Russian-Ukrainian-Polish Eternal Friendship Thread

[WolfBear]

Even ignoring the risk of a nuclear war with Russia, why exactly are we sending American boys to die in Ukraine? This whole fiasco in Eastern Europe really needs to be looked at in that light too; why are we doing this and what are we supposed to gain from it?

Well, why exactly do we have treaty commitments to the Baltic countries? What exactly is in it for us either? Ukraine is at least much more geopolitically important than the Baltic countries are. Ukraine has almost 40 million people (excluding the seceded regions), but the Baltic countries combined have less than 10 million people. This means that Ukraine is more important, or at least it would be if it was actually capable of fully developing its potential.

But the Baltic countries weren't led by a bunch of robber barons after independence like Ukraine was, especially for its first couple of decades.

 

[WolfBear]

Condemn the Iraq Invasion right now, but we both know you won't because you're a hypocrite when it comes to applying international law fairly. For the Russians, it's supposed to be iron clad but then you let the U.S. weasel out of it. I'd tell you to have consistency, but it's clear that's a choice on your end not to at this point.

Yeah, the West paved the way for this when it violated international law to bomb Serbia (then Yugoslavia) over Kosovo in 1999. It claimed that its actions were "Illegal but legitimate", but the thing is that Russia can also play the same game and insist that any violations of international law that it itself makes are likewise legitimate in spite of them being illegal. If it's fair game for some countries to violate international law when it's legitimate, why not for other countries as well? Unless of course there's a dispute about what is actually legitimate.

 

[Terthna]

Is it? EU helped too. Ukrainian nationalists helped too. And lets not forget that the shitty corruptocrat friends of Russia who were in charge of Ukraine since the 90's also helped - after all, if they have gotten Ukraine to a living standard similar to even neighboring pro-Russian Belarus, the regime change probably wouldn't have nearly as much support, making its success rather unlikely.
So absolutely not, it's not entirely US fault, it was in fact a massive culmination of various factors and influences, and even calling it a "fault" is inherently tendential.

I'll grant you that there were other contributing factors which led up to the coup; but without the promise of backing from the United States, do you honestly think it would have gotten off the ground in the first place? That, at least, is our fault; because we made promises to monsters in the hopes of putting ourselves in a better position against Russia, at the cost of making the lives of the people of Ukraine orders of magnitude worse than they already were.

Do Ukrainians not have a right to launch revolutions of their own? Because plenty of Ukrainians see their country's future as being with Europe. This was already the case even back in late 2013.

Plenty of Ukrainians don't as well; particularly the large segment of the population in Donbass and Crimea that were always Russian in all but name. Then there's the fact that much of Europe doesn't see Ukraine as being part of their future either, which has kinda put a damper on the supposed plans of the revolutionaries; not that they ever really cared about establishing closer ties with Europe. Most of them were simply in it for the wealth and power, as has been made blatantly obvious by their actions since they took over.

 

[WolfBear]

Plenty of Ukrainians don't as well; particularly the large segment of the population in Donbass and Crimea that were always Russian in all but name. Then there's the fact that much of Europe doesn't see Ukraine as being part of their future either, which has kinda put a damper on the supposed plans of the revolutionaries; not that they ever really cared about establishing closer ties with Europe. Most of them were simply in it for the wealth and power, as has been made blatantly obvious by their actions since they took over.

FWIW, I personally support the right of Crimea and the Donbass to secede from Ukraine *if* they genuinely desire it. Sometimes a smaller country can be a better, more cohensive country: India post-partition, for instance, or France after its withdrawal from Algeria.

As for Europe, it honestly needs to embrace Ukraine more. As in, actually offer Ukraine a roadmap for membership, even if actual membership itself will still be 20-30 years or more off into the future. Ukraine is more European than Turkey is due to it being Christian and a former territory of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

 

[WolfBear]

TBH, I think that the people of the Donbass would have been better served by Russia outright annexing them in 2014, though the support for this simply didn't exist in sufficient levels back then:

News - The views and opinions of South-Eastern regions residents of Ukraine: April 2014

kiis.com.ua

You had something like 30% of Donbassers supporting a union with Russia in comparison to 40% (with a lot of overlap, presumably) who supported federalization, so it made more sense for Putin to support federalization. 40% isn't a majority overall, but it could be a majority in some parts of the Donbass for all I know. Look at the 1921 Upper Silesian plebiscite, for instance. Germany won the overall plebiscite with almost 60% of the total vote, but Poland nevertheless won majorities in some parts of Upper Silesia.

