Russia & Ukraine

[budwom]

This story asks lots more questions than it answers. The biggest one is why the almost wholesale attempt (or success?) to reveal the hypersonic missile secrets to foreign powers. Was it just to China for money? Was it to Western countries as a protest against the Ukraine invasion? Or is this just a sign of Putin's paranoia, who like Stalin, is seeing disloyalty behind every bush?

If it had been just one person selling secrets, I could believe a financial motivation, but three members of the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics (conveniently in Siberia, I'm sure right next to a gulag) apparently working together seems to be something more complicated. I wonder what it was? The Hunt for Red October has been on TV a lot lately, and I confess that watching it is a guilty pleasure. Do you suppose that these three scientists were trying to defect with a top Russian military secret to avoid a world war?

Just one ping please...

I agree, it's a fascinating story with few answers...however they got there, however, having ended up on Vlad's bad side is not going to be enjoyable. One other obvious question is why the Russians are publicizing this...to have Vlad's pet project befouled with allegations of treason can't be a happy story for him. We'll have to stay tuned.

[Acymetric]

One other obvious question is why the Russians are publicizing this...to have Vlad's pet project befouled with allegations of treason can't be a happy story for him. We'll have to stay tuned.

Got to scare other would be conspirators straight. A way of saying "you're not as slick as you think you are, we will get you too."

That's one plausible explanation anyway.

[PackMan97]

Since this thread previously condemned Russian attacks on civilian areas, I found this interesting - though not surprising in the least. Link

...to which Ukraine has vehemently denied doing anything such thing with the purpose of using civilians as human shields, as if that would matter to Russia. Russia has shown they clearly don't care about attacking civilian targets even when there is no military within miles. (see the shopping mall strike in Kremenchuk, hundreds of miles from the front). The truth is Ukraine is going to set their lines and bases where it is most expedient and strategic to set them to defeat Russia. Something tells me if they set up in a school, school is canceled. If they take up residence in a hospital, the regular patients have long since left. If they are digging trenches in the neighborhood, they've told the residents to leave.

From what I've seen of the report, it exists to merely provide cover and narrative to Russia's talking points.

[dudog84]

...to which Ukraine has vehemently denied doing anything such thing with the purpose of using civilians as human shields, as if that would matter to Russia. Russia has shown they clearly don't care about attacking civilian targets even when there is no military within miles. (see the shopping mall strike in Kremenchuk, hundreds of miles from the front). The truth is Ukraine is going to set their lines and bases where it is most expedient and strategic to set them to defeat Russia. Something tells me if they set up in a school, school is canceled. If they take up residence in a hospital, the regular patients have long since left. If they are digging trenches in the neighborhood, they've told the residents to leave.

From what I've seen of the report, it exists to merely provide cover and narrative to Russia's talking points.

Now now. We must appease the aggressor.

Well, at least some must.

[Acymetric]

...to which Ukraine has vehemently denied doing anything such thing with the purpose of using civilians as human shields, as if that would matter to Russia. Russia has shown they clearly don't care about attacking civilian targets even when there is no military within miles. (see the shopping mall strike in Kremenchuk, hundreds of miles from the front). The truth is Ukraine is going to set their lines and bases where it is most expedient and strategic to set them to defeat Russia. Something tells me if they set up in a school, school is canceled. If they take up residence in a hospital, the regular patients have long since left. If they are digging trenches in the neighborhood, they've told the residents to leave.

From what I've seen of the report, it exists to merely provide cover and narrative to Russia's talking points.

Here is one interview from NPR, just for the sake of providing some perspective on the Amnesty report that was described previously. I am not qualified to judge the merits here (or at least I don't feel I have enough information yet) but worth considering for a balanced perspective on the contents of the report.

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/06/11161...nian-war-crime

ESTRIN: So if what the Amnesty researchers documented is true, as you say, what is the criticism against the report?

