Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Ludicus]

A few years ago, TheEllenShow had a very entertaining segment called “Comments on Comments” …
----
As I have mentioned before, only 3% of Crimean Russians called themselves Ukrainians before the invasion, which is not surprising, knowing that the breakup of the Soviet Union instantly turned thousands and thousands of Russians into second-class citizens in a new country whose heroes had for many decades wished it to be mono-ethnic.

As Anders Rudling, a Holocaust historian, puts it, there are those who have the “mindset of fascist apologists”, and dedicate themselves to historical revisionism of the Holocaust: Grandson of Ukraine's Stepan Bandera Reckons With Legacy - Haaretz

Timothy Snyder stated in 2010 that “The incoming Ukrainian president will have to turn some attention to history, because the outgoing one has just made a hero of a long-dead Ukrainian fascist. It is no wonder. Bandera aimed to make of Ukraine a one-party fascist dictatorship without national minorities”.

He repeated the same in 2015, which made Askold Lozynsky furious: “Timothy Snyder erred in calling OUN, UPA & Bandera fascist...I’m not saying he is a poor academic but…”



After the invasion of Ukraine, Timothy Snyder quickly changed his mind and now says that Bandera is "a heroic figure for having rejected Stalin". For Snyder, Bandera is either a fascist or a hero depending on the circumstances of the moment.

As Gabriel Rockhill says, now is the time to use a simplistic narrative loosely based on WW2: Putin is an evil, Hitler-like figure. But since the moment is excellent to rehabilitate Bandera, why not rehabilitate Hitler as the European hero for having rejected Stalin and almost destroyed the Soviet Regime?

Meanwhile Zelensky trades missiles for principles and tells Netanyahu: give me missiles, then I will give you the Ukrainian vote. Netanyahu asks for Ukraine vote, Zelensky says not without weapons.

----
Speaking at a conference in Portugal’s capital Lisbon, Putin wants to destroy Ukraine, Germany's Baerbock says

Baerbock's first trip in this new year was to Lisbon. It was a trip of seduction. He quoted a song by Mariza to praise the EU's acting "with one voice" during the Ukrainian war, praised Portugal's lighthouses, told how she learned to walk in Portugal when he was two and a half years old - his parents visited Portugal after the "carnation revolution" - and added her voice to that of the Portuguese Foreign Minister, who, inspired by Rosseau, explained that “coordination between hunters is essential in hunting" The Stag Hunt School of Social Sciences
It is assumed that the deer is Putin.

But the real reason for the trip was to convince the Portuguese government to accept the end of the unanimity rule in the EU. On that point she was not successful. Baerbock's campaign will continue, I think, in other countries. Baerbock doesn't realize that it is the unanimity rule that keeps the EU functioning, however poorly.

She also went to visit the National Pantheon where Aristides Mendes de Sousa, a "Righteous among the Nations", is buried. Burying someone in the Pantheon is the greatest tribute this country can pay to any national hero, and that's where the grave of Camões is.
At the time of the ceremony of the transfer of Aristides' body to the Pantheon last year, the President of the Republic stated that "there are no races, ethnicities, religions, cultures, civilizations which are better than others". I doubt that this message will be well received in some countries.

A few months ago, Tolstoy came under attack of the Ukrainian school system. According to the Deputy Minister of Education of Ukraine Andriy Vitrenko,

As for foreign literature, it will completely be eliminated. For example, "War and Peace"…That is, everything that glorifies the "Orcs Army"

Meanwhile, Marta Albertini, a descendant of Leo Tolstoy, welcomed a family of Ukrainian women into her home in Switzerland,
'Very emotional': Tolstoy descendant hosts Ukrainians

Before they arrived, Albertini removed most of the family pictures that covered the wooden walls of the apartment, but a large painting of her great-grandfather hangs in the living room. Albertini, who last year published a book about three generations of Tolstoy women -- her great-grandmother, who gave the author 13 children, her grandmother and her mother -- pointed out that he was a renowned pacifist

Mosfilm has now decided to offer a complete version of War and Peace, in a carefully restored copy. It is 7 hours and eleven minutes long, divided into four parts, and it’s on youtube. Just search for "War and Peace Part 1" and so on.
There is nothing like keeping an open mind. Is this a film that glorifies the "orc's army"?
“All thoughts that have huge consequences are always simple. My whole idea is that if vicious people are interconnected and make up strength, then honest people need to do the same," - with these words of Leo Tolstoy epic picture "War and Peace" begins. Film tells about the life of Russian society at the beginning of the 19th century.”
Enjoy,
Part One https://youtu.be/bIij-KQ0jYU
Part two https://youtu.be/uJjqSfdFuUI
Part three https://youtu.be/wpKA1meiJzs
Part four https://youtu.be/nvDMu5e4xzw

[Loyt]

As I have mentioned before, only 3% of Crimean Russians called themselves Ukrainians before the invasion, which is not surprising, knowing that the breakup of the Soviet Union instantly turned thousands and thousands of Russians into second-class citizens in a new country whose heroes had for many decades wished it to be mono-ethnic.

