refuse to resume control being afraid that terrorists will return (and sometimes they do). So as often as not people having weapons (ex-criminals including) wander at will in such towns and take justice (or rather injustice) into their hands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironside

That's why so few of them did fold anything.

The envelopes are there so that the state can't know how I voted. They know that I voted and how the people in this poll station voted, but they don't know my vote. That's a quite useful cover for retaliation, in particular if there's armed factions involved.

It's not a game breaker, but if that's the parts you show off for the propaganda, that's bad.

---

In Ukraine, as long as I can remember myself there were no envelopes and the boxes were always transparent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

“And as for me, I don't vote against anyone, I vote for someone.” :verycool: That is because you don’t have habits of democracy…

“Svoboda got 10.44% which is much less than 17% of Le Pen.” My point: we didn't have Nazi in government when they represented 17%, you have them when they represent 10.44% (according to you).

---

So this is what democracy is about: a party gets a fair percentage of votes and then you just disregard it (and the people who voted for it) forming a government.
As for the percentage according to me, it would be quite easy for you to check (of course, in the sources that don't follow my agenda :batman:).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Come back after Russia has dismantled Eastern Ukraine and the bloody, beaten, rump has been absorbed into NATO.

Ultimately, the defining moment was the Russian decision to annex Ukrainian territory before a Presidential Election.

---

I'd say the defining moment was when some 100 000 people from Kiev, supported by nationalists from western regions, decided they can use violence to change electoral will of 50 million Ukrainians.

Well, we can agree to disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

I'd say the defining moment was when some 100 000 people from Kiev, supported by nationalists from western regions, decided they can use violence to change electoral will of 50 million Ukrainians.

---

On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine (not all of which were nationalists). And you forgot the abominable nazis and Right Sector. Oh, my bad, it is Brenus who is to keep watch so that we shouldn't forget about them.
And not 50 million Ukrainians voted for Yanukovych. The margin between him and Tymoshenko in the second round was about 3% - 12 481 266 (48,95%) against 11 593 357 (45,47%).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine (not all of which were nationalists). And you forgot the abominable nazis and Right Sector. Oh, my bad, it is Brenus who is to keep watch so that we shouldn't forget about them.
And not 50 million Ukrainians voted for Yanukovych. The margin between him and Tymoshenko in the second round was about 3% - 12 481 266 (48,95%) against 11 593 357 (45,47%).

---

Cor, only a 3% majority for Yanukovich? Churchill's Tories actually won less votes than Attlee's Labour on a turnout of over 82% in the 1951 general election, but won more parliamentary seats due to the first past the post system. The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy. Pity it's only fair when one side does it, and when the other side tries their hand at it, it's corruption and whatnot.