После референдума в Крыму (After the referendum in the Crimea)

Hello friends,
the situation in Ukraine and in the Crimea and about them develops very quickly.
There are some my thoughts about the referendum in the Crimea and about the history of the Crimea.
It’s in Russian.
Here is the Link:

Maybe my opinion is different to yours, but we all have the freedom of speech, don’t we?

2 Likes

In my opinion, the coverage of this issue in the Western media (especially, if I may say so, the BBC) has been grossly biased and unfair.

Some inconvenient facts:

#1 Our nice new friends in Kiev came to power by violently overthrowing a democratically elected government

#2 Some of our nice new friends in Kiev are Neo-Nazis and anti-Semites

#3 The Crimea was undemocratically removed from Russia in 1954 - albeit only within the context of the Soviet Union’s internal borders.

#4 A majority of the settled population in the Crimea is ethnically and culturally Russian

#5 There is no doubt whosoever that a majority of them wish to re-join Russia

Sure, one can debate whether the Russians went about this in the best way - it may well have been better to seek a diplomatic process working towards an agreed referendum. But so what? This isn’t our backyard, and it isn’t our freaking business.

As for the ridiculous huffing and puffing by the EU, what a joke!

If things get REALLY tough, let’s send in Herman Rumpy-Pumpy! That’ll shock the Kremlin. Not.

There also seems to be a lot of clangor about the significance of Putin’s ‘imperial conquests,’ ostensibly being that he’s only just now - 20 years after the collapse - decided to retake what the KGB once reigned over.

It seems more like the opposite to me… for what it’s worth the Soviet Union didn’t really collapse, it just dissolved into Russia, Russia’s puppets, and the EU. Therefore, the empire lived on covertly.

So… now that Ukraine lost its status as a ‘Russian puppet’ and for all intents and purposes is now an ‘EU puppet,’ the emperor wants to retain what he can of his empire, taking back Crimea, at least for now.

But I certainly do think Western media also inflames quite a bit for their own interests, and fails to leave out important information.

BTW

Peter Hitchens has a great blog post on this - I think he’s spot on.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk

Wow, I was just about to post a link to Peter Hitchens’ blog. Great minds eh.

For all the guardianistas:

1 Like

Вот интересное интервью о событиях в Донецке.

http://tvrain.ru/articles/donetskij_bloger_deni

Я искал видео о насилия в отношении русскоязычного населения в Украине и не смогли найти никаких, только с насилием в отношении про-киевских демонстрантов в Донецке.

Pardon my Russian. I originally posted this on the tutor’s forum to Evgueny’s lesson but then noticed that it produced an enormous heading for the thread. So I reposted it here without taking into consideration that this thread, despite its Russian title, is all in English. Now I am just going to leave it.

Hitchen’s article and the Prinz’s comments do not persuade me, but they are evidence of a lively divergence of opinion which is a good thing, and I have already enjoyed two conversations with Evgueny on this subject in Russian.

Re Prinz’s points

  1. The only possible legitimate government of Ukraine is the present interim government, as voted in by a majority of the members of the Ukrainian parliament. A vote will take place on May 25 to elect a permanent government.

  2. There are some nasties in the present government and these were active at the Maidan, Party Svoboda and Right Sector (not so much party as a paramilitary organization). Opinion polls I have seen show their public support as quite low, although Svoboda is the 4th largest party in the Rada and allied with two other larger parties to form the majority today. It is worth noting that similar elements exist in Russia and that Zhirinovsky’s wing-nut xenophobic party got 25% of the Duma vote in the early 1990’s in Russia, and has since declined.

  1. Lots of borders have been changed both democratically and undemocratically over the years. If the government of the semi-autonomous republic of Crimea had proposed a referendum and this had been squashed by Kiev, there might have been an argument for international, especially Russian, pressure to allow such a referendum. But that is not what happened. Russian troops took over the 10,000 sq. km territory and a hasty referendum was called with no opportunity for the pro-Ukrainian side to make a case, with the choice presented as being between fascism or Russia.

I think the government in Kiev is not fascist, but rather weak, disorganized and inept, and Russia is taking advantage of this.

  1. A survey some months ago showed only 40% of Crimean residents in favour of joining Russia.

  2. Putin said on March 4 that Russia had no interest in taking over Crimea. Now he says he has no intention of dismembering other parts of Ukraine but stresses his right to protect and even reunite ethnic Russians wherever they live. Despite Russian hype, and the nasty look of the Party Svoboda and Right Sector thugs (who have their equivalents in many countries especially Russia), I have yet to see any evidence of Russian speakers being assaulted by these thugs. I have seen videos of pro-Russian thugs assaulting pro-Kiev demonstrators in Donetsk, however.