HAYDA: Yeah, so the criticism mostly comes down to what the report doesn't say as opposed to what it does say. The report implies that Ukraine may be committing war crimes and says that soldiers actions might be interpreted as using civilians as human shields. So I talked to the report's author, Donatella Rivera, who's very well known in this area of human rights research. And she said that being in schools and hospitals isn't strictly against international law. And so critics are asking, who gets to determine what is or isn't within the bounds of international law? How far do soldiers need to be away from civilians, especially in cases of defensive urban warfare, to be within the bounds of legal warfare? It's just too ambiguous.

[Ultrarunner]

...to which Ukraine has vehemently denied doing anything such thing with the purpose of using civilians as human shields, as if that would matter to Russia. Russia has shown they clearly don't care about attacking civilian targets even when there is no military within miles. (see the shopping mall strike in Kremenchuk, hundreds of miles from the front). The truth is Ukraine is going to set their lines and bases where it is most expedient and strategic to set them to defeat Russia. Something tells me if they set up in a school, school is canceled. If they take up residence in a hospital, the regular patients have long since left. If they are digging trenches in the neighborhood, they've told the residents to leave.

From what I've seen of the report, it exists to merely provide cover and narrative to Russia's talking points.

I sincerely doubt that Amnesty is a Russian/Putin stooge. If you have evidence to the otherwise, I'd appreciate a link.

The report pointed out that on specific occasions, the Ukrainians had emplacements in civilian populated areas, in direct disagreement with the published statements of the Ukraine officials. As for Ukraine evacuating civilians, the report suggests otherwise.

The report did not absolve the Russians of attacking civilian targets. Indeed, specific findings within the report show the Russians using munitions such as cluster bombs that are widely banned in an area that those munitions would clearly injure and kill non-combatants.

Both nations are engaged in active propaganda wars. Putting your faith in the propaganda statements an authoritarian kleptocracy such as Ukraine seems . . . unsound. It would be like taking the word of the Russians, another authoritarian kleptocracy, as gospel.

The Amnesty report sheds a little light that penetrates the 'fog of war'. I trust them far more than any of the statements of various governments - our own included.

My principle concern with the conflict has little to do with either nation as I see this as a falling out among thieves. I am much more concerned about the impact that the war is having on a looming famine that will probably kill far more people, especially children, than the combined losses from Ukraine and Russia.

Supporting links for my contention for the corruption in Ukraine.
Welcome to Ukraine, the most corrupt nation in Europe
In Ukraine, Corruption Is Now Undermining the Military
Ukraine’s Unyielding Corruption
Ukraine: Zelensky Suspends 11 Left-Wing Political Parties

[Skydog]

I sincerely doubt that Amnesty is a Russian/Putin stooge. If you have evidence to the otherwise, I'd appreciate a link.

The report pointed out that on specific occasions, the Ukrainians had emplacements in civilian populated areas, in direct disagreement with the published statements of the Ukraine officials. As for Ukraine evacuating civilians, the report suggests otherwise.

The report did not absolve the Russians of attacking civilian targets. Indeed, specific findings within the report show the Russians using munitions such as cluster bombs that are widely banned in an area that those munitions would clearly injure and kill non-combatants.

Both nations are engaged in active propaganda wars. Putting your faith in the propaganda statements an authoritarian kleptocracy such as Ukraine seems . . . unsound. It would be like taking the word of the Russians, another authoritarian kleptocracy, as gospel.

The Amnesty report sheds a little light that penetrates the 'fog of war'. I trust them far more than any of the statements of various governments - our own included.

My principle concern with the conflict has little to do with either nation as I see this as a falling out among thieves. I am much more concerned about the impact that the war is having on a looming famine that will probably kill far more people, especially children, than the combined losses from Ukraine and Russia.

Supporting links for my contention for the corruption in Ukraine.
Welcome to Ukraine, the most corrupt nation in Europe
In Ukraine, Corruption Is Now Undermining the Military
Ukraine’s Unyielding Corruption
Ukraine: Zelensky Suspends 11 Left-Wing Political Parties

Interesting. I read a couple of these articles (the first and the last). Ukraine, like Russia, clearly has a major problem with corruption in the day to day process of trying to do business. IOW you can't get anything done in either country without bribing people along the way. Once these internal corruption systems get entrenched they are almost impossible to clean up - too many in power with vested interests. And these bribe driven economies are inefficient as hell. They slow GDP growth and, of course, penalize the poor.