 

[PsihoKekec]

Btw, you don't need to make a new post for every quote, you can put multiple quotes in a single post.

Do Ukrainians not have a right to launch revolutions of their own?

They do, I just don't recall any revolutions they launched on their own since they got their independence.

Ukraine actually tried to sign an Association Agreement with the EU even under Yanukovych but changed its mind at the last minute in late 2013 due to Russian pressure

That is not entirely true. Yanukovich tried to negotiate grace period for opening the market to EU products and reprogramming of IMF loans, to which EU and IMF reply could be summed as ''bite the pillow, we are going in dry''. Not to mention that due to entering EU it would lose open market treaty with Russia (standard for entering EU, all national treaties are superseded by EU treties). Due to decades of economic mismanagement by the political elites (both East and West) this would precipitate complete collapse of Ukrainian economy and kill his political career. So he turned to Russia to bail him out and they were all to happy to torpedo the deal. Idiocy all around and the worst part of it, the grace period and reprogramming of IMF loans were granted to the coup junta, so all the bloodshed could have been avoided if EU and IMF were more flexible at the start.

and they became even more pissed off once Yanukovych's thugs and goons literally bloodied a lot of Ukrainian protesters in the winter of 2013-2014

Actually the police were fairly restrained throughout the Maidan fighting, until the final shooting spree (which the new government for some reason didn't want to investigate in depth) and most of the protesters, especially the combat elements, received salaries for being there, so it wasn't exactly a spontaneous thing and the violence was very much reciprocal thing.

 

[WolfBear]

Btw, you don't need to make a new post for every quote, you can put multiple quotes in a single post.


They do, I just don't recall any revolutions they launched on their own since they got their independence.


That is not entirely true. Yanukovich tried to negotiate grace period for opening the market to EU products and reprogramming of IMF loans, to which EU and IMF reply could be summed as ''bite the pillow, we are going in dry''. Not to mention that due to entering EU it would lose open market treaty with Russia (standard for entering EU, all national treaties are superseded by EU treties). Due to decades of economic mismanagement by the political elites (both East and West) this would precipitate complete collapse of Ukrainian economy and kill his political career. So he turned to Russia to bail him out and they were all to happy to torpedo the deal. Idiocy all around and the worst part of it, the grace period and reprogramming of IMF loans were granted to the coup junta, so all the bloodshed could have been avoided if EU and IMF were more flexible at the start.


Actually the police were fairly restrained throughout the Maidan fighting, until the final shooting spree (which the new government for some reason didn't want to investigate in depth) and most of the protesters, especially the combat elements, received salaries for being there, so it wasn't exactly a spontaneous thing and the violence was very much reciprocal thing.

You mean like this?

What about 2004? Or was the West responsible for that revolution as well?

Yeah, I certainly won't dispute that the EU could have been more flexible here.

Who exactly paid them?

 

[PsihoKekec]

Or was the West responsible for that revolution as well?

USA was never shy about taking credit for the Colour Revolutions.

Who exactly paid them?

Good question, one source was supposed to be some of the oligarchs, but USA was also supposed to foot some of the bill, at least the then American ambassador was known to take the credit.

 

[WolfBear]

USA was never shy about taking credit for the Colour Revolutions.


Good question, one source was supposed to be some of the oligarchs, but USA was also supposed to foot some of the bill, at least the then American ambassador was known to take the credit.

Do you know which oligarch? Petro Poroshenko? Someone else?

 

[Marduk]

at the cost of making the lives of the people of Ukraine orders of magnitude worse than they already were.

Umm, that's a huge assumption. It couldn't be nearly that bad, considering Ukraine's most recent election results, welp, if majority of Ukrainians regretted the pro-western turn, they could have voted in the pro-Russia party again. They didn't, not even close, the pro-Russian president candidate didn't even get to second round. In conclusion, either it's not nearly as bad as you picture it, or if it is, Ukrainians themselves still consider that worth it.
So, lets check that with the facts:

So facts are, economically at least, its not "orders of magnitude worse than they already were", the reality is that they were in stagnation since the 2008 crisis, the Euromaidan, war, and breaking off ties with Russia merely took few percent off their GDP, and they have recovered that since then.
In terms of HDI rather than pure economics, in fact it seems Ukraine is slightly better off.