  3. Russia has mounted a propaganda campaign to discredit the government in Kiev, and is quashing disagreement internally at the same time, calling dissident voices “traitors” and a “fifth column”. I find this mass hysteria scary and I think Putin himself is a victim of his own propaganda campaign.

  4. Western media is not one monolithic machine, despite what most Russians and western conspiracy theorists seem to believe. There is a divergence of opinion, as evidenced by Hitchens article and many others.

  5. I have no idea of the allegiances of eastern and southern Ukrainians. However, I think it is extremely important not to allow the kind of strong arm actions we have seen in Crimea. I think that Putin blew it, and should have just accepted his referendum as a means to pressure Ukraine, but not annex Crimea. In other words he should have done what he said in his Mar 4 press conference. His credibility is now gone, and he is mostly compared to another famous leader who wanted to unite all ethnic brothers and wasn’t too concerned about how he did it. It all seemed reasonable, the Rhineland, Sudetenland …

I believe Putin is cornered now, and the West should offer him some kind of escape route in my view. Unless of course his intention is to take over all areas with large Russian populations, or former states of the Soviet Union, in which case, all bets are off.

  1. I hope the Ukrainian government can soften its Ukrainian nationalism, reach out to the Russian speakers in the east and south, accept the loss of the Crimean, and take the first steps towards reconciliation with Russia. That is very difficult for them, but perhaps the fastest way out of this crisis.

The more I read of the actions of the Russian military in Crimea and follow their propaganda war, I think the Russian goal is to humiliate and debilitate an already weak Ukrainian government, the better to control events there in the long run. I wonder how this will play out.

@Steve: “…The only possible legitimate government of Ukraine is the present interim government, as voted in by a majority of the members of the Ukrainian parliament…”

I don’t agree. The parliament voted in the interim government while the building was under the control of armed militia men. The old government still had a mandate lasting one year.


“…Russian troops took over the 10,000 sq. km territory and a hasty referendum was called with no opportunity for the pro-Ukrainian side to make a case, with the choice presented as being between fascism or Russia…”

Here I agree - the Russian troops (which were legally stationed in the Crimea, of course) shouldn’t have been deployed. And there should have been a referendum conducted under, let’s say, “normal” political circumstances.

Nevertheless, there remains the basic fact that these people have a right to self-determination. And I see few voices among Western politicians speaking in support of this principle.


“…A survey some months ago showed only 40% of Crimean residents in favour of joining Russia…”

I doubt very much whether this was accurate. I haven’t seen any serious commentator at all (and most of them are clearly anti-Russian remember) who disputes the basic fact that a majority of Crimean people do indeed want to rejoin Russia.


“…Western media is not one monolithic machine, despite what most Russians and western conspiracy theorists seem to believe. There is a divergence of opinion, as evidenced by Hitchens article and many others…”

I haven’t seen anybody suggest that Western media is one monolithic machine. Sure there are a few dissenting voices like Peter Hitchens. But for the most part the coverage here in the UK is heavily biased. Maybe it is different in North America.


“…However, I think it is extremely important not to allow the kind of strong arm actions we have seen in Crimea…”

Every big country uses “strong arm tactics” when it suits its interests (Vietnam War, Iraq War, etc.) That’s just the way the world works.

If you don’t want to “allow” it, you had better be ready for war. A big war. (Good luck finding the young men to fight it…)


“…he is mostly compared to another famous leader who wanted to unite all ethnic brothers and wasn’t too concerned about how he did it. It all seemed reasonable, the Rhineland, Sudetenland … Unless of course his intention is to take over all areas with large Russian populations, or former states of the Soviet Union, in which case, all bets are off…”

This is what worries me. It seems to me that this is precisely the kind of alarmist anti-Russian hysteria that is being whipped up by most of the UK media.

I don’t see any evidence that Putin is about to steamroller the whole swathes of Eastern Europe. I will believe that this is the case when I see it happen.

EDIT
I have just seen (Sunday morning UK time) that Peter Hitchens has a new blog post which debunks this rather facile comparison with Hitler - same link as above.

