Russo-Ukrainian War - 2022 Edition - Part 8

[hexagon]

The Russian Federation in previous agreements and in the Budapest Memorandum accepted Ukraine's borders and her sovereignty. The time to have raised this was back in the USSR days and it was not raised. It was not raised in the years of Yeltsin and not even in early Putin years. So this is a post facto justification, a retroconning like the whole BS promise of non-expansion of NATO.

That's very far from the only argument being made. It merely sets the scene. The Black Sea Fleet has been at Sevastopol for decades. The external meddling in the government, to the point that it was regarded as illegitimate, and huge arms transfers are where it became existentially a threat to Russian speakers and Russia itself.

And then,
OSCE Reports Reveal Ukraine Started Shelling The Donbas Nine Days Before Russia's 'Special Military Operation'

The OSCE observer mission provides maps in daily reports documenting the location of ceasefire violations and explosions along the contact line between the Ukrainian military and the Donbas republics.

These maps clearly show that Ukraine began artillery strikes against the Donbas republics on February 16th, 2022.

In other words, Ukraine began shelling the independent republics of Donetsk and Luhansk nine days before Russia announced its ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine.

 

[Paulsie]

Just to add to the Donbas separatism debate.

Found this research paper on US and Right Sector involvement in Maidan and subsequent Russian involvement in Donbas. Make your own conclusions what started this.

It's not a substack, but hey.

Edit: published 2018

The Separatist War in Donbas: A Violent Break-Up of Ukraine?

Ukraine previously experienced significant regional political divisions, including separatism in Crimea and Donbas. However, in contrast to post-communist count

papers.ssrn.com

Yanukovych agreed to a compromise deal with the opposition, negotiated with the participation of the foreign ministers of France, Germany, Poland and a Russian government representative on February 21, 2014. Yanukovych, however, fled from Kyiv and then from Ukraine after radical elements of the “Euromaidan” opposition reneged on the compromise agreement and threatened to resume violence if he did not resign. The US government and major EU countries de facto backed this violent overthrow of the relatively pro-Russian government by reneging on the February 21st deal and immediately recognizing the new government of Ukraine. The issue of the potential involvement of the US government or governments of the EU states in the Yanukovych government overthrow requires further research. To date many government sources concerning these events are not available to researchers.

Analysis of various sources, in particular Ukrainian media reports, suggest that Ukraine became a US “client state” after the “Euromaidan” and during the conflict in Donbas. The US government had obtained influence over appointments of top officials, for instance, primeminister Arseniy Yatseniuk, and over policies of the Ukrainian government, in particular, concerning the conflict in Donbas. (See, for instance, Mostovaia, 2015). There was nearly perfect alignments of Ukrainian and US government positions concerning major foreign policy issues, including the war in Donbas. Specifically, top US government officials generally expressed unconditional backing of the Ukrainian government policies concerning the conflict in Donbas, and the US provided free of charge military training and military equipment to the Ukrainian forces. But the US government and other Western countries have excluded the possibility of direct military intervention in the war in Donbas. Similarly, there is evidence, including separatist sources, that suggests that the separatist republics in Donbas became de facto client states of Russia at the end of summer 2014.

Conclusion:

Separatists, the Yanukovych government, the Maidan opposition, the Maidan government, far right organizations, Russia, the US, and the EU contributed to the start and escalation of violent separatist conflict in Donbas, and the de-facto break-up of Ukraine, in different ways.

They all misrepresented the conflict in Donbas to various extent, but their actions did not all have an equal impact. The presumed covert involvement of the US and Russia, the former in the violent regime change during the “Euromaidan,” the latter in the start of the conflict in Donbas requires further research because of lack of publicly available data concerning these events. This study suggests that it is almost impossible in the foreseeable future to permanently resolve the conflict in Donbas and thereby to unite Ukraine once again even without Crimea. It is far more likely that this war can either turn into a frozen conflict, similar to Transdniestria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Nagorno Karabakh, or the violence can once again escalate. The civil war in Donbas, with Russian military support, has already led to the de facto independence of the DNR and the LNR, which control the most populated parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk Regions. Alongside the annexation of Crimea, we are witnessing the de-facto break up of Ukraine. But while the KIIS survey shows that separatism has significantly higher support in Donbas compared to other regions of Ukraine, it also suggests that other regions are not likely to follow Donbas and separate from Ukraine.