Political corruption however is a somewhat different animal. Someone in power rigging elections to stay in power, betraying their country by making side deals with the enemy for profit, etc. are a 1000 times worse than the palm greasing problems. The article I read about Zlensky suspending the "left wing parties" implied that was what he was doing but it was far from convincing. It says that Zelensky accused the parties of being "pro-Russian." The quotation marks are from the article and imply that Zelensky calling them Russian allies is dishonest. Then the article points out that the only significant sized banned party was the Opposition Platform for Life, which had 44 seats in the 450 member parliament. The article then states:

The Opposition Platform for Life, Ukraine’s biggest opposition party, is led by Viktor Medvedchuk, a pro-Moscow oligarch with close ties to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Party officials later said the suspension “had no legal basis”.
The Ukrainian authorities last year charged Medvedchuk, a longtime ally of Putin who is believed to be the godfather of Medvedchuk’s daughter, with treason and placed the oligarch under house arrest, a move that angered the Kremlin.
Ukraine said Medvedchuk escaped house arrest three days after Russia started its invasion of Ukraine on 24 February and his whereabouts are currently unknown.

Huh? Zelensky, trying to defend his country from at military takeover by Russia, is being labeled as "corrupt" for suspending a party that according to the author himself is led by an escaped pro-Moscow oligarch who chose Putin to be his daughter's godfather?? How is that corruption? I'm guessing approximately 100% of nations at war have clamped down on enemy sympathizers during wartime. Hell the US put Japanese Americans in internment camps just for their nationality in WWII. A horrible decision by the US? Definitely. Corruption? Not at all.

The author goes on to say:

"Of course where Viktor Medvedchuk, a pro-Moscow Zelensky is pro-Washington while Ukrainian people suffer in a proxy war pushed by two outside corrupt superpowers."

So he's saying the "corrupt" US is somehow responsible for the invasion by Russia? The author further shows his stripes:

"Ukraine has suffered under the influence of both East and West. In 2014 after saying NO to joining both the EU and NATO an action that brought about the Euromaidan protests when deadly clashes between protesters and the security forces in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv culminated in the ousting of elected President Viktor Yanukovych and the overthrow of the Ukrainian government.
The regime change brought in a Pro-Washington government and 8 years of civil war.
As always the people suffer while old men play their ‘cold war games’ getting rich on the slaughter of innocents while pretending it’s all in the name of democracy."

So apparently both the "Ukrainian civil war" and the Russian invasion are all the fault of the pro-democracy stances of the US and Zelensky? Hell, I don't know Ukrainian politics. Zelensky might be a corrupt dictator (doesn't seem to be) but if so this author failed miserably in making the case.

[dudog84]

Interesting. I read a couple of these articles (the first and the last). Ukraine, like Russia, clearly has a major problem with corruption in the day to day process of trying to do business. IOW you can't get anything done in either country without bribing people along the way. Once these internal corruption systems get entrenched they are almost impossible to clean up - too many in power with vested interests. And these bribe driven economies are inefficient as hell. They slow GDP growth and, of course, penalize the poor.

Political corruption however is a somewhat different animal. Someone in power rigging elections to stay in power, betraying their country by making side deals with the enemy for profit, etc. are a 1000 times worse than the palm greasing problems. The article I read about Zlensky suspending the "left wing parties" implied that was what he was doing but it was far from convincing. It says that Zelensky accused the parties of being "pro-Russian." The quotation marks are from the article and imply that Zelensky calling them Russian allies is dishonest. Then the article points out that the only significant sized banned party was the Opposition Platform for Life, which had 44 seats in the 450 member parliament. The article then states:

The Opposition Platform for Life, Ukraine’s biggest opposition party, is led by Viktor Medvedchuk, a pro-Moscow oligarch with close ties to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Party officials later said the suspension “had no legal basis”.
The Ukrainian authorities last year charged Medvedchuk, a longtime ally of Putin who is believed to be the godfather of Medvedchuk’s daughter, with treason and placed the oligarch under house arrest, a move that angered the Kremlin.
Ukraine said Medvedchuk escaped house arrest three days after Russia started its invasion of Ukraine on 24 February and his whereabouts are currently unknown.

