Rival protests in Kiev as Ukraine crisis gathers pace

Yushchenko has been masterfully outplayed by Yanuk in nearly every single political battle. It’s hard to know if it’s because he’s a bad leader with terrible instincts, he’s got bad people around him or if it’s because he’s really quite ill — probably a combo of all three.

All his current choices are bad. He can wait until the next elections and idly watch as Yanuk. chips away at his official powers and PoR buys off all his MPs until they get a constitutional majority, or take his chances with new elections.

A likely scenario: PU/OU fails to cross the threshold, he becomes more marginalized and irrelevant, Tymoshenko officially becomes the voice of the opposition (a de facto position she’s held and capitalized effectively on) and the 2009 Presidential election continues to play out. Meanwhile Yushchenko spends the rest of his Presidency abroad in places where people still think he’s a hero.

Oh, yah, and the Russians regain their political foothold in Ukraine.

Hmm, I’m not sure. The Wikipedia site on Ukrainian politics is probably a pretty good starting point.

Anyone else have any ideas?

The Russians never really lost their foothold in Ukraine in the first place.

A bit of a setback yes. However, one can’t easily wish away how many in Ukraine feel towards Russia.

Yushchenko is being ridiculous.

Reference the RFE/RL article in the Ukraine segment of this link:

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@525.kVLEbzlNFtm.1@.77480649/7461

The tragedy of the situation is that the country is being torn apart and there is always a danger of peaceful protests turning into a violent revolution and the only way out of it will be disintegration of Ukraine.

Baba Yaga Kieva

I have never heard this “nickname” for Tymoshenko before. An interesting comparison though.

I suspect that my views on YT mirror Ger’s.

Crimean girl is right. Yulia’s hair has nothing to do with it, and neither does the gas.

Ukraine is at a crossroads and has been since 2004. The decision is whether to lean west and towards democracy. Stay neutral and form independantly. Or lean towards the east, forgo democracy, and embrace Russian style politics.

The first option is my prefered choice as it ensures a future for all my people “as Ukrainians” and not as “little Russians”.

Actually, Ms. T’s hair has a lot to do with things, because it’s symptomatic for her cheap populism. I know plenty of rather proud Ukrainians who do not try to look like cute little peasant girls. That Ukrainians seem to fall for this is sad.

If she were a man, people would not be as gung-ho on her, but she is very deliberately using all the advantages traditional Slavic culture provides women with (without having to bother about the disadvantages).

She’s nothing but yet another oligarch who is trying to secure the levers of politics to retain her ill-gotten gains from the time when her good connections (daddy) allowed her to accumulate them.

The choices are not West+democracy vs. East+”Russian style” politics, but between stability and border-line chaos, at least for the moment.

my two cents.

Bigoted BS repeated.

See the Holodomor issue of this AUR which includes a citation of Quick Takes:

http://action-ukraine-report.blogspot.com/2007/02/aur811-feb-4-anti-sovietchik-no-1-1932.html

Whatever. Russia not responsibe for it.

Actually, the Holodomor is not generally considered a genocide by historians, not even by Robert Conquest.

No, and I said as much. But even if it was not genocide, it is still an episode in history which serves to explain why many Ukrainians may not hold Russians in high regard.

Many Irish still hold the English responsible for their starvation under the British. It is not surprising that many Ukrianians hold the Russians responsible for their starvation under the Soviets, especially considering the famine is still within living memory.

Tim — ok, point taken. Just wanted to set the record straight. I’m very touchy on these issues, so that’s why.

Yes, the Ukrainians are rather bitter about this — but it’s unfair, and it’s a bitterness that is kept artificially awake by interested nationalist circles. Ukrainians, Russian, Kazakhs, etc. etc. suffered under the Soviets — it’s rather unfortunate that some UR nationalists try to present themselves as the main, if not only, victims, and blame it on the ‘Russians’. One could point out that the majority of Bolsheviks were members of ethnic minorities, not ethnic Russians… as if that mattered.

