Ukraine Thread

[Sarmatian]

It is a good excuse - to say that no one in the world should be hurt for any cause. But reality bites - sometimes one have to sacrifice a little to avoid greater harm.
But in the disscussed case it was not the local population that started the armed resistance, but Girkin (aka Strelkov) and his GRU posse. This fact is important in seeing the real meddler and instigator of the conflict.

That's great. Why doesn't Kiev sacrifice a little pride, recognize election results and give eastern Ukraine a greater autonomy?

I was speaking not of resisting but of interfering into other country's affairs. But you again seem to liken Ukrainian regime to nazis.

I have not. I was pointing out that you can't place the blame for conflict on a side that's resisting what they perceive to be an outside threat coming into their area.

[Kralizec]

That's great. Why doesn't Kiev sacrifice a little pride, recognize election results and give eastern Ukraine a greater autonomy?

Why should Ukraine swallow their pride when the other side has so clearly breached an agreement of only several weeks old? Why should anyone recognise so called 'elections' which have not been reviewed by impartial observers and whose only purpose is to provide a fig leaf for the gang of thugs that have been in power before, during and after the event?

The Minsk agreements stipulated that Ukraine would be sovereign over those territories and that it would provide autonomy and locally elected leaders. It does not mean that Ukraine has to legalize this completely unilateral sham after the fact. The autonomy was already provided for by Ukrainian law, but withdrawn after the separatists reneged on the deal.

[Sarmatian]

Why should Ukraine swallow their pride when the other side has so clearly breached an agreement of only several weeks old? Why should anyone recognise so called 'elections' which have not been reviewed by impartial observers and whose only purpose is to provide a fig leaf for the gang of thugs that have been in power before, during and after the event?

The Minsk agreements stipulated that Ukraine would be sovereign over those territories and that it would provide autonomy and locally elected leaders. It does not mean that Ukraine has to legalize this completely unilateral sham after the fact. The autonomy was already provided for by Ukrainian law, but withdrawn after the separatists reneged on the deal.

Hardly. Minsk agreement was broken a long time before with neither side respecting ceasefire.

Ukrainian law obviously doesn't provide enough autonomy for them. So far, it was the rebels who were calling for a dialogue, and Kiev has consistently been refusing. A great chance was missed to have a dialogue, establish an acceptable level of autonomy and have new elections after that. Not only Kiev refused, they physically isolated them from the rest of the country, thus alienating even the most moderate people there.

The alternative to that is Kiev crushing them militarily, which is a laughable idea. Ukrainian foreign currency reserves are nearly depleted, their gold reserves are almost gone, hryvna losing value constantly and the Ukrainian army is still reluctant to do anything major, forcing Kiev to rely on ultranationalist paramilitary groups. They can't make a sustained effort, and even if they gain an upper hand for a short time, Russia just needs to up its support for that much.

At this point, I'd support Kiev if they could pull a clean and efficient military operation to regain control with minimal civilian casualties, but they can't even do that AND they've been consistently closing all possible avenues for dialogue. What's Kiev strategy? To physically isolate that part of the country? To starve and freeze them to compliance? Despicable. And I'm truly amazed that some people's fear or hatred of Russia stop them from seeing that. They only need to start catapulting bodies with plague to go fully medieval at this point.

[Kralizec]

Hardly. Minsk agreement was broken a long time before with neither side respecting ceasefire.

Ukrainian law obviously doesn't provide enough autonomy for them. So far, it was the rebels who were calling for a dialogue, and Kiev has consistently been refusing. A great chance was missed to have a dialogue, establish an acceptable level of autonomy and have new elections after that. Not only Kiev refused, they physically isolated them from the rest of the country, thus alienating even the most moderate people there.

The alternative to that is Kiev crushing them militarily, which is a laughable idea. Ukrainian foreign currency reserves are nearly depleted, their gold reserves are almost gone, hryvna losing value constantly and the Ukrainian army is still reluctant to do anything major, forcing Kiev to rely on ultranationalist paramilitary groups. They can't make a sustained effort, and even if they gain an upper hand for a short time, Russia just needs to up its support for that much.

At this point, I'd support Kiev if they could pull a clean and efficient military operation to regain control with minimal civilian casualties, but they can't even do that AND they've been consistently closing all possible avenues for dialogue. What's Kiev strategy? To physically isolate that part of the country? To starve and freeze them to compliance? Despicable. And I'm truly amazed that some people's fear or hatred of Russia stop them from seeing that. They only need to start catapulting bodies with plague to go fully medieval at this point.

Both sides have broken the ceasefire repeatedly, so that's neither here nor there.