What a lies. Before annexation about quarter of Crimean population identified themselfs as ethnic ukrainians. And what "second-class citizens" are you talking about, there was no such thing in Ukraine.
And anyway, your argument is turned upside down, in monoethnic countries other etnicies try to pose as state etnicity more, because it might have benefits.

A few months ago, Tolstoy came under attack of the Ukrainian school system

Oh gosh, does children study "War and Peace" in portugal schools?

[Vanoi]

As I have mentioned before, only 3% of Crimean Russians called themselves Ukrainians before the invasion, which is not surprising, knowing that the breakup of the Soviet Union instantly turned thousands and thousands of Russians into second-class citizens in a new country whose heroes had for many decades wished it to be mono-ethnic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea

The number of Crimean residents who consider Ukraine their motherland increased sharply from 32% to 71.3% from 2008 through 2011; according to a poll by Razumkov Center in March 2011,[23] although this is the lowest number in all Ukraine (93% on average across the country).[23] Surveys of regional identities in Ukraine have shown that around 30% of Crimean residents claim to have retained a self-identified "Soviet identity".[24]

What's more interesting is the composition of Crimea's parliament before the 2014 invasion.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010...ntary_election

Out of all the parties in the Crimes Parliament the Russian Unity party was the only party pre-2014 to advocate the secession of Crimea to Russia. They received only a small amount of the seats in the Parliament.

Ludi and others have suggested that the residents of Crimea would have accepted annexation by Russia but my first source and the 2010 Crimean Parliament elections don't show Crimeans being privy to being annexed by Russia. You have the 2014 referendum but it's hard to say how legitimate it actually was considering it was held under Russian occupation and didn't even include a status quo option.

An assumption being made here is that those in Ukraine who are ethnically Russian must automatically be pro-Russian themselves while there is no real evidence to support that.

[Kyriakos]

Makes no sense to ban Russian literature; it is clearly one of the most important (primarily the 19th century one).
You might as well also ban half of classical music, let alone much of modern math.

[fkizz]

Not easy to officially aprove teaching in school system the prefered literature of the people who routinely are kamikaze-droning you.
When the SMO is over I doubt serious ban will stay for long.

[Kyriakos]

Not easy to officially aprove teaching in school system the prefered literature of the people who routinely are kamikaze-droning you.
When the SMO is over I doubt serious ban will stay for long.

Oh, if it is only in Ukraine, I agree - thought this type of ban was to be run (also) elsewhere ^^

[Laser101]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea



What's more interesting is the composition of Crimea's parliament before the 2014 invasion.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010...ntary_election

Out of all the parties in the Crimes Parliament the Russian Unity party was the only party pre-2014 to advocate the secession of Crimea to Russia. They received only a small amount of the seats in the Parliament.

Although there wasn't a whole lot of incentive for them to push for that at the time, especially with a Russia-aligned Ukrainian government. Additionally, Crimean elections pretty consistently favoured parties with pro-Russian rather than pro-Western political orientations (of course that isn't the same as supporting separation).

Ludi and others have suggested that the residents of Crimea would have accepted annexation by Russia but my first source and the 2010 Crimean Parliament elections don't show Crimeans being privy to being annexed by Russia. You have the 2014 referendum but it's hard to say how legitimate it actually was considering it was held under Russian occupation and didn't even include a status quo option.

The dubiousness of the 2014 referendum is pretty clear (ironically, if the results weren't so blatantly inflated, they'd be far more plausible), but there's also the rather awkward problem that subsequent polls suggest that the population mostly supported the change (here's one example)

An assumption being made here is that those in Ukraine who are ethnically Russian must automatically be pro-Russian themselves while there is no real evidence to support that.

Since last year there's at least the motivation of a belief that ethnic Russians would be expelled or massacred by Ukrainian forces, which if historical precedents of similar situations (e.g. the Yugoslav Wars or the post-WW2 expulsions and massacres of ethnic Germans) are any indication is quite likely.

[Vanoi]

Although there wasn't a whole lot of incentive for them to push for that at the time, especially with a Russia-aligned Ukrainian government. Additionally, Crimean elections pretty consistently favoured parties with pro-Russian rather than pro-Western political orientations (of course that isn't the same as supporting separation).