RM is right. The whole of the Soviet Union and its leadership in particular was culpable for the Ukrainian famines. Blaming the Russians for it is just cheap populism that suits nationalist interests in Ukraine. Another factor is that famine perpetuates itself -one bad year can cause several bad subsequent years, because of lack of seeds, labourers and also lack of physical strength and wellbeing amoung the labourers that are left to plant for next year. This is what happened in Ireland. And even in tiny Ireland, the problem was very localised. Balanced Irish people do not blame the English for what happened; certainly they exacerbated the problem but they werent its cause. And funnily enough, it was the famine more than anything which led to the end of the British landowning class in Ireland. After the famine gradually the Irish simply stopped listening to the British and obeying them, our rebels became as vicious as them, and eventually ran them out the door in 1921.
Tim is also right in saying any view coming of Ukraine should be taken with a pinch of salt. And I blame Yushenko for the rise again of Yanukovich – Yushenko had to be the man, courting the US, NATO, Mickey Mouse, everyone but Russia, his nearest neighbour and biggest trade partner. If he’d engaged properly with Russia, with whom half his country have affinity, he’d surely have got a few more deputies into parliament and wouldnt be in this hopeless mess now. Whether the Russophobes like it or not it makes no sense to fall out with your biggest customer.

Its very sad actually Tim. I remember in history class in school the teacher telling us about Ukraine, the ”Breadbasket of Europe”, about its endless golden plains and mountains of grain. Yushenko has, through stupid nationalism and personal pride, crippled Ukraine. He should have been quick to fix relations with Moscow after his election. Instead he sour pussed and further polarised the country. The worst thing is the nonsense of that policy -it makes no sense, no matter what LR or anyone else says – to give two fingers to your biggest punter, irrespective of the rows you’ve had. As for Yanukovich, seemingly he makes George W look like an intellectual. Bravo Yushenko! Never mind, the US will give you a few used pc’s and burly drill sergeants for your faithful policy!) Who needs warmth for your pensioners when you’re welcome in the White House?)

“Many Irish still hold the English responsible for their starvation under the British. It is not surprising that many Ukrianians hold the Russians responsible for their starvation under the Soviets, especially considering the famine is still within living memory.”

***

Not a good analogy. The Brits didn’t suffer during that famine. More Russians died during that period than Ukrainians and Stalin among others in the Soviet leadership weren’t Russian. There were no Ukrainian Communists?

On another point, which hunt for an editor are you talking about?

Heribert — wie kannst Du nur! The Americans would NEVER interfere in other country’s domestic affairs. Tsk tsk tks.

Drei Wochen Doppelzelle mit dubbelju….;)

Ah well, at least i managed the gerecht part.

And there are far too many Virginean Farm Boys (aka “The CIA”) hopping around on the Ukrainian fields ensuring that Ukraine stays polarized.

That Russia is struggling to compete for influence in Ukraine against a handful of Virginian farm boys speaks volumes about how Russia is perceived in Ukraine.

Just to avoid one or two obvious strawmen which might be built here, I am not saying that Russia and only Russia is to blame for what happened in Ukraine (or indeed any other part of the Soviet Union or Eastern Bloc). I am also not saying that Ukraine does not bear some of the responsibility too.

I am saying that Russia bears some, even a lot, or responsibility for what happened in Ukraine; and by saying “Russia” I mean the nation of Russia as a political entity, and not “ethnic Russians bear responsibility”.

I am also not suggesting what Russia should do about it, if anything. I am simply pointing out that the political entity called “Russia” shares responsbility to what happened in the politcal entity named “Ukraine”, and as a result a lot of citizens of the Ukraine are not particularly fond of the polical entity called “Russia”.

Nothing personal Tim. Saw Alexander Cockburn on CSPAN over the weekened. He noted how he likes to engage in the art of direct hard hitting commentary and added that he would be a hypocrite if he couldn’t take what he dishes out.

Without naming names, there’re some rather hypocritical folks out there who follow a half assed route on such matter.

I’m not one of them.

Nonsense analogy. There were no Jewish Nazis. There were plenty of Ukrainian and other non-Russian Communists.

It is not nonsense. The basis for your objection to Ukrainians apportioning some of the blame on Russia for their treatment at the hands of the Soviets is that:

1) more Russians died than Ukrainians,
2) Stalin wasn’t Russian, and
3) many Ukrainians supported the Soviets.

Pointing out that my analogy doesn’t take into account that no Jews were Nazis does nothing to nulify my rebuttal of the first two points, i.e. that by your logic Czech Jews can’t blame Germany because:

1) Germany lost more Jews than Czechoslovakia
2) Hitler wasn’t Austrian.

Which leave us with 3), your assertion that Ukrainians cannot apportion some of the blame to Russia because some Ukrainians collaborated with the Soviets. This takes the view that Ukrainians should all be treated as one amalgomous block, and not as individuals. It is perfectly acceptable for some Ukrainians to dislike Russia for their involvement in the Ukraine regardless of whether other Ukrainians were involved also.