Ukraine Human development - data, chart | TheGlobalEconomy.com

Ukraine: Human Development Index (0 - 1): For that indicator, we provide data for Ukraine from 1990 to 2021. The average value for Ukraine during that period was 0.713 points with a minimum of 0.661 points in 1996 and a maximum of 0.779 points in 2020. The latest value from 2021 is 0.773 points...

www.theglobaleconomy.com

So no, Ukraine definitely is not a Syria style scenario.

TBH, I think that the people of the Donbass would have been better served by Russia outright annexing them in 2014, though the support for this simply didn't exist in sufficient levels back then:

Probably. But lets not forget that the Donbass separatists were tools for Russia. Russia doesn't care that much about getting a small piece of Ukraine and its population, its way more interested in the whole thing. The plan A was to get Ukraine into Russia mediated negotiations with the separatists, which in turn would be guided to make Ukraine give certain autonomy to the regions, alongside other perks promises in international policy
that would include Russia's main objective of being stuck having close relations with Russia no matter the cost, and in turn limited relations with the west. Probably also "funny" election business in the newly autonomous regions. Basically the separatist regions and threat of civil war they pose would be used as a handle to control whole Ukraine with.

But the other side didn't cooperate with the plan and instead let Russia to do its worst, and turn the place into effectively unrecognized states with semi-formal Russian support.
Now the handle is kinda detached from the object it was supposed to be used for handling. Still, it has some of the benefits it was supposed to have - having a semi-frozen conflict like that considerably complicates Ukraine's perspectives for EU and NATO membership.
And that's the plan B. Which also shows the priorities in what Russia really cares about regarding Ukraine. Hint: Ukrainian's well being is not very high on that list.

That is not entirely true. Yanukovich tried to negotiate grace period for opening the market to EU products and reprogramming of IMF loans, to which EU and IMF reply could be summed as ''bite the pillow, we are going in dry''. Not to mention that due to entering EU it would lose open market treaty with Russia (standard for entering EU, all national treaties are superseded by EU treties). Due to decades of economic mismanagement by the political elites (both East and West) this would precipitate complete collapse of Ukrainian economy and kill his political career. So he turned to Russia to bail him out and they were all to happy to torpedo the deal. Idiocy all around and the worst part of it, the grace period and reprogramming of IMF loans were granted to the coup junta, so all the bloodshed could have been avoided if EU and IMF were more flexible at the start.

But why should they? It would be completely unreasonable realpolitik wise. Why should EU and USA bail out Russia's cronies? Are they meme Sweden or what? Russia is a big country, it can bail out its own cronies, satraps and buddies if it wants to. EU and USA meanwhile can stick to bailing out their own, they sure do plenty of that.

 

[Terthna]

Umm, that's a huge assumption. It couldn't be nearly that bad, considering Ukraine's most recent election results, welp, if majority of Ukrainians regretted the pro-western turn, they could have voted in the pro-Russia party again. They didn't, not even close, the pro-Russian president candidate didn't even get to second round. In conclusion, either it's not nearly as bad as you picture it, or if it is, Ukrainians themselves still consider that worth it.
So, lets check that with the facts:

So facts are, economically at least, its not "orders of magnitude worse than they already were", the reality is that they were in stagnation since the 2008 crisis, the Euromaidan, war, and breaking off ties with Russia merely took few percent off their GDP, and they have recovered that since then.
In terms of HDI rather than pure economics, in fact it seems Ukraine is slightly better off.

Ukraine Human development - data, chart | TheGlobalEconomy.com

Ukraine: Human Development Index (0 - 1): For that indicator, we provide data for Ukraine from 1990 to 2021. The average value for Ukraine during that period was 0.713 points with a minimum of 0.661 points in 1996 and a maximum of 0.779 points in 2020. The latest value from 2021 is 0.773 points...

www.theglobaleconomy.com

So no, Ukraine definitely is not a Syria style scenario.

I was more talking about the effects of the current government's abuses of power, and the ongoing civil war, on the people's day to day lives than their economy; and in any event, a country's GPD per capita isn't exactly the most reliable metric (as anyone familiar with China's economic situation can attest). I can't prove that it's a fabrication, as it's admittedly not something I've looked into that deeply; but I've sure as heck learned not to trust such things at face value.

Also, arguing that they could have simply voted out the western-aligned revolutionaries ignores both their liberal use of violence to suppress criticism and dissent since taking power (meaning anyone caught voting against them had reason to fear for their lives), as well as the fact that the Crimea and Donbass regions (traditionally the political strongholds for pro-Russia sentiment) weren't allowed to vote in said elections; granted, for obvious reasons.