Huh? Zelensky, trying to defend his country from at military takeover by Russia, is being labeled as "corrupt" for suspending a party that according to the author himself is led by an escaped pro-Moscow oligarch who chose Putin to be his daughter's godfather?? How is that corruption? I'm guessing approximately 100% of nations at war have clamped down on enemy sympathizers during wartime. Hell the US put Japanese Americans in internment camps just for their nationality in WWII. A horrible decision by the US? Definitely. Corruption? Not at all.

The author goes on to say:

"Of course where Viktor Medvedchuk, a pro-Moscow Zelensky is pro-Washington while Ukrainian people suffer in a proxy war pushed by two outside corrupt superpowers."

So he's saying the "corrupt" US is somehow responsible for the invasion by Russia? The author further shows his stripes:

"Ukraine has suffered under the influence of both East and West. In 2014 after saying NO to joining both the EU and NATO an action that brought about the Euromaidan protests when deadly clashes between protesters and the security forces in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv culminated in the ousting of elected President Viktor Yanukovych and the overthrow of the Ukrainian government.
The regime change brought in a Pro-Washington government and 8 years of civil war.
As always the people suffer while old men play their ‘cold war games’ getting rich on the slaughter of innocents while pretending it’s all in the name of democracy."

So apparently both the "Ukrainian civil war" and the Russian invasion are all the fault of the pro-democracy stances of the US and Zelensky? Hell, I don't know Ukrainian politics. Zelensky might be a corrupt dictator (doesn't seem to be) but if so this author failed miserably in making the case.

Thank you for your service to the board (keeping me from reading this trash).

This war is ENTIRELY Putin's fault. Any consequences arising from it can be laid ENTIRELY at his feet.

[Skydog]

Thank you for your service to the board (keeping me from reading this trash).

This war is ENTIRELY Putin's fault. Any consequences arising from it can be laid ENTIRELY at his feet.

You are welcome. But to be fair the sources cited weren't all trash. The first one, a piece from The Guardian about the rampant internal economic corruption in Ukraine was well sourced and I found it completely credible. It focused on corruption in Ukrainian government health care spending - so much is siphoned off by crooked bureaucrats that doctors have been forced to ask for bribes from patients to be treated. The docs aren't profiting - they are using the bribes to pay for vital hospital medical supplies and equipment.

The fourth article condemning Zelensky was trash from a pro-Communist/Socialist rag called Labour Heartlands.

I just checked out the other two. They were NYT pieces from 2016 and 2018 respectively. (Zelensky took office in May 2019.) The first describes massive corruption in military spending, paralleling the siphoning of health care money. It also describes government attempts to clean up the corruption, a daunting task with some successes and many failures along the way. A lot of the worst actors from 2016 have been rooted out but it's still a major problem.

So bottom line remains same: Internally Ukraine has rampant problems with economic corruption. But there is no evidence in these articles that Zelensky is anything other than what he presents himself to be - an honest but pragmatic pro-Ukraine politician attempting to clean up the mess he's been put in charge of, all while fighting off a superpower.

[Acymetric]

I had a bad experience visiting The The Guardian on a work computer and have cast a leery eye their way ever since (years ago now, but still). Maybe not fair of me but it is what it is.

[Ultrarunner]

Interesting. I read a couple of these articles (the first and the last). Ukraine, like Russia, clearly has a major problem with corruption in the day to day process of trying to do business. IOW you can't get anything done in either country without bribing people along the way. Once these internal corruption systems get entrenched they are almost impossible to clean up - too many in power with vested interests. And these bribe driven economies are inefficient as hell. They slow GDP growth and, of course, penalize the poor.

Political corruption however is a somewhat different animal. Someone in power rigging elections to stay in power, betraying their country by making side deals with the enemy for profit, etc. are a 1000 times worse than the palm greasing problems. The article I read about Zlensky suspending the "left wing parties" implied that was what he was doing but it was far from convincing. It says that Zelensky accused the parties of being "pro-Russian." The quotation marks are from the article and imply that Zelensky calling them Russian allies is dishonest. Then the article points out that the only significant sized banned party was the Opposition Platform for Life, which had 44 seats in the 450 member parliament.