Time, you’re overly presumptuous in a most ignorant manner. In the past couple of months, my commentary has appeared in The Tiraspol Times and Serbianna, in addition to my Siberian Light interview and Sean’s Russia Blog articles. In the SL interview, I note the free web design and customer support offers accorded me.

My apologies. Given that you are such a successful commentator and have no problem getting published across a raft of impressive outlets, can we now expect an end to your rather tedious insistence from you and your fans that you are being silenced and censored?

In your Siberian Light interview, you acknowledged not reading too many blogs. I’ve noticed how you’ve previously jumped into conversations overlooking what was said in the given article and related conversations.

Can you provide some examples? Or at least let me make the prediction that almost all such examples will involve me talking about a subject with others whilst ignoring the rather dubious arguments that you yourself are espousing?

He noted how he likes to engage in the art of direct hard hitting commentary and added that he would be a hypocrite if he couldn’t take what he dishes out.

I have no idea who Alexander Cockburn is, but I tend to avoid any commentary which is self-described as “hard-hitting” and involves “dishing out” something or other.

You show your ignorance yet again in a way that suggestively promotes hating a group of people despite your addendum to the contrary. Russia is inhabited by Russians.

Nazi Germany was opposed to Jews. The USSR saw loyal Ukrainians rewarded over perceived Russian threats. Nazi Germany had no loyal Jews who benefitted over Germans. Hence your poor analogy.

The previously stated mass media biases are a clearly defined matter of record hushed up by (among others) some perceived Russia friendlys. It’s all well documented in my Siberian light interview and discussion following it.

You don’t know that because you are by your own self admission not so well versed on the matter inclusive of not reading too many blogs and not knowing who Cockburn is.

In your interview, you were clear in not reading too many blogs. In the Sean’s Rusia Blog 91 posted comments on the media coverage, you made some of the inaccurately stated Anglo-American mass media statements about the wars in former Yugo. Issues previously detailed at length at that and other venues where my commentary has appeared.

That and your ongoing incorrect supposition that more Ukrainians dislike Russians over Ukrainians not disliking Russians. Were you well read on the subject, you would know this to not be true.

There’s a reason why the Blue folks are back, why most Ukrainians oppose NATO membership and why a series of polls shows Ukrainioans not holding the misguided grudges you continue to claim.

Not quite Lyndon. Give Crimea back to Russia. You can’t bash Communism, while supporting some of its spoils for your own biases.

It’s 100% bogus to whitwash the many non-Russian Communists in the USSR and abroad.

No apology as you define it is owed.

An apology is owed to Russians for the bigoted US congressionally sponsored Captive Nations Committee, which appears to be the most institutionalized form of anti-Russian bigotry on record.

Russia is inhabited by Russians.,/em>

Please highlight where I have said otherwise. Let’s save time: I haven’t.

The USSR saw loyal Ukrainians rewarded over perceived Russian threats. Nazi Germany had no loyal Jews who benefitted over Germans.

Yes, I know. But as I have already said, it is perfectly acceptable for some Ukrainians who suffered under the Soviets to hold Russia partly responsible, regardless of whether some Ukrainians benefitted under the Soviets. Your statement, as I have also pointed out, does not refute my analogy.

In your interview, you were clear in not reading too many blogs.

No, I believe I said I do not read many Russian-themed blogs for somebody who himself blogs on Russia. I actually read a great many blogs, just not that many Russian-themed blogs. For what it’s worth, all those blogs on my blogroll I read on a daily basis. Also, I would not draw too many conclusions from my not reading many blogs on Russia. Blogs are a hit-and-miss source of information at best. When it comes to Russia, I prefer books.

In the Sean’s Rusia Blog 91 posted comments on the media coverage, you made some of the inaccurately stated Anglo-American mass media statements about the wars in former Yugo.

Actually, what I said was that I believed that Kosovo had no right to independence until Serbia started to persecute the Kosovars. Having done so, Serbia lost its right to rule Kosovo. Now, please can you find where this argument appears in any “Anglo-American mass media” outlet?

Issues previously detailed at length at that and other venues where my commentary has appeared.

Heh! You’ll forgive me for repeating the prediction I made in the last comment of mine:

At least let me make the prediction that almost all such examples will involve me talking about a subject with others whilst ignoring the rather dubious arguments that you yourself are espousing?

Yes, I was right: you complain that the person who does not agree with your arguments is not aware of the full facts, and attempt to set him straight by using one of your own identical arguments as an authoritative source.

