Comments by "R Johansen" (@rjohansen9486) on "Putin's Black Sea Threat 'Terrifies' NATO; Bloc Scales Naval Security Fearing Russian Attacks" video.
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 The Minsk agreements did not address the root cause of the conflict. It was stipulated, so to speak, that there was or had been some kind of ethnic conflict between Russians and Ukrainians in Ukraine, and that this was the reason for the outbreak of violence. And by settling this alleged ethnic conflict, the conflict could be pacified.
THIS WAS PURE FICTION. The ethnic conflicts that existed in Ukraine were no more serious than ethnic tensions in many other countries. Moreover, the dividing lines in this conflict, if one insists on understanding them in ethnic terms, are incredibly blurred. This is not about the Russian versus the Ukrainian language or Ukrainian versus Russian national identity.
Nor is it about religion, not even in the slightest. At most, one could find something like an eastern Ukrainian Donbas identity. But this regional identity of the Donbas is not much stronger than strong regional identities in other countries. What this conflict is fundamentally about is RUSSIA WANTING TO EXERT INFLUENCE OVER THE DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN POLICY ORIENTATION OF THE GOVERNMENT IN KYIV.
In the Minsk agreement, however, this fiction of an ethnic conflict was constructed instead, although Russia actually had no particular interest in obtaining any autonomy rights for eastern Ukraine, for Russian-speaking or ethnically Russian Ukrainian citizens. Russia was not really interested in these issues, but Ukraine was not at all eager to grant such rights either, for fear of a supposed fifth column.
However, Moscow was not only concerned with what was happening in the Donbas, but above all with what was happening in Kyiv. The Ukraine conflict is about the orientation of Ukraine, pure and simple. But the Minsk agreement addresses completely different issues. That’s why the process didn’t work.
Moreover, a major blockage has been Russia's insistence that it is not a party to the conflict and therefore is not bound by its terms. Point 10, for example, calls for the withdrawal of all foreign armed formations and military equipment from the two disputed regions, Donetsk and Luhansk: Ukraine says this refers to forces from Russia, but Moscow denies it has any forces there. (Later Putin admitted there were Russian forces.)
4
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 A statement signed by more than 300 historians who study genocide, Nazism and World War II said Putin’s rhetoric about de-Nazifying fascists among Ukraine’s elected leadership is “propaganda.” “We strongly reject the Russian government’s cynical abuse of the term genocide, the memory of World War II and the Holocaust, and the equation of the Ukrainian state with the Nazi regime to justify its unprovoked aggression,” the statement says.
“This rhetoric is factually wrong, morally repugnant and deeply offensive to the memory of millions of victims of Nazism and those who courageously fought against it, including Russian and Ukrainian soldiers of the Red Army. “Neo-Nazi, far right and xenophobic groups do exist in Ukraine, like in pretty much any other country, including Russia,” Finkel said. “They are vocal and can be prone to violence but they are numerically small, marginal and their political influence at the state level is non-existent. That is not to say that Ukraine doesn’t have a far-right problem. It does. But I would consider neo-Nazi groups IN RUSSIA A MUCH BIGGER problem and threat than the Ukrainian far right.”
3
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 Ever since the early years of his reign, Putin has made no secret of his bitterness over the Soviet collapse, which he has always viewed as a Russian defeat.
In 2005, when he famously referred to the disintegration of the USSR as “the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” he stressed that it was a tragedy for “the Russian people” and the millions of Russians who suddenly found themselves living beyond Russia’s borders in newly independent countries such as Ukraine. Putin went even further in 2021, lamenting the fall of the USSR as “the collapse of historical Russia under the name of the Soviet Union.” In other words, he regards the entire Soviet era as a continuation of the Czarist Russian Empire, and sees the settlement of 1991 as anything but final.