  1. Legitimacy of new government depends on how many countries recognize it. Always has been the case.
  2. No one denies right of people in Crimea to organize referendum. What happens then depends on international reaction. Poll can be conducted in various ways see “plebiscite” in Veneto.
  3. Re Crimean attitudes prior to Russian military takeover and propaganda blitz-krieg see following article.
    This Gallup Poll Shows Crimeans Had Very Different Ideas About Russia Last Year
  4. We will see long term consequence of Russian actions. I think the Russian economy will suffer from isolation, long term loss of gas and oil customers, and the embrace of China will not be enough to offset this.
  5. In view of the crescendo of anti-Western nationalistic hype and restriction of media freedom in Russia, nostalgia for past greatness and sense of "historical injustice"in government circles, the comparison to Hitler is useful.
  6. I gather Hitchens sees himself as some kind of pro-religion, pro-traditional values, anti-EU arch Conservative. This is a major group in the West which supports Putin, and which Putin wants to appeal to. The more extreme wing of this ideology provided the “observers” for the Crimean referendum

@Steve: “…We will see long term consequence of Russian actions. I think the Russian economy will suffer from isolation, long term loss of gas and oil customers, and the embrace of China will not be enough to offset this…”

Given the rather flimsy nature of the sanctions, there are grounds to hope that the doomsday rhetoric is mostly hot air. It may well be that there is no real appetite for a serious conflict - certainly not in the EU.

Possibly there will be a kind of phoney ‘Cold War’ for a couple of years, then (like the aftermath of the Georgia crisis) it will be quietly forgotten?

At any rate, this is what any sane person in the West should hope for, IMO. There may be some principles that are worth risking nuclear war over - the colour of the flag over the Crimea sure as heck isn’t one of them.

It is not so much the sanctions as the reluctance of the dominant western economies to commit to trade and business relations with an increasingly hostile and unpredictable Russia. Russia needs western technology and western markets for its gas, if it wants to maintain its standard of living. Of course, most countries who face isolation are strengthened in their fortress mentality, so it is unlikely that isolating Russia will change its foreign or internal policy.

@steve, Liam
I believe that I’ve explained everything in my article at least for them who would like to know another point of view.
I don’t think that the referendum in the Crimea was unfair, they have always wanted to leave Ukraine and to re-join Russia.
They had 2 times refeerendums in 1992 and 1996, but both times the wish of the Crimea popuklatiobn was supressed violantly by Kiev.
I thuink that Ukraine have a lot of problems -financial, nacionalistic, legality - we have all to help this country to solve these problems and not to sharpen the situation about the Crimea.
The Crimea was, is and will be Russian!
I don’t see the anti-Western hype in Russia, but I seed every day the antyi-Russian hype in the Westyerbn Mass Media. There are another voices, but thewy asre maybe 1% in compare with anti-Russian histery.
And here are some Links from YouTube that show who was the pperpertrator o0f all these events, onxcluding the liberation of the Crimea from the Ukrainian occupation:

But of cause if you don’t want to understand the other point of view - it is not for you!

1 Like

Thanks Evgueny. I had a look at these. Of course there is concern about the presence of far right groups in the Rada. You could find people with similar attitudes belonging to organized neo-nazi groups in Russia, Germany and elsewhere. These are turbulent times in Ukraine and they have more influence than in peaceful times. We will have to wait and see.

However, there has been no anti-Russian violence. Cohen says in his interview that the new government banned Russian and banned the two major parties representing the East and South in Ukraine.

Both statements are false. Initially the new government passed a motion to undo the law enacted by the Yanukovch government allowing minority languages official status in areas where these languages are spoken by more than 10% of the population. This unwise move to undo this legislation was quickly quashed. The official status of Russian in those regions remains.

The Party of Regions is not banned, although it was banned in some districts in the Western Ukraine. Yes there are hot heads in some areas of the Western Ukraine, but not in Kiev. Neither Yatseniuk, present premier, nor Petro Proshenko, who leads opinion polls as most popular presidential candidate, are fascists.

Below I show the present make up of the Rada. (parliament)

Cohen or one of the other journalists suggests that Jews are threatened but the Chief Rabbi in the Ukraine refutes this.

In other words, the spectre portrayed hysterically by the Russian state controlled media, and reported on by various Western media or commentators, is grossly overblown, and no justification for Russia’s anti-Ukrainian campaign.

Faction summary[edit]

Council Party standings (January 3, 2013)
134 Regions
117 Non-affiliated
88 Fatherland
42 UDAR
36 Freedom
32 Communists
Party
(Shading indicates majority caucus)
Total Vacant
Party of Regions Fatherland UDAR Svoboda Communists Economic Development Sovereign European Ukraine Non-affiliated
End of previous convocation[33][34] 195 97 DNP DNP 25 DNP DNP 31 348 102
Begin[35] 185 101 40 37 32 - - 43 438 12
December 12, 2012[33] 208 99 42 36 32 - - 27 444 6
June 11, 2013[33] 207 93 42 36 32 - - 34 444 6
December 31, 2013[33] 204 90 42 36 32 - - 38 442 8
February 21, 2014[36] 177 90 42 36 32 - - 55 442 8
February 22, 2014[33][37] 134 88 42 36 32 - - 115 447 3
February 23, 2014[33] 131 88 42 36 32 - - 118 447 3
February 24, 2014[33] 128 88 42 36 32 - - 123 449 1
February 25, 2014[33] 127 88 42 36 32 33 - 91 449 1
February 27, 2014[33] 122 88 42 36 32 32 37 60 449 1
February 28, 2014[33] 122 88 42 36 32 36 36 57 449 1
March 4, 2014[33] 119 87 42 33 32 36 36 60 445 5
March 15, 2014[33] 120 88 42 35 32 37 36 58 448 2
March 18, 2014[33] 120 82 41 33 32 37 36 58 439 11
Latest voting share 30.2% 19.8% 9.5% 8.1% 7.2% N/A N/A 25.9%
Note: The parties United Centre (3 seats), People’s Party (2 seats), Radical Party of Oleh Lyashko (1 seat) and Union (1 seat) did not form their own faction. Their deputies did not join any faction besides 1 deputy of People’s Party who became a member of the Party of Regions faction in December 2012.[33]