Only if you count the Party of Regions. It's described as pro-Russian but in reality up until 2014 it was simply just the dominant party in Ukrainian politics likely due to corruption. They were dominant in areas regardless if they were pro-Russian or not.

The dubiousness of the 2014 referendum is pretty clear (ironically, if the results weren't so blatantly inflated, they'd be far more plausible), but there's also the rather awkward problem that subsequent polls suggest that the population mostly supported the change (here's one example)

And yet just fews years earlier Crimeans considered Ukraine their homeland regardless of their ethnicity.

Since last year there's at least the motivation of a belief that ethnic Russians would be expelled or massacred by Ukrainian forces, which if historical precedents of similar situations (e.g. the Yugoslav Wars or the post-WW2 expulsions and massacres of ethnic Germans) are any indication is quite likely.

I've heard that the entire war now. It's still yet to happen. Besides ethnic Russians have lived in Ukrainian controlled territory in Donbass since 2014. No reports of ethnic cleansing though.

[Laser101]

And yet just fews years earlier Crimeans considered Ukraine their homeland regardless of their ethnicity.

According to one poll, but there exist polls suggesting otherwise (annoyingly, the poll you cited from Wikipedia links to a dead article). Again, you may be correct, but the available evidence isn't definitive and there is probably at least as much evidence to the contrary.

I've heard that the entire war now. It's still yet to happen. Besides ethnic Russians have lived in Ukrainian controlled territory in Donbass since 2014. No reports of ethnic cleansing though.

We haven't had any situations up to this point where the Ukrainian forces have controlled territory with a substantial ethnic Russian population though. The only areas of the Donbas with such a population are the areas which have been under Russian control since before last year.

[Loyt]

Oh, if it is only in Ukraine, I agree - thought this type of ban was to be run (also) elsewhere ^^

In all honesty, "large format" Tolstoy has no place in school, and so is Dostoevsky. Those books clearly aimed at more adult auditory. Children hate them with passion, too long and boring. Some short stories would be better as introduction, but "War and Peace" was such a drag.

[Loyt]

Since last year there's at least the motivation of a belief that ethnic Russians would be expelled or massacred by Ukrainian forces, which if historical precedents of similar situations (e.g. the Yugoslav Wars or the post-WW2 expulsions and massacres of ethnic Germans) are any indication is quite likely.

It is in fact vice versa. Last year showed, that even actual war with Russia didn't bring any repressions on ethnic russians in Ukraine. And they are willingly fight Russia alongside ukrainians.

[Loyt]

Only if you count the Party of Regions. It's described as pro-Russian but in reality up until 2014 it was simply just the dominant party in Ukrainian politics likely due to corruption. They were dominant in areas regardless if they were pro-Russian or not.

People often forget, that Party of Regions was fully endorsing and promoting "EU-Ukraine Association agreement" at the time. Before Yanukovich stalled it (most probably due to Putin intervention).

[Loyt]

We haven't had any situations up to this point where the Ukrainian forces have controlled territory with a substantial ethnic Russian population though. The only areas of the Donbas with such a population are the areas which have been under Russian control since before last year.

You realize that most of Donetsk and Lugansk regions territory were under Ukraine control before 2022? Nothing happened with ethnic russians there. There are substantial ethnic russian population in Kharkiv, Nikolaev and Odessa - nothing happened to them too. Even big scarecrow of russian propaganda, "Azov" regiment, has about quarter of ethnic russians in its forces (at least it was the case before the war, regiment was formed in south-east regions of Ukraine).

[Laser101]

You realize that most of Donetsk and Lugansk regions territory were under Ukraine control before 2022? Nothing happened with ethnic russians there. There are substantial ethnic russian population in Kharkiv, Nikolaev and Odessa - nothing happened to them too. Even big scarecrow of russian propaganda, "Azov" regiment, has about quarter of ethnic russians in its forces (at least it was the case before the war, regiment was formed in south-east regions of Ukraine).

Do they actually consider themselves Russian though? As far as I'm aware, most of the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine (excluding Crimea) consider themselves ethnic Ukrainians even though they do not speak Ukrainian (again c.f. the example of Ireland). This is also true for much of the ethnic Ukrainian population in Crimea, so there is definitely a difference between "ethnic Ukrainian who speaks Russian" and "ethnic Russian".

[Loyt]

Do they actually consider themselves Russian though?

Why not? There are in fact a lot of historically russian villages (founded by russian immigrants centuries ago) in Kharkov and Donetsk regions. Why wouldn't they consider themselfs russians? Russians by ethnos, ukrainian by nationality (citizenship).