Putin’s sense of historical injustice has led to an unhealthy obsession with Ukraine, which he insists is an inherent part of historical Russia that has been subjected to artificial separation. He is fond of claiming that Ukrainians are in fact Russians (“one people”), and took the unusual but revealing step in July 2021 of publishing a lengthy essay arguing against the legitimacy of Ukrainian statehood. This fixation has been further fueled by fears that the emergence of a democratic Ukraine could serve as a catalyst for similar changes inside Russia itself.
Putin remains haunted by the pro-democracy uprisings that swept Central Europe in the late 1980s while he was a young KGB officer in East Germany, and views modern Ukraine’s embrace of democracy as a direct threat to his own authoritarian regime. It is no coincidence that in the buildup to last year’s invasion, Putin began referring to Ukraine as an intolerable “anti-Russia.”
Over the past 13 months of full-scale war, Putin’s imperial objectives in Ukraine have become increasingly evident. He has compared his invasion to the eighteenth century imperial conquests of Russian Czar Peter the Great, and has repeatedly spoken of returning historical Russian lands while attempting to annex four partially occupied Ukrainian regions representing almost 20% of the war-torn country. Meanwhile, his army has imposed brutal policies of russification throughout occupied Ukraine, complete with summary executions, forced deportations, the suppression of Ukrainian national symbols, and widespread use of torture against anyone deemed a potential opponent of Russian rule.
3
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 Feb -14 “coup”: It already started in nov -13.
First there was an attempted coup by the russians. They put pressure on president Yanukovych to not sign an already negotiated political association and free trade deal with EU. When people heard about this scam, they gathered in the streets. Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of Russians and oligarchs, police brutality, and human rights violations. Ressive anti-protest laws fuelled further anger.
In January and February 2014 further protests resulted in the government’s resignation. On 21 February, Yanukovych and the parliamentary opposition signed an agreement to bring about an interim unity government, constitutional reforms and early elections. The next day, 22 February, the Ukrainian parliament voted to remove Yanukovych from office by 328 to 0. Russia then occupied and annexed Crimea, with “little green men” (Russian masked soldiers). More “little green men” together with Russian armed pro-Russian separatists seized government buildings and proclaimed the independent states of Donetsk and Luhansk, sparking the Donbas war.
The Russian Federation initially denied that these were Russian military forces, but in April 2014 Vladimir Putin finally confirmed the presence of the Russian military. Alexander Borodai, Prime Minister of the self-declared Donetsk People's Republic, stated that 50,000 RUSSIAN citizens fought in the Donbas up to August 2015.
1
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 THERE WAS NO GENOCIDE IN DONBAS.
From Iranian press: Vladimir Putin regularly drone on about the alleged “genocide of the Donbas population”. Today, this myth sits at the core of the Kremlin’s propaganda. Putin has used this myth to justify Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. " Its goal is to protect people who have been subjected to abuse and genocide by the Kyiv regime for eight years” Putin said in his address announcing the war. Both Ukraine and the occupied Donbas territories have suffered casualties because of the HOSTILITIES THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION has been conducting there since 2014. But Russia has insisted for these eight years and tried to convince the world that the actions of Ukraine’s Armed Forces in Donbas “are aimed at destroying the population of Donbas” and are not a struggle for Ukraine’s territorial integrity.
And despite the UNTRUTHFULNESS of the argument, Russia’s propaganda machine has nevertheless managed to convince the Russian audience of this, that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is “an act of retaliation for Donbas”.
As it happens, official United Nations data suggests that the 14,000 casualty figure that Putin has used does not only refer to civilians. During Russia’s 2014-2021 military operations against Ukraine, 14,500 people died in the Donbas war. Of that 14,000, 3,404 were civilians, 4,400 were Ukrainian servicemen and 6,500 were Russian militants.
The figure Putin operates with, is the total number of casualties incurred in the Donbas war by both sides. The Russian Federation both armed the separatists and sendt unmarked soldiers. Russia initially denied that there were Russian military forces in Donbas, but on 17 April 2014 Vladimir Putin finally confirmed the presence of the Russian military. Alexander Borodai, Prime Minister of the self-declared Donetsk People's Republic, stated that 50,000 RUSSIAN citizens fought in the Donbas up to August 2015.