 

[Dave]

The invasion only started last year.

Rambo, you might live in your own reality, but here on planet earth, the Russo-Ukrainian war started in 2014.

 

[Dave]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1636040024641658881

 

[Dave]

The western armaments industry going into a higher gear.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1636146663122190338

 

[Cius]

Unlike you, I am not supporting anything. I am merely seeing what led to this and what it's outcome will inevitably be.

The age of the corrupt and inept UN is over, Russia saw this and took advantage. We are back to where we were during the cold war with the UN not being able to actually achieve a single thing or note. All the soft power the UN had is unraveling and Russia is helping it happen.

No need to get emotional about it.

BS. You clearly support Russia. And the UN is working very well. Look at the last few votes as an inication of how the whole world (other than other bad actors) despises Russia. Russia, and its lap dogs are the main bad actors in the UN and the fact that Russia was on the security council was the only thing that largely made the UN toothless.

Anyways, people who support the Russian invasion are exactly the same type of people who supported Hitler. End of story. People like that disgust me. Russia has been invading and annexing neighbors for years, it has murdered so many innocent people. The only reason they do it is because they despise those people and want to control them, just like the Nazi's did back in the day. There is such overwhelming evidence of how backwards and evil the current Russian regime is. Any justification of them is ridiculous and sad. The way they treat free media, opposition politicians, neighboring states, and even non ethnic Russian's within their own borders is so overwhelmingly evil. If I could have one wish it would be that all these idiot armchair supporters of Putin could go to the front lines as part of a Russian unit and see how much Russia cares for human lives, even if its their own people.

Go Ukraine! Somebody has to stop Putin. What you are doing now will be remembered and compared to how the UK stood against Hitler almost alone for years but held until help could build up and stop him.

 

[MiW]

The civil war started in 2014.
Burnt alive in Odessa:

Anyone thinking that the Donbass (the vast majority Russian speakers) didn't need intervention, is complicit in the crimes committed against those citizens.

FACING THE WAR

This documentary is about the war in Donbass that has been going on for 8 years but most of the world had turned a blind eye on it. And keeps ignoring it even now when the political crisis hit the res

rumble.com

I see you spreading the official Kremlin propaganda again. For anyone interested about the truth, here it is

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Odesa_clashes

In early 2014, there were clashes between rival groups of protestors in the Ukrainian city of Odesa, during the pro-Russian unrest that followed the Ukrainian Revolution.[21][22] The street clashes were between pro-revolution (pro-Maidan) and anti-revolution (anti-Maidan)/pro-Russian protesters. Violence erupted on 2 May, when a 'United Ukraine' rally was attacked by pro-Russian separatists. Stones, petrol bombs and gunfire were exchanged; two pro-Ukraine activists and four pro-Russia activists were shot dead in the clashes.[23][24][25][26] The pro-Ukraine demonstrators then moved to dismantle a pro-Russian protest camp in Kulykove Pole, causing some pro-Russian activists to barricade themselves in the nearby Trade Unions House. Shots were fired by both sides, and the pro-Ukraine demonstrators attempted to storm the building, which caught fire as the two groups threw petrol bombs at each other.[27][28][29]

The clashes resulted in deaths of 48 people, 46 of whom were anti-Maidan/pro-Russian activists.[30] 42 of the victims died in the Trade Unions House fire, and 200 were injured.[31] The events were the bloodiest civil conflict in the region since the Odessa Bolshevik uprising of 1918.[32] Although several alleged perpetrators were charged, there has yet to be a trial.[33] There are allegations that some police colluded with pro-Russian activists in the initial street clashes.[34] In 2015, the International Advisory Panel of the Council of Europe concluded that the investigation's independence was hampered by "evidence indicative of police complicity",[35] and that authorities failed to thoroughly investigate the events.[36]

Prelude​

See also: Revolution of Dignity

On 26 January 2014, during the Euromaidan protests, up to 2,000 pro-Maidan protesters marched on the regional state administration (RSA) building in Odesa,[37][38] but were repelled by anti-Maidan activists and municipal barricades.[39][40] Odesa municipal administration fortified the building with concrete blocks to prevent further incursions on 28 January.[41] Confrontations between Euromaidan and Anti-Maidan protesters continued over the next month, and on 19 February, about 100 unidentified men wearing masks and helmets, and armed with baseball bats, assaulted a pro-Maidan demonstration.[42][43] Three journalists and two cameramen were injured in the clashes.[44] A number of Russian nationalist groups such as the Odesskaya Druzhina were active throughout the period and actively supported by senior Russian politicians such as Sergey Glazyev.[45] Ukrainian Nationalist groups such as Right Sector, Misanthropic Division, and the Social-National Assembly were also simultaneously active, in opposition to the pro-Russian groups.[2]