Neither side has disavowed the Minsk agreement, though. Ukraine went ahead and passed legislation giving Donbass autonomy. I don't know if the Minsk agreement specified the level of autonomy; as far as I know there's no English version of the text. Nevertheless, if the separatists thought it wasn't enough to be acceptable they should have demanded more, and failing that, declared that they no longer see the Minsk plan as being valid.

Russia could almost certainly have kept the separatists from holding "elections" if it wanted to. But far from that, they immediately recognised the results and called on the rest of the world to do the same. The whole charade was overwatched by a bunch of stooges flewn in by Russia so that they could say "foreign observers" were present. Everything about it smells of bad faith.

Shortage of supplies and heating gas - honestly, did they expect the country they violently seceded from was going to allow free traffic of goods and energy? How is this Ukraine's fault? If we're talking about humanitarian trouble, I'd be a lot more concerned about the political repression and lawlessness that pervades these "people's republics".

[Gilrandir]

Why doesn't Kiev sacrifice a little pride, recognize election results and give eastern Ukraine a greater autonomy?

Once again: Lugandon denied any other option but complete independence. But even if it hadn't there is no way to make any kind of agreement with peple who don't control all of the territory they hold since they don't control all the hitmen there. For example, Minsk agreements were not recognized by Don cossacks in Lugansk region, Bezler's group in Horlivka, Chechens here and there and Motorola's group around Donetsk airport. There is no unified Eastern Ukraine, nor Novorossia, nor DPR, nor LPR. The area is divided between 12-17 gangs some of which obey no one (not even Putin).

I was pointing out that you can't place the blame for conflict on a side that's resisting what they perceive to be an outside threat coming into their area.

Once again: a side that's resisting now (and started resisting back in spring) is Russia. That is the side I place the blame on for the stalemate we are having now.

Not only Kiev refused, they physically isolated them from the rest of the country, thus alienating even the most moderate people there.

How do you know the bold? The source, please.

the Ukrainian army is still reluctant to do anything major, forcing Kiev to rely on ultranationalist paramilitary groups.

How do you know the bold? The source, please.
You seem to be rooted in what you claimed half a year ago and base your judgements on your own assumptions and wishful thinkings.
Reluctance of the Ukrainian army spotted in spring was explained by the fact that its propulsion was resisted by unarmed people (mainly women). The reluctance vanished since the nature of the resistance changed. And the minister of defense is the ex-head of the National Guard who you seem to include into "ultranationalist paramilitary groups". So, following your logics, that cutthroat can have no scruples whatever giving ordres to kill civilian Russian-speakers in heaps. Wait, I heard something like that before... Ah, yes. Russian TV showed a speaker who claimed that at one Ukrainian checkpoint near Kramatorsk Ukrainians don't let anyone pass through without taking money from them, one grandfather didn't have it so they took by force ten eggs he had with him. Another time they raped a 50+ woman who had an epileptic fit during the rape, but it didn't stop the perpetrators so they kept on doing their business while the whole bus (out of which they had pulled her) were watching them. Another "witness" said that Ukrainian soldiers fight in the East because they had been promised a piece of land and two slaves to till it.
Any more tales of horror you can add?

At this point, I'd support Kiev if they could pull a clean and efficient military operation to regain control with minimal civilian casualties

Like what Croatia did to Kraina?

What's Kiev strategy? To physically isolate that part of the country? To starve and freeze them to compliance? Despicable. And I'm truly amazed that some people's fear or hatred of Russia stop them from seeing that. They only need to start catapulting bodies with plague to go fully medieval at this point.

You should sell the last idea of yours to RT. They will be mighty glad and you will make some easy money.
And I'm truly amazed that some people's hatred of Ukraine stops them from seeing that what Ukraine is doing is not a punishment nor a way of forcing the recalcitrant part of it into something. For once, it is not the people of Donbas who are putting up the armed resistance now and the current armed authorities of Donbas will suffer no harm, it is the ordinary people who will, and Kiev is aware of that.
You seem to know so much of the current economic and financial situation in Ukraine to realize that Ukraine can't keep financing the territories that don't pay taxes into its budget. Even when they did they were heavily donated from the said budget, so the expenditures were not covered by the taxes. Now it is a forced measure applied to the areas where Ukraine can't control anything. Do you think the USSR should have paid pensions and salaries on the territories occupied by Germany in 1941-44?
Btw, if a person comes to the "Ukrainian part of Ukraine" he can receive his payments (if those are financed from the central budget).

as far as I know there's no English version of the text.

Russian:
http://www.osce.org/ru/home/123807?download=true
English:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025499736
Pay attention that Russia (via Zurabov) signed it (though it is not mentioned in Russian media), so it has some responsibilities too, no?