I'll tackle these is separate comments.
1. Thank you for taking time to read the articles. I will note that I intentionally selected the last as the most left-wing I could find. DBR has deleted a news source in another thread in the past and I preferred the commentary attack the argument more than the source.

2. First bolded - your premise here, that unbridled corruption is nearly impossible to clean up - undermines your suggestion that Zelensky somehow managed to to so in less than two years. On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being most likely, how likely do you think this proposition is?

3. Second bolded - This argument reminds me of the three blind men describing an elephant. You'll need to help me out, because, for the life of me, I can't think of a single thoroughly corrupt nation-state that was not also politically corrupt. One of the primary goals in politics in those nations is to keep the gravy train going and, to do that, the pol needs to stay in office and will do whatever it takes to do so. So, what nations, in your opinion, have extremely high levels of corruption which does not infect the political environment?

4. Third bolded - Well, shucks, Zelensky only banned a party with 10 percent of the parliamentary seats. Non-corrupt democracies do this all the time, so no problem. /s We'll have to disagree on this point. Even in wartime, a democracy (representative republic in our case) should not be banning the opposition.


Again, thank you for taking the time to read some of the articles and for the discussion. I think I am probably far more cynical than you.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I'll tackle these is separate comments.
1. Thank you for taking time to read the articles. I will note that I intentionally selected the last as the most left-wing I could find. DBR has deleted a news source in another thread in the past and I preferred the commentary attack the argument more than the source.

2. First bolded - your premise here, that unbridled corruption is nearly impossible to clean up - undermines your suggestion that Zelensky somehow managed to to so in less than two years. On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being most likely, how likely do you think this proposition is?

3. Second bolded - This argument reminds me of the three blind men describing an elephant. You'll need to help me out, because, for the life of me, I can't think of a single thoroughly corrupt nation-state that was not also politically corrupt. One of the primary goals in politics in those nations is to keep the gravy train going and, to do that, the pol needs to stay in office and will do whatever it takes to do so. So, what nations, in your opinion, have extremely high levels of corruption which does not infect the political environment?

4. Third bolded - Well, shucks, Zelensky only banned a party with 10 percent of the parliamentary seats. Non-corrupt democracies do this all the time, so no problem. /s We'll have to disagree on this point. Even in wartime, a democracy (representative republic in our case) should not be banning the opposition.


Again, thank you for taking the time to read some of the articles and for the discussion. I think I am probably far more cynical than you.

Apologies I haven't caught up on this thread recently. I'm wondering what the relevance is of arguing whether Ukraine is/was a corrupt country?

[TrickDribbles99]

Apologies I haven't caught up on this thread recently. I'm wondering what the relevance is of arguing whether Ukraine is/was a corrupt country?

Likely related to the numerous high-end weapon systems and straight cash that have been sent into that country without any oversight or means of tracking their whereabouts.

[Skydog]

I'll tackle these is separate comments.
1. Thank you for taking time to read the articles. I will note that I intentionally selected the last as the most left-wing I could find. DBR has deleted a news source in another thread in the past and I preferred the commentary attack the argument more than the source.

2. First bolded - your premise here, that unbridled corruption is nearly impossible to clean up - undermines your suggestion that Zelensky somehow managed to to so in less than two years. On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being most likely, how likely do you think this proposition is?

3. Second bolded - This argument reminds me of the three blind men describing an elephant. You'll need to help me out, because, for the life of me, I can't think of a single thoroughly corrupt nation-state that was not also politically corrupt. One of the primary goals in politics in those nations is to keep the gravy train going and, to do that, the pol needs to stay in office and will do whatever it takes to do so. So, what nations, in your opinion, have extremely high levels of corruption which does not infect the political environment?