 

[MiW]

Canada announces more military aid for Kyiv​

Canada is sending more military assistance to Ukraine, Defence Minister Anita Anand said during a US-hosted Defense Contact Group in support of Kyiv.
Canada will donate about 8,000 rounds of 155mm ammunition as well as 12 air defence missiles sourced from the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) inventory, read a statement from Canada’s defence ministry.
The shipments of four Leopard 2 battle tanks are under way, added the report.
Canada has committed eight Leopard 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine in total, four of which have already been delivered to Poland with a team of CAF personnel training Ukrainian soldiers on their use, the ministry said.
All of the tanks – as well as the previously announced armoured recovery vehicle, ancillary equipment and ammunition donated by Canada – are expected to be in Ukraine in the coming weeks.

 

[MiW]

US top diplomat Blinken says drone crash being investigated

All the updates from March 15. Blinken describes Russian jet’s collision with a US drone as ‘reckless’ and ‘unsafe’.

www.aljazeera.com

​

Russia will ‘react proportionately’ to future US ‘provocations’: Defence ministry​

Russia says it will react “proportionately” to any future US “provocations” as tensions raged over the drone incident.
“Flights of American strategic unmanned aerial vehicles off the coast of Crimea are provocative in nature, which creates preconditions for an escalation of the situation in the Black Sea zone,” the Russian defence ministry said.
“Russia is not interested in such a development of events but it will continue to respond proportionately to all provocations.”

US to continue flying ‘wherever international law allows’: Austin​

The US will continue to fly wherever international law allows, defence chief Lloyd Austin told reporters after speaking with Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu.
“I just got off the phone with my Russian counterpart, Minister Shoigu,” Austin said at a Pentagon press briefing. “As I’ve said repeatedly, it’s important that great powers be models of transparency and communication and the United States will continue to fly and to operate wherever international law allows.”
The US has said it was working on declassifying surveillance footage from the drone that would show Tuesday’s crash.

Russia, US defence ministers hold phone call: Russian media​

Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu spoke over the phone with his US counterpart Lloyd Austin, the Russian defence ministry said as reported by Interfax state-run media.
The conversation took place “at the initiative of the American side”, it added.
While no details were provided on what was discussed, the call comes as Washington and Moscow are ramping up their confrontational rhetoric over a US surveillance drone that crashed near Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, which the Kremlin illegally annexed in 2014.
The US said a Russian jet hit the propeller of the drone, while Moscow says no contact was made and blamed “sharp manoeuvring” by the US aircraft for the incident.

 

[MiW]

 

[MiW]

 

[tetrasect]

US top diplomat Blinken says drone crash being investigated

All the updates from March 15. Blinken describes Russian jet’s collision with a US drone as ‘reckless’ and ‘unsafe’.

www.aljazeera.com

​

Russia will ‘react proportionately’ to future US ‘provocations’: Defence ministry​

Russia says it will react “proportionately” to any future US “provocations” as tensions raged over the drone incident.
“Flights of American strategic unmanned aerial vehicles off the coast of Crimea are provocative in nature, which creates preconditions for an escalation of the situation in the Black Sea zone,” the Russian defence ministry said.
“Russia is not interested in such a development of events but it will continue to respond proportionately to all provocations.”

US to continue flying ‘wherever international law allows’: Austin​

The US will continue to fly wherever international law allows, defence chief Lloyd Austin told reporters after speaking with Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu.
“I just got off the phone with my Russian counterpart, Minister Shoigu,” Austin said at a Pentagon press briefing. “As I’ve said repeatedly, it’s important that great powers be models of transparency and communication and the United States will continue to fly and to operate wherever international law allows.”
The US has said it was working on declassifying surveillance footage from the drone that would show Tuesday’s crash.