As far as I'm aware, most of the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine (excluding Crimea) consider themselves ethnic Ukrainians even though they do not speak Ukrainian (again c.f. the example of Ireland).

You realise that it depends of who your parents are? If parents are ethnically ukrainians (even if russified), you are ethnically ukrainian, if they are russians, you are russian. There are, of course, fringe and mixed cases - then you simply decide your identity by yourself. It has nothing to do with language, or at least not much.

[Laser101]

Why not? There are in fact a lot of historically russian villages (founded by russian immigrants centuries ago) in Kharkov and Donetsk regions. Why wouldn't they consider themselfs russians? Russians by ethnos, ukrainian by nationality (citizenship).

Most of the rural areas in eastern Ukraine are predominantly Ukrainian-speaking though. The urban areas are mostly Russian-speaking (presumably because under the Soviets a large portion of city-dwellers were employed by the state sector which used Russian). Frankly, this is why the image of a largely Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine is illusory; the distribution is not uniform. Again, this isn't the case in Crimea.

You realise that it depends of who your parents are? If parents are ethnically ukrainians (even if russified), you are ethnically ukrainian, if they are russians, you are russian. There are, of course, fringe and mixed cases - then you simply decide your identity by yourself. It has nothing to do with language, or at least not much.

Ethnicity is as much a question of what a person considers themselves as much as anything else. It seems pretty clear from the reactions of the local population in Kherson and elsewhere last year that the locals overwhelmingly did not consider themselves Russian. The situation is different with Crimea and the eastern Donbas (interestingly, the area the Russians controlled before Feb 24 lines up pretty well with the areas that had a Russophone rural population rather than just urban). There's probably a case to be made that the areas that the Russians held earlier were the only places where they actually had any semblance of local support (to be honest, it seems to me that Putin mistaking language for ethnic identity is a large part of the erroneous assumptions responsible for Russia's early stuff-ups).

[Loyt]

Most of the rural areas in eastern Ukraine are predominantly Ukrainian-speaking though.

Most yes. But there are russian ones mixed here and there. They existed like that for hundreds of years.

The urban areas are mostly Russian-speaking (presumably because under the Soviets a large portion of city-dwellers were employed by the state sector which used Russian).

Not only because of soviet times. Even before USSR urban population had higher percentage of russians - most towns were founded as indusrty hubs and did udergo labor force migration from Russian Empire.

Frankly, this is why the image of a largely Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine is illusory; the distribution is not uniform.

It is not uniform, but most of ukrainians, living in eastern Ukraine, knows russian language - so it is not completely made up. That doesn't automatically make them pro-Russia, of course, as russian propaganda often claims.

Ethnicity is as much a question of what a person considers themselves as much as anything else.

I disagree. Sometimes it's like that, but mostly not.

It seems pretty clear from the reactions of the local population in Kherson and elsewhere last year that the locals overwhelmingly did not consider themselves Russian.

You don't have to deny your ethnicity to condemn actions of Russian Federation and it's military. It is about political views really.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

We haven't had any situations up to this point where the Ukrainian forces have controlled territory with a substantial ethnic Russian population though. The only areas of the Donbas with such a population are the areas which have been under Russian control since before last year.

I mean, that's just not true:

Note that, while it's not as obvious by just looking at the map, neither Donetsk nor Luhansk had a Russian majority.

[Kyriakos]

In all honesty, "large format" Tolstoy has no place in school, and so is Dostoevsky. Those books clearly aimed at more adult auditory. Children hate them with passion, too long and boring. Some short stories would be better as introduction, but "War and Peace" was such a drag.

Maybe, well, I actually haven't read the huge novels by Tolstoy - read smaller novels, like the Kreutzer Sonata and the Death of Ivan Ilyich, which are very good. The first of the two has some adult (sexual) themes.
While I did read all 4 of Dostoevsky's major novels, when I was 17-18, I can agree that those too might not be very pleasant for school-age children. He has a few interesting shorter stories, including The dream of a Ridiculous Man, but then again those are from his ETA Hofmann-inspired period, so not really what one thinks when they mention Dostoevsky.

[Laser101]

I mean, that's just not true:

That sort of fits my point, though? Ethnic Russians are limited to only a few pockets outside the easternmost parts of the Donbas, and Crimea is the only region where they are dominant.

Note that, while it's not as obvious by just looking at the map, neither Donetsk nor Luhansk had a Russian majority.

The oblasts as a whole do not, but the areas that the Russians held pre-2022 (which were only about a third of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts overall) did. This is probably why the conflict in 2015 and 2016 had the results it did; the Russian proxy groups were only able to hold areas where they could find at least some kind of support.