THESE SOLDIERS are the ones that the Ukraninan government fought against, NOT “shelling of innocents in Donbass”, which Russian propaganda will tell you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 Russia’s Lie Machine Fans Flames of Odessa ‘Massacre’
Most of the propaganda themes used by Russia to try to justify its invasion of Crimea and aggression in eastern Ukraine dated back at least as far as the 2004 “Orange Revolution.” They took on a whole new dimension following the Euromaidan revolution of 2013-14, reaching a level so extraordinary that the head of one state TV channel reportedly said that they made Cold War disinformation look like “child’s play”.
Portrayals of the new government in Kyiv as a “fascist junta”, supported by anti-Semitic hordes and waging genocide against Russian-speakers did however hit major obstacles. Prominent Ukrainian Jewish figures took out full-page adverts in several international newspapers to debunk such claims and condemn Russian aggression. On several occasions, Jewish or other ethnic minorities issued public statements dissociating themselves from fake ethnic groups claiming persecution.
There was further incontrovertible evidence that the rampant fascism narrative was nonsense. In May 2014, the two Ukrainian far-Right presidential candidates together received a mere 2% of the popular vote. While there are certainly far-Right groups in Ukraine, and the authorities often fail to respond adequately to racist or homophobic attacks, the scale of the problem remains small.
Despite this, any report about the far-Right or anti-Semitism in Ukraine is far more likely to hit the headlines than stories about similar trends in Russia, or about Russia’s extensive links with far-Right groups in European countries. The problem is, however, that most people have no idea that they are being deceived and would simply not think to verify the information they receive if they watch Russia’s state-funded RT (formerly Russia Today), assuming this to be a Russian version of the BBC or Deutsche Welle.
1
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 Russia's lie machine:
48 people died during disturbances and a terrible fire in Odessa. The flames were still smoldering when Russia first began presenting the conflagration as a massacre by Ukrainian nationalists. This has continued regardless of several investigations, by the bipartisan 2 May Group; the Council of Europe’s International Advisory Panel and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Each has found that the earlier disturbances began when a large group of pro-Russian activists attacked a peaceful march in support of Ukrainian unity. From then on, weapons were used by both sides and six people were killed. Toward evening, pro-Ukrainian activists headed towards Kulikove Pole Square intending to destroy a tent camp set up by pro-Russian activists.
The latter responded with gunfire and Molotov cocktails from the roof and windows of the Trade Union building. All independent reports agree that with Molotov cocktails being thrown both at and from the building, it is impossible to determine the source of the fire which caused the death of 42 pro-Russian activists. Selective coverage was evident from the outset. All Russian video footage treated Ukrainian “radicals” as the perpetrators of the earlier riots. No mention was made of the shooting and Molotov cocktails from inside the building, nor of the pro-Ukrainian activists who risked their safety to rescue people from the building. Russian footage instead showed a pro-Ukrainian activist firing a pistol at the building, failing to note that the man was returning fire coming from the building’s windows and that his pistol contained blanks.
Two years after the Council of Europe’s report, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that, “Ukrainian nationalists drove defenseless people into the Trade Union building and burned them alive”. This knowingly false story has now been peddled around the world, with generously financed exhibitions and carefully selected “witnesses” taken on tours of European countries. It is a story that is known to have cost even more lives, with many of the young men who volunteered to fight for the Kremlin-backed insurgents in eastern Ukraine citing the alleged “Odessa massacre” as a catalyst.
1
-
@PerceivedREALITY999 Ian Garner, a historian and analyst of Russian culture: Russia and President Vladimir Putin are preparing the country's youth to "die for the motherland", believes the Canadian historian and author Ian Garner, who has written a book about what he calls "Russia's fascist youth". -
Russia indoctrinates young people with military games, TikTok videos and influencers. Children and young people who have grown up since 2012, when Putin became president again, are much more ideological and isolated from the world than generations before them When we think of young people, we like to think of the hope of the future and of people who want peace and democracy. But those who do not want war in Russia are fleeing or have fled. They will not die because of ideology, says Garner With Putin as president, everything has become much more ideological, right from childhood.