Russia, US defence ministers hold phone call: Russian media​

Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu spoke over the phone with his US counterpart Lloyd Austin, the Russian defence ministry said as reported by Interfax state-run media.
The conversation took place “at the initiative of the American side”, it added.
While no details were provided on what was discussed, the call comes as Washington and Moscow are ramping up their confrontational rhetoric over a US surveillance drone that crashed near Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, which the Kremlin illegally annexed in 2014.
The US said a Russian jet hit the propeller of the drone, while Moscow says no contact was made and blamed “sharp manoeuvring” by the US aircraft for the incident.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1636215367516266496

 

[rambo919]

Rambo, you might live in your own reality, but here on planet earth, the Russo-Ukrainian war started in 2014.

Read the wiki, it lists it as 2022 not 2014.

At least keep up with what I am saying literally meaning what it is saying.

 

[rambo919]

No, the invasion started in 2014 when Russian troops invaded eastern Ukraine and armed their proxies and invaded and annexed Crimea.

Wikipedia disagrees with you

 

[Cray]

I do not know the details of it but the Russians would definitely interpret allowing Murican interests to gain influence as a violation.

Okay, which point of the agreement do you think they would try to claim was violated?

1. Respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.[7]
2. Refrain from the threat or the use of force against the signatory.
3. Refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by the signatory of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
4. Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used".
5. Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against the signatory.
6. Consult with one another if questions arise regarding those commitments.

And why are Russian interests acceptable in Ukraine but not American?

I condemn both sides, I do not believe the myth of only one side being entirely at fault when it comes to most wars, probably all wars. Ukraine just happened to be the more stupid party in this one.

And yet the terms in your list are far more condemnatory of Ukraine than they are of Russia, for someone who supposedly blames both sides, your choice of language is very slanted against Ukraine and very forgiving or Russia...

Examples.

• Tensions boil over in 2014 with Russian retaliatory interference in Ukraine providing Russia with a solid pretext for annexation.

There is no solid pretext for annexing a part of another country,

Ukraine in retaliation begins a campaign of ethnically cleansing all Russian influence including banning the use of the Russian language.

There was no ethnic cleansing or language ban

• Russian Ukrainians with Russian support start fighting back.

The idea that Ukraine started the fighting and the Russian funded insurgence was just defensive....

• Ukraine renegs on all treaties as ethnic hostilities within it's borders continue

Zero mention of Russia reneging on any treaties, including the Budapest memorandum

• Russia looses all patience with intimidation tactics and launches a full scale invasion.

The idea that Russia was very patient and wasn't fuelling an insurrection in another country the whole time...

Your supposed neutrality is pretty darn suspect.

 

[Cray]

The History Between Ukraine and Russia - Part 2


The History Between Ukraine and Russia - Part 3

Anonymous reporters always raise an eyebrow...

 

[MunosMachos]

The usual white supremacist disinformation artists would like to spread the narrative that Russia is losing and running out of ammo and that the Ukrainian soldiers are motivated.

Battle of Bakhmut: Ukrainian soldiers worry Russians begin to ‘taste victory’

Editor's note: The Kyiv Independent is not revealing the soldiers' surnames or the exact location of their deployment due to security concerns amid the ongoing war. Some military personnel spoke without the authorization of their commanders or a press officer.

kyivindependent.com

Reality suggests otherwise.

"(The Russians) keep firing at us, but we don't have artillery – so we have nothing to attack them back with," Volodymyr said. "I don't know if I will return or not. We are just getting killed."

"It's a pity that probably 90% of our losses are from artillery – or tanks and aviation," Valeriy told the Kyiv Independent a few hours after leaving the Bakhmut front. "And much less (casualties) from shooting battles."

 

[MiW]

What happened to the previous 500 000 mobilized?

Call-up notices are being sent out in 35 Russian regions, says human rights activist

The head of the international human rights organisation Agora has reported that enlistment offices in 35 Russian regions have begun extensively sending out call-up notices to local residents.

www.pravda.com.ua

The head of the international human rights organisation Agora has reported that enlistment offices in 35 Russian regions have begun extensively sending out call-up notices to local residents.

Source: Pavel Chikov, head of the international human rights organisation Agora, on Telegram

Details: Chikov presented a list of 35 regions where call-up notices are being sent out, including Moscow and St Petersburg, the oblasts of Leningrad, Moscow, Belgorod and Murmansk, and the Altai, Perm, Krasnoyarsk and Krasnodar territories.

Chikov did not explain where he had obtained this information, but in his estimation, there is no question of a second wave of mobilisation yet.