 

[Marduk]

I was more talking about the effects of the current government's abuses of power,

Umm...
So how are they so much worse than the previous government's abuses of power?
Seems to me like they are within the norm as far as Ukraine goes.

and the ongoing civil war, on the people's day to day lives than their economy; and in any event, a country's GPD per capita isn't exactly the most reliable metric (as anyone familiar with China's economic situation can attest). I can't prove that it's a fabrication, as it's admittedly not something I've looked into that deeply; but I've sure as heck learned not to trust such things at face value.

That's why i've also brought up HDI, which looks better than the economics alone.
The separatists and people supporting them have made their bed, its hard to blame the other side for the fact that now they have to sleep under the rule of Russia backed warlords.

Also, arguing that they could have simply voted out the western-aligned revolutionaries ignores both their liberal use of violence to suppress criticism and dissent since taking power (meaning anyone caught voting against them had reason to fear for their lives),

So how many people were disappeared, how many people shot at? About 12% of people did vote for them, and they could campaign.
Where are the victims?
You are just assuming things happened, why aren't we hearing of anything like it?
Its Ukraine, not some kind of pro-western North Korea, it has jack shit in terms of information control, something would have leaked.

as well as the fact that the Crimea and Donbass regions (traditionally the political strongholds for pro-Russia sentiment) weren't allowed to vote in said elections; granted, for obvious reasons.

Well they aren't controlled by the government in question regardless, so they are kinda out of the equation.
Funny enough, it doesn't seem like the rest of Ukraine is jealous of the government they are having.

 

[Captain X]

I don't care what excuses anyone comes up with, I'll never be cool with just handing Russia another country. It all comes off as apologism for Russian imperialism.

 

[Zachowon]

I don't care what excuses anyone comes up with, I'll never be cool with just handing Russia another country. It all comes off as apologism for Russian imperialism.

Agreed.
"BUT WESTERN AGRESSION CAUSED THEM TOO RESIST RUSSIA!"
And? It wasn't western aggression. Ot was the people tired of Russian puppetry

 

[WolfBear]

Umm, that's a huge assumption. It couldn't be nearly that bad, considering Ukraine's most recent election results, welp, if majority of Ukrainians regretted the pro-western turn, they could have voted in the pro-Russia party again. They didn't, not even close, the pro-Russian president candidate didn't even get to second round. In conclusion, either it's not nearly as bad as you picture it, or if it is, Ukrainians themselves still consider that worth it.
So, lets check that with the facts:

So facts are, economically at least, its not "orders of magnitude worse than they already were", the reality is that they were in stagnation since the 2008 crisis, the Euromaidan, war, and breaking off ties with Russia merely took few percent off their GDP, and they have recovered that since then.
In terms of HDI rather than pure economics, in fact it seems Ukraine is slightly better off.

Ukraine Human development - data, chart | TheGlobalEconomy.com

Ukraine: Human Development Index (0 - 1): For that indicator, we provide data for Ukraine from 1990 to 2021. The average value for Ukraine during that period was 0.713 points with a minimum of 0.661 points in 1996 and a maximum of 0.779 points in 2020. The latest value from 2021 is 0.773 points...

www.theglobaleconomy.com

So no, Ukraine definitely is not a Syria style scenario.

Probably. But lets not forget that the Donbass separatists were tools for Russia. Russia doesn't care that much about getting a small piece of Ukraine and its population, its way more interested in the whole thing. The plan A was to get Ukraine into Russia mediated negotiations with the separatists, which in turn would be guided to make Ukraine give certain autonomy to the regions, alongside other perks promises in international policy
that would include Russia's main objective of being stuck having close relations with Russia no matter the cost, and in turn limited relations with the west. Probably also "funny" election business in the newly autonomous regions. Basically the separatist regions and threat of civil war they pose would be used as a handle to control whole Ukraine with.

But the other side didn't cooperate with the plan and instead let Russia to do its worst, and turn the place into effectively unrecognized states with semi-formal Russian support.
Now the handle is kinda detached from the object it was supposed to be used for handling. Still, it has some of the benefits it was supposed to have - having a semi-frozen conflict like that considerably complicates Ukraine's perspectives for EU and NATO membership.
And that's the plan B. Which also shows the priorities in what Russia really cares about regarding Ukraine. Hint: Ukrainian's well being is not very high on that list.