4. Third bolded - Well, shucks, Zelensky only banned a party with 10 percent of the parliamentary seats. Non-corrupt democracies do this all the time, so no problem. /s We'll have to disagree on this point. Even in wartime, a democracy (representative republic in our case) should not be banning the opposition.


Again, thank you for taking the time to read some of the articles and for the discussion. I think I am probably far more cynical than you.

1. I did attack the argument in the commie blog. I said that in wartime it is reasonable for a leader to root out known enemy sympathizers in the government.
2. Where did I claim Z cleaned up all the corruption in Ukraine? He's trying but its been baby steps. Ukraine is still a democracy with a massive problem with economic corruption. Think Mexico.
3. I wasn't clear. Yes the economic corruption extends into politicians getting their hands greased. I was trying to say that was a different kind of corruption than say a Pinochet, Franco or Belarus's Lukashenko. Those leaders weren't trying to clean up politics, they weren't pro-democracy. Much of Ukraines leadership, including it's President, is pro-democracy (see complaint by commie rag). This isn't a country we should just give up on, no more than Mexico is.
4. Democracies do suspend rights of people who openly support the enemy in the middle of a war. In peacetime, freedom of speech in paramount.

My whole argument is that Ukraine is worth saving. It isn't perfect but it is a democracy that isn't attacking anyone, but is being attacked by a superpower governed by a cruel dictator with unbridled expansionist dreams. It is very easy for me to pick sides.

[Skydog]

I had a bad experience visiting The The Guardian on a work computer and have cast a leery eye their way ever since (years ago now, but still). Maybe not fair of me but it is what it is.

I don't know how trustworthy The Guardian is. Maybe a Brit can chime in here. My assessment was more about the article itself. It was well sourced and I seemed credible.

[PackMan97]

My whole argument is that Ukraine is worth saving. It isn't perfect but it is a democracy that isn't attacking anyone, but is being attacked by a superpower governed by a cruel dictator with unbridled expansionist dreams. It is very easy for me to pick sides.

Bingo. Just as Kuwait, Israel, South Korea, Taiwan and any number of other countries that are in part existing because of American military might. None of them are perfect, America certainly isn't.

[Acymetric]

I don't know how trustworthy The Guardian is. Maybe a Brit can chime in here. My assessment was more about the article itself. It was well sourced and I seemed credible.

Sorry, that was meant to be an amusing (and true) anecdote more than a serious commentary, although I haven't been back to the site since so there is that.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Likely related to the numerous high-end weapon systems and straight cash that have been sent into that country without any oversight or means of tracking their whereabouts.

Fair, I suppose. But no one can argue that they are the victim of a transparently aggressive attack and fighting for their existence.

[Acymetric]

Fair, I suppose. But no one can argue that they are the victim of a transparently aggressive attack and fighting for their existence.

Also worth remembering that Russia's ultimate goal is to..."integrate" Ukrainians with Russia (Ukrainians are a distinct ethnicity with a distinct language and history, if there is anyone who has not caught on to that yet). By no means a foregone conclusion and I have no "inside" info on international warfare obviously but it would not be unreasonable to predict that in a conquered Ukraine speaking Ukrainian would become illegal.

Think we have some words for that kind of thing, no? Generally we like to take the opposing side. Parsing out whether a descendant of the U.S.S.R. sharing a boarder with one of the most dangerous and corrupt countries in the world is itself more corrupt than we would like (shocking given the history, surely) is not a meaningless or useless conversation in a vacuum, but it is 100% a non sequitur in the conversation about the Russian invasion, full-stop. I have so much more to say on this but it probably veers out of bounds so this is probably sufficient but if you are deeply worried about corruption and bribery I would encourage folks to stop worrying about Ukraine and focus your attention more locally.

Edit: Any references to "you" are the generic you to be clear, this disclaimer was easier than trying to modify the post and retain the meaning but didn't want there to be any confusion

[Furniture]

I don't know how trustworthy The Guardian is. Maybe a Brit can chime in here. My assessment was more about the article itself. It was well sourced and I seemed credible.

The Guardian should be fairly trustworthy. Don’t trust rags like The Sun or The Daily Mail/Mirror…

https://pressgazette.co.uk/trust-in-news-uk/