Quote: "The ones that raise the most questions are the call-up notices for military training, which can only be held after a presidential decree. There has been no such decree - at least none that has been published."

Details: Novaya Gazeta Europe confirmed that call-up notices are being distributed in Moscow. An attempt was made to serve their reporter with one, which demanded that he go to the enlistment office "to clarify military registration documents".

Earlier, authorities in the Russian regions said call-up notices were being sent out in order to "update military records" or invite the recipients for military training.

 

[TofuMofu]

Wikipedia disagrees with you

 

[rambo919]

You pass a moral judgment on the actions of each country. Hence you follow some moral system. You can't say you're divorced because in that case you should not comment here. You also moralise here about the UN etc.

No I mostly cast logical judgement. Morals are how you do something not what you do. I do not make the mistake of mixing my morals and logic.

You either believe attacking another country and killing its people soldiers or civilians who were not actively preparing to attack you is moral or immoral. I and many others happen to think that attacking and killing innocent people is morally wrong. Russia is morally in the wrong here.

See below, the Russians are not operating on your historical scale.

So no soldiers and no plans to invade Russia. Donbas was and is a part of Ukraine. Transvaal and Free State were not part of the British Empire until then. So this analogy fails. I don't know the Boer wars well enough but if there was evidence that Brits were going to attack and were massing forces and if the pre-emptive war the Boers carried out was not targeting civilians there would be possibly be some justification. Alas this was not the case with Russia and Ukraine. Russia invaded Ukraine and not vice versa. In fact Russia had a long history of doing this, including starving millions of Ukrainians to death in 1932-33.

It's a different kind of war, before Russia changed the rules and went kinetic the weapons were political and economic. The same way the British used political and economic weapons to isolate and weaken the Republics before it invaded.... Russia simply decided to not wait for actual invasion it was sure was coming at some point. The same way Murica and China are currently at war trying to soften each other up before one side chooses to go kinetic. War does not equal physical fighting that is just one of the usual later phases.

Collateral damage is only justified if the war was justifed. If you start a war of aggression all collateral damage is not justified because it follows from your unjustified war. Power and resources are not justifications. Otherwise we end up with a world full of war and no more rules.

You know this is actually a bit alarming..... you are asserting the ends justifies the means. And you say my moral compass is off? Collateral damage has been a reality of any war since WWI, explosives do that just because they do that.

That would be like the British landing in Transvaal with soldiers and suddenly Transvaal wants to be part of the British empire. There was no grass roots, local, indigenous, actual movement but an artificial one created by Russia. That doesn't count.

You should be interested in actual truth and not a sham pseudo-truth. The last indications and polls showed that Donbas people did not want to secede from Ukraine.

Most people in separatist-held areas of Donbas prefer reintegration with Ukraine – new survey

What do the people of the Donbas want for their future?

theconversation.com

The problem is even that data clearly shows that the people under the two areas of control corresponding with who has military control.... show exact opposite attitudes. You cannot use that data as any kind of solid indicator and it's not even a thousand people.

Whether the call for independence was created by Russia or not is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether it will succeed or not.

You're not only not supporting Ukraine, you're attempting to justify Russia's actions and blame Ukraine for wanting to decide its own future. You are moralising whether you like it or not. You should travel to the region and learn some actual history of it and not merely follow what's popular, i.e. Russian history because that's all you read about. Read about some other countries in the region and what Russia did to them.

No I am attempting to bring no morals into this whatsoever because it muddies the results. I am not trying to blame Ukraine for wanting to decide it's own future that is too simplistic. I am blaming Ukraine for making stupid choices.

This is essentially a Pelopenesian conflict where a state on the border of Sparta tried to join the Athenian League. The morals of whether or not it should be allowed to join are utterly irrelevant, what is relevant is how feasible it was that Sparta would not react violently. Remember, Sparta and Athens do not share the same ideologies nvm the same morals.

So you condemn both sides, yet only one side has children killed RIGHT NOW as we speak.
Only one side, Ukraine, has Russian missiles land on its apartment blocs. Ukraine is not throwing missiles at Russian homes.

Both sides are lobbing bombs at homes, the only difference is the Russians evacuated a lot of these homes so there are fewer people in them. You are using an extremely narrow short view while I am using a wide long one. I find my approach much more useful to actual understanding rather than getting emotional and banging fists on walls out of frustration.