Young people are almost forced to join the state's youth groups, which are becoming more and more militarized. They are constantly told that everything outside Russia is dangerous and will destroy them. It makes me worried - and scared, says Garner. He points out that teachers and schools are receiving new teaching material where violence and ultra-nationalism become part of everyday school life - that young people who want to do something in their spare time must do so under the auspices of the state. The scope for what you can do as a young person in Russia is narrowing. - That's very smart. Children and young people are getting more and more ideological and military input. Like a Wagner officer telling you that you have an obligation to join the military and make sacrifices so that Russia can be saved from the so-called scary and dangerous world out there, says Garner.
It is especially young people under the age of 19-20 that Garner calls the "Z generation", who are influenced by what he refers to as "fascist ideology". Recruitment is done on TikTok and other social media. According to Garner, the youth army - which has members aged six to 18 - is the most radical group. Now I meet children who are learning the language of hate and war. It makes me sad and scared. The young people are brainwashed into thinking that everyone outside Russia hates them and wants to crush them, he says The Russian state has, according to Garner, created a world where you are either with us, Russia, or against us. There is no room here for homosexuals, oppositionists, pacifists, Ukrainians - or non-Orthodox Christians, according to Garner.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ElectronicaStation1 Yes, that's correct. They also write about that, but the conclusion is this: " .... but I would consider the neo-Nazi groups in Russia a much bigger problem and threat than the Ukrainian far right.”
The far right also gained some traction after popular uprisings in 2013 and 2014 when Ukraine’s pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, suspended an agreement passed by Ukraine’s Parliament to establish closer economic ties to the European Union. After Yanukovych ultimately fled the country, Russian troops invaded and then annexed Crimea and supported Russian separatists who fought against Ukrainian forces in eastern Ukraine.
One of the volunteer paramilitary regiments at the forefront of the battle with Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine was a group called the Azov battalion, which was founded by members of two neo-Nazi groups.
The battalion’s success in 2014 in helping to win back the city of Mariupol from separatists has made them heroes to many in Ukraine, Izabella Tabarovsky of the Wilson Center told us.
“If they [Ukrainian citizens] value them, it is not because of any Nazi ideology,” said Tabarovsky, who manages the Wilson Center’s Russia File and Focus Ukraine blogs. “They value its patriotic stance. They value a group that fights an enemy that thinks their country has no right to exist.”
The Azov battalion, which had about 1,000 members, represents a small minority of the overall Ukrainian military. As the BBC reported, the Ukrainian armed forces number some 250,000 (March 2022)
And some say the ultra-nationalist, neo-Nazi leanings of the Azov regiment have become less prevalent. In 2015, a spokesman for the Azov brigade told USA Today that 10% to 20% of the group’s members are Nazis. The leader of the Azov regiment, Biletsky, has since left to start a political party. And while there are still some far-right ties remaining in the unit, there have also been a flow of new recruits “who mostly are not there because of the regiment’s ideology, but because of its reputation as a particularly tough fighting unit.
1
-
@ElectronicaStation1 Russian claims about neo-Nazi influence in Ukraine did not begin just prior to the invasion of Ukraine this year. Putin and other Russian officials have been characterizing Ukrainians as neo-Nazi fascists since Russia invaded Crimea eight years ago, Tabarovsky (Wilson Center) said.
“There has been an intensive campaign of demonization,” Tabarovsky told us. And, she said, referencing Nazism has “a certain resonance for Putin’s core supporters in Russia” because “there is a national historical memory formed around World War II and the victory over Nazis. It is a strong part of the [Russian] national identity.”
Umland, an expert in Ukrainian nationalism who until recently was based in Kyiv, agreed.