I might add, that while there are nationalists hot heads in Western Ukraine, they are not the mainstream. Note the move to speak Russian once a week in Lviv.

@Steve: “…This unwise move to undo this legislation was quickly quashed. The official status of Russian in those regions remains…”

It was quickly quashed all right - almost certainly because the US-EU sponsors had a little word in the ear of the revolutionaries. Unfortunately the cat was already out of the bag: their gut instincts and intent were clear enough.

(I remain amazed that we are making common cause with illegal revolutionaries who contain violent and openly Neo-Nazi elements. The double standards are just sickening. In my opinion Brussels richly deserves a violent paramilitary mob with petrol bombs outside their own parliament - a taste of the same fine medicine, so to speak.)

Steve, I would like first osf all to divide two topics: the Crimea and the Ukraine.
The Crimea always wanted to be with Russia and at last this dream of the most of the population of the Crimea has fullfilled. Full stop with it!
Yes, they took the only opportunity of the riots and the nationalist revolution of supporter of Bandera in the Ukraine because two previous attemps in the 90s were unsuccessful due to the violance from Kiev.Moscow helped them because I say cynicly: it was in accordance to the Russian national interests.
The second topic- the Ukraine. It’s difficult topic because I believe the maidan was well grounded- the unsatisfaction against Yanukovich was great. But then the main role became in the maidan Right sector and the fighters of the party Svoboda, the maidan stopped to be peaceful, the pure milicemen were attacked by Miolotov-cocktail, Yanukovich betrayed these people who defended him and flew as a timid hare.
His party is now deeply demoralized like also the Communist party, they can’t resist the other parties. But do not be so naive that the power belongs to the legal opposition - the government can do only the things that the Right sector approves. The government can’t do anything that the Right Sector and Svoboda disapprove because they are armed and they can return this arm against the government as well.
The opposition government is the collection of puppets: during maidan they every day went to the American Assambly to receive instructuions and now they have to go to the nationalists for the approval. They are not able to disarm these fighters. The western supporters of the opposition opened the Pandora’s box - and the future of the Ukraine is very unclear.
That’s why I don’t believe that the election on 25 Mai would be fair because it will be at gun point of the Bandera-nationalists. It’s pity, but it’s probably true.

Do you think the initiative in Lviv to speak Russian once a week and to show solidarity with Russian speakers was also at the behest of the EU? Don’t be so quick to jump to these black and white conclusions. It is a revolution, revolution by ordinary people against the people and institutions that have misgoverned them for over 20 years. There are always some wild elements in revolutions. I say we wait to May 25.

My concern is not fascism in Kiev, but ineptitude and that nothing much will change in the corrupt and inept institutions of that country, despite the tremendous human capital of a well educated population,

There plenty of anti-semitism in Russia. Note that the Rodina party of Dmitry Rogozin (now an influential advisor to Putin) was involved in an attempt by Duma deputies to ban Jewish organizations in Russia some years back. However, I do not consider the Russian government nor Putin to be anti-semitic. I think it is wise to help the Ukrainian government try to cope in these difficult times, rather than trying to promote dissension and fear.

Evgueny, let wait to see the election results. We know that opinion polls show that Svoboda’s support has declined, and only 1.5% would vote for Yarosh as president. So if the results of the elections are widely different then we have a case. I prefer to wait and see.

I don’t agree that western advisors had much influence on events, although the maidanists obviously wanted their support. I think that there is far more evidence of Russian operatives working to create problems in the east and south.

I believe that much of the problem between Ukraine and Russia is the fault of the domineering attitude of Russia. I think there was lots of good will towards Russia, or nostalgia towards the Soviet Union, not only in the Ukraine but elsewhere in the ex Soviet realm. However, a strident nationalist Russia, trying to dictate terms, covertly and overtly, using ethnic Russians as a pretext, is not the best formula for creating a new Russian Commonwealth similar to the British Commonwealth.