Russia could almost certainly have kept the separatists from holding "elections" if it wanted to. But far from that, they immediately recognised the results and called on the rest of the world to do the same.

Correction: Russia said that it respected the choice of the Donbas people. A day later Lavrov (iirc) said that "to recognize" and "to respect" are two different notions.

[Sarmatian]

Once again: Lugandon denied any other option but complete independence. But even if it hadn't there is no way to make any kind of agreement with peple who don't control all of the territory they hold since they don't control all the hitmen there. For example, Minsk agreements were not recognized by Don cossacks in Lugansk region, Bezler's group in Horlivka, Chechens here and there and Motorola's group around Donetsk airport. There is no unified Eastern Ukraine, nor Novorossia, nor DPR, nor LPR. The area is divided between 12-17 gangs some of which obey no one (not even Putin).

Precisely the reason why Kiev should have recognized (even provisionally) the election results.

Once again: a side that's resisting now (and started resisting back in spring) is Russia. That is the side I place the blame on for the stalemate we are having now.

Well, I'm willing to agree that we disagree on that.

How do you know the bold? The source, please.

Common sense. If I'm a moderate who wants things to go back to how they were, I'm royally screwed because my government cut me off completely.

How do you know the bold? The source, please.

Lack of major combat operations, a lot of small scale fighting and whenever it happens, it usually involves National Guard or paramilitary groups.

You seem to be rooted in what you claimed half a year ago and base your judgements on your own assumptions and wishful thinkings.
Reluctance of the Ukrainian army spotted in spring was explained by the fact that its propulsion was resisted by unarmed people (mainly women). The reluctance vanished since the nature of the resistance changed. And the minister of defense is the ex-head of the National Guard who you seem to include into "ultranationalist paramilitary groups". So, following your logics, that cutthroat can have no scruples whatever giving ordres to kill civilian Russian-speakers in heaps. Wait, I heard something like that before... Ah, yes. Russian TV showed a speaker who claimed that at one Ukrainian checkpoint near Kramatorsk Ukrainians don't let anyone pass through without taking money from them, one grandfather didn't have it so they took by force ten eggs he had with him. Another time they raped a 50+ woman who had an epileptic fit during the rape, but it didn't stop the perpetrators so they kept on doing their business while the whole bus (out of which they had pulled her) were watching them. Another "witness" said that Ukrainian soldiers fight in the East because they had been promised a piece of land and two slaves to till it.
Any more tales of horror you can add?

Que? What are you even talking about.

Like what Croatia did to Kraina?

Croatia performed ethnic cleansing in Krajina, so obviously not that. If Croatia defeated military force and protected civilian population and integrated them back as citizens with full rights, I'd have very little problem with entire thing.

[Gilrandir]

Common sense. If I'm a moderate who wants things to go back to how they were, I'm royally screwed because my government cut me off completely.

From what I know I would say that allegiance of people didn't change because of that fact. Those who were pro-Russain don't consider current Ukrainian government as "their government" (and with anti-Ukrainian propaganda they are not likely to), so they stayed pro-Russian getting one more reason to hate Ukraine, others realize that the payments will be renewed when/if the territories are won back. After all this is the strategy to win back the lost lands - to show that elsewhere the life is better, no?

Lack of major combat operations, a lot of small scale fighting and whenever it happens, it usually involves National Guard or paramilitary groups.

How do you know the bald? The source please.
From what I know the lack of offensive on the part of Ukrainian armed forced (both regular and others) is partly explained by the inclination of the government to stick to Minsk agreements, partly by the inadequate weapons and troops quantity to do that (according to the war rules, if you want to start an offensive you are to have at least four times more troops on a theater; as for the kind of artillery and armored vehicles that Ukraine possesses, they are largely old decrepit things that demand constant repair; both men and arms domination Ukraine had had in summer was lost after August 24, when Russia intervened directly and since that time has been pumping its "help" across the border) and partly (or perhaps primarily) by the fear that the moment we start an offensive Russia will say that Ukraine has forfeited the signed agreements and will invade openly.

Que? What are you even talking about.

You still believe the stories of Ukrainian atrocities against civilians (performed by "ultranationalists") in the areas controlled by Ukraine.

[Viking]

the Ukrainian army is still reluctant to do anything major, forcing Kiev to rely on ultranationalist paramilitary groups.

I don't see how this is correct. AFAIK, the regular troops (artillery) was instrumental in the taking of Sloviansk. It was also regular troops that decisively defeated the separatists at Donetsk Airport at the start of the insurgency, and who has been holding it ever since (with some support). It was also regular troops that were close to cutting off the separatists' supply lines from Russia when they came under heavy and sustained artillery fire and withdrew.