“The primary reason that the Kremlin is doing this is because the defeat of the Nazis is the high point of modern Russian history,” Umland said. “It is a major reference point for the Russian national identity. ‘We secured the victory over Hitler’ — is a principal source of Russian pride.”
Putin’s propaganda cherry-picks the problematic parts of Ukrainian civil society and government, Umland said.
“Far right extremists do exist in Ukraine,” he said. “The Ukrainians are not a nation of angels.” But Russian propaganda “gives the altogether minor Ukrainian right-wing extremist groups a disproportionate political relevance as an allegedly dominant phenomenon. In principle, you can do something like that with any country, make minor problematic aspects look salient and demonize every country of the world.”
“It’s a fairly obvious and rather successful political-psychological trick to justify the war among ordinary Russians,” Umland said.
1
-
@ElectronicaStation1
What has received less coverage than the Ukrainian far right groups, is the Putin regime’s own record of collaboration with far-right extremists. Even as Russian diplomats condemned “fascists” in the Baltic states and Kremlin propagandists railed against imaginary “Ukronazis” in power in Kyiv, the Russian state was cultivating its own homegrown Nazis.
The roots of neo-Nazism in Putin’s Russia:
The origins of this relationship date to the late 1990s, when Russia was shaken by a wave of racist violence committed by neo-Nazi skinhead gangs. After Putin’s accession to the presidency in 2000, his regime exploited this development in two ways.
First, it used the neo-Nazi threat to justify the adoption of anti-extremism legislation, a longstanding demand of some Russian liberals. Ultimately, this legislation would be used to prosecute Russian democrats.
Second, the Kremlin launched “managed nationalism”, an attempt to co-opt and mobilise radical nationalist militants, including neo-Nazis, as a counterweight to an emerging anti-Putin coalition of democrats and leftist radicals.
As part of its preparations to confront a potential democratic uprising in Russia, Nashi enlisted football gang members, whose subculture overlapped with the neo-Nazi underground.
During 2005, Nashi’s thugs staged a series of raids on anti-Putin youth groups. The most violent attack, which left four left-wing activists in hospital, led to the arrest of the assailants. They were released after a visit to the police station from Nikita Ivanov, the Kremlin functionary who supervised the regime’s loyalist youth organisations.
The resulting scandal provoked a reconfiguration of “managed nationalism”. While Nashi distanced itself from football gangs, its radical militants migrated to two rival Kremlin proxies, the nationalist “Young Russia” group and the anti-immigration “Locals” group. These organisations became bridges between the neo-Nazi subculture and the Kremlin.
In 2008-09, the Kremlin was threatened by Russian opposition activist Alexei Navalny’s efforts to build an anti-Putin coalition of democrats and radical nationalists in Russia. In response, the Kremlin began to work with Russkii Obraz (“Russian Image”, or “RO” for short), a hardcore neo-Nazi group best known for its slick journal and its band, Hook from the Right.
With the assistance of Kremlin supervisors, RO attacked nationalists who were abandoning the skinhead subculture for Navalny’s anti-Putin coalition. In return, RO was granted privileged access to public space and the media.
Its leaders held televised public discussions with state functionaries and collaborated openly with Maksim Mishchenko, a member of parliament from the ruling party. Perhaps most shockingly, RO also hosted a concert by the infamous neo-Nazi band Kolovrat in Moscow’s Bolotnaya Square, within earshot of the Kremlin.
The problem for the Kremlin was that RO’s leader, Ilya Goryachev, was a fervent supporter of the neo-Nazi underground, the skinheads who committed hundreds of racist murders in the second half of the 2000s. The authorities turned a blind eye to RO’s production of a two-hour internet “documentary” titled Russian Resistance, which celebrated these killers as patriotic heroes and called for armed struggle against the regime.
And then we have the Wagner group, with several leaders who are known neo-Nazis
I think we can now state that RUSSIA HAS A MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM WITH NAZISM than Ukraine. Also into the corridors of power.
1