But why should they? It would be completely unreasonable realpolitik wise. Why should EU and USA bail out Russia's cronies? Are they meme Sweden or what? Russia is a big country, it can bail out its own cronies, satraps and buddies if it wants to. EU and USA meanwhile can stick to bailing out their own, they sure do plenty of that.

AFAIK, most of Ukraine's post-2014 economic decline occurred in the Donbass due to the war there. The rest of Ukraine quickly recovered from the shock of 2014-2015.

As for voting in pro-Russian candidates, it's hard to do when Ukraine lost Crimea and most of the Donbass. With Ukraine's current de facto borders, even Yanukovych would have lost in 2010, which was a very good year for him.

Also, there is no way in Hell that Ukraine will ever actually agree to give the Donbass veto power over EU and NATO membership. That's a level of federalization that's way too high for Ukraine to ever accept. This would be like giving a US state veto power over joining an economic union and/or military alliance. Not going to happen. Better to just let the Donbass go, if necessary, permanently and for good, as painful as this might be.

 

[Terthna]

Umm...
So how are they so much worse than the previous government's abuses of power?
Seems to me like they are within the norm as far as Ukraine goes.

That's why i've also brought up HDI, which looks better than the economics alone.
The separatists and people supporting them have made their bed, its hard to blame the other side for the fact that now they have to sleep under the rule of Russia backed warlords.

So how many people were disappeared, how many people shot at? About 12% of people did vote for them, and they could campaign.
Where are the victims?
You are just assuming things happened, why aren't we hearing of anything like it?
Its Ukraine, not some kind of pro-western North Korea, it has jack shit in terms of information control, something would have leaked.

Well they aren't controlled by the government in question regardless, so they are kinda out of the equation.
Funny enough, it doesn't seem like the rest of Ukraine is jealous of the government they are having.

Well there was that rash of "suicides" that occurred after the coup, as well as the embezzlement of government funds, and roving gangs of extremists groups attacking people. You simply don't hear about a lot of it; both because nobody really cares about what happens in Ukraine, and because it would make Russia look good. Although you do make a fair point; Ukraine before the coup wasn't exactly a great place to live either. I just don't think you can make the argument that they're better off now.

Also, western Ukraine may not be "jealous" of eastern Ukraine's government, but they aren't exactly happy with the one they do have either; seeing as current president Volodymyr Zelensky's approval rating dipped below 30% in October.

I don't care what excuses anyone comes up with, I'll never be cool with just handing Russia another country. It all comes off as apologism for Russian imperialism.

It's not imperialism to be worried about your enemy encroaching on your border, and I doubt you're going to try and argue that we're not Russia's enemy. We'd be doing the same thing if they backed a coup in Mexico, or Canada.

 

[Captain X]

You're completely ignoring the history between Russia and Ukraine, not to mention Russia's more recent history in apparently trying to recapture the states the dissolving Soviet Union released to try to relive those old "glory days."

Again, I will accept no excuse for allowing Russia to just roll in and take over another country.

 

[WolfBear]

It's not imperialism to be worried about your enemy encroaching on your border, and I doubt you're going to try and argue that we're not Russia's enemy. We'd be doing the same thing if they backed a coup in Mexico, or Canada.

Well, we tolerated Castro's regime in Cuba for decades so long as he didn't have nuclear missiles in there. We were willing to let him keep his alliance with the Soviet Union.

 

[WolfBear]

You're completely ignoring the history between Russia and Ukraine, not to mention Russia's more recent history in apparently trying to recapture the states the dissolving Soviet Union released to try to relive those old "glory days."

Again, I will accept no excuse for allowing Russia to just roll in and take over another country.

Well, Yeah, the problem is that before Euromaidan, Russia engaged in economic coercion in an attempt to get Ukraine to remain in its orbit. While the EU could have also been more sensitive to Ukrainian concerns, it's worth noting that Yanukovych didn't bring up the $160 billion figure until the very end, which could have legitimately given the EU the impression that Yanukovych simply wants more EU money so that he can steal it. Ukraine is a very corrupt country, after all.

 

[WolfBear]

Interesting fact: Even in 2016, some parts of Ukraine, especially in its center and west, experienced a construction boom, which suggests that even back then things weren't completely bad there:

The Ukrainian economy is not terrible everywhere

Free exchange

www.economist.com

As for Zelensky, at least he can get voted out in the next Ukrainian presidential election.