[Sarmatian]

From what I know I would say that allegiance of people didn't change because of that fact. Those who were pro-Russain don't consider current Ukrainian government as "their government" (and with anti-Ukrainian propaganda they are not likely to), so they stayed pro-Russian getting one more reason to hate Ukraine, others realize that the payments will be renewed when/if the territories are won back. After all this is the strategy to win back the lost lands - to show that elsewhere the life is better, no?

I believe the state has an obligation to its citizens. Furthermore, it encourages the local authorities to set up their own system and encourages all people living there to try to work within that system if they don't want their families to starve/freeze, and in the end, the entire thing moves closer to the point of no return.

Winning hearts and minds is where this conflict could be decided.

How do you know the bald? The source please.
From what I know the lack of offensive on the part of Ukrainian armed forced (both regular and others) is partly explained by the inclination of the government to stick to Minsk agreements, partly by the inadequate weapons and troops quantity to do that (according to the war rules, if you want to start an offensive you are to have at least four times more troops on a theater; as for the kind of artillery and armored vehicles that Ukraine possesses, they are largely old decrepit things that demand constant repair; both men and arms domination Ukraine had had in summer was lost after August 24, when Russia intervened directly and since that time has been pumping its "help" across the border) and partly (or perhaps primarily) by the fear that the moment we start an offensive Russia will say that Ukraine has forfeited the signed agreements and will invade openly.

From the reports and news I've read over the last several months. Involvement of the actual army has been pretty minimal and small scale.
That has been pretty consistent from the start and I haven't noticed major changes after Minsk agreement.

You still believe the stories of Ukrainian atrocities against civilians (performed by "ultranationalists") in the areas controlled by Ukraine.

I do believe they have been rather indiscriminate with their targets, yes, and that, in my opinion has a lot to do with the previous paragraph - too little involvement of the actual army and too much involvement of the National Guard (which seems to be a poor attempt to hastily legalize paramilitary groups like the Azov brigade). I also think they are significantly worse than the Rebels in that regard, even though the Rebels have hardly been angels so far.

I don't see how this is correct. AFAIK, the regular troops (artillery) was instrumental in the taking of Sloviansk. It was also regular troops that decisively defeated the separatists at Donetsk Airport at the start of the insurgency, and who has been holding it ever since (with some support). It was also regular troops that were close to cutting off the separatists' supply lines from Russia when they came under heavy and sustained artillery fire and withdrew.

I didn't say no involvement, I said little involvement. Western media tend not to draw a distinction between the actual Ukrainian army and recently formed National Guard.

[Viking]

I didn't say no involvement, I said little involvement. Western media tend not to draw a distinction between the actual Ukrainian army and recently formed National Guard.

What I just listed is some most of the serious involvement on Ukrainian side thus far in the conflict. I don't see how much more the Ukrainian army could have done.

In most of the battles, the separatists are located inside cities and towns. There are only two options then: raze the city to the ground or go in slowly.

[Sarmatian]

What I just listed is some most of the serious involvement on Ukrainian side thus far in the conflict. I don't see how much more the Ukrainian army could have done.

In most of the battles, the separatists are located inside cities and towns. There are only two options then: raze the city to the ground or go in slowly.

As I've said, western media tend not to make distinction between the two. In taking of Slavyansk, both army and the National Guard were present. What was the exact ratio, I don't know.

Ukraine can field a rather large with reserves deployed. The fact that they had to resurrect National Guard and that National Guard was involved in pretty much all skirmishes/battles tells me that Kiev doesn't trust the army so much (NG is controlled by the Ministry of Interior Affairs)

[Gilrandir]

I believe the state has an obligation to its citizens.

Unless those citizens live in the (temporary) occupied territories. Even so the Ukrainian government will still keep those territories supplied with gas and electricity expecting no payment for it. This is as much as it can do for the time being.

Winning hearts and minds is where this conflict could be decided.

Not possible while Russian media keep poisoning those hearts and minds. And minds must tell their owners that Ukraine can only finance territories it controls.

I do believe they have been rather indiscriminate with their targets, yes, and that, in my opinion has a lot to do with the previous paragraph - too little involvement of the actual army and too much involvement of the National Guard (which seems to be a poor attempt to hastily legalize paramilitary groups like the Azov brigade). I also think they are significantly worse than the Rebels in that regard, even though the Rebels have hardly been angels so far.

Your mind has been poisoned by Russian propaganda as well, like the stories I cited. National Guard was a transformation of Internal Troops done in March, long before any fighting broke in Donbas. And turning Azov into a brigade of National Guard happenned after several months of fighting. Do you call it hasty? Even before that ALL volunteer battallions functioned with the legal framework of either Ministry of Defense or National Guard.