That and your ongoing incorrect supposition that more Ukrainians dislike Russians over Ukrainians not disliking Russians.

Please highlight where I have said this? Let’s save time: I haven’t.

Tim to Mike: Judging from your comments on various message boards over the last couple of months, I understand you are struggling to find an editor who will publish your writings.

Does a foreign policy analyst and media critic have to do this ? Why does he claim to not have a blog of his own ? What about Averko’s Russia Report ?

Gosh, he is so far off the mark when analysing and criticising Russia, does he really have to do the very same thing with Germany, with the very same quality now ? Plese no !

Do 2 comments (one of December 23, 2006 and one of March 22, 2007 at Serbianna.com hake someone an foreign policy analyst and media critic ?

Do 8 hits at “The Tiraspol Times” (most of them only bring up his name, only 2-3 were written by him) make a foreign policy and media critic ?

Do 9 letters to the editors of the New York Times (1st on August 16, 1993 – last on March 16, 1999) make a foreign policy analyst and media critic ?

Do comments on privately owned blogs make anybody a foreign policy analyst and media critic ?

Is my 3 year old son a foreign policy analyst and media critic because he grunts and whines when I switch the TV set from his favourite kiddy channel to the news (on foreign policy) ?

Could anybody please tell me what it takes to become a foreign policy analyst and media critic ?

)))Beauty Andy. Very well said)) Am actually laughing at loud at that one!))

I’m not sure what it says about your son’s credentials as a foreign policy analyst, but I think you’ve clearly demonstrated that he is a far more able media critic than most of us…

Ok, the “media critic” goes to my son then. But there are other things I could do ….

a) I could go out to dinner in a Michelin Star decorated restaurant and could yell at the waiter … this clearly would make me a gourmet critic.

b) I could address the ladies of the Salvation Army running around in Düsseldorf, analyse their looks and the quality of their uniforms …this clearly would make me a military analyst.

c) I could engage my mother-in-law and saw her head off. After this I could not only claim to be an expert on the war on terror, I could also claim the title of a successful dragon slayer and become the hero on the Medieval Fantasy Websites & Blogs

Tim/Mike/Heribert – stop this row please. Now I know I’m not one to talk myself and sorry to all I’ve offended previously, but this row has gone a bit personal. Everyone has something to add here but ripping pieces off each other has no use at all.

Hä ? Which row ? The (serious) question is what does it take to become a foreign policy analyst and media critic.

As far as I remember, neither Tim nor me ever claimed to be anything else than bloggers who have fun in what they do. And what we do is blogging, not giving us the aura of being some expert, analyst or critic. Neither Tim nor me have ever claimed to be the one and only source of important information the world has to listen to. And I cannot remember having read Tim, or having written myself, that people do not have the right to make a fool of themselves. I do this on a daily basis.

And yes Ger, you are right. No offense intended, but the job of the Siberian Light Moralist is Andy’s job, not yours. Particularly not after posting your “Birthday Wishes” to the La Russophobe Boys just recently. As long as Andy doesn’t complain and tells me (or Tim) how to behave on his blog I will write what I think is appropriate, the way I think being appropriate.

Tim:

Seeing how Russians suffered at the hands of Ukrainian and Jewish Communists, then Russians have a right to despise Jews and Ukrainians?

It’s wrong to blame Jews for Communism. It’s also wrong to do that with Russians.

as per your other comments, the Serbs were persecuted by Albanians which in turn ignited what transpired after 1989. This had been detailed at the venue you participated in with fact based info.

Heribert:

One of my Tiraspol Times articles is frequently featured at the very top portion of its web site at http://tiraspoltimes.com. TTT has informed me that my articles there are among the most read.

You’re carrying on like a demagogue with broad negative side swipes which misrepresent my contributions elsewhere, to go along with not directly addressing my points.

Your LR like belittling of my NYT letters negates the following:

– 7 of the 8 were published within a two year span in a pre-internet era when it was extremely difficult to get anything published in the “paper of record”.

– Such names as Mark Ames and Peter Lavelle have yet to make The NYT op-ed.

– From the looks of things, I’ve provided more original and fact based analysis than your grandson and yourself combined and not just at blogs (besides The NYT and TTT: JRL, Serbianna, Intelligent.ru and the AUR).

I did it while never backtracking on my views, which are very much suppressed in the “free” (for those who can afford to influence it) press.

Ger:

Just setting the record straight.

Mike,

Your LR like belittling of my NYT letters negates the following […]

I do not belittle anything. I simply say that a writer of a letter to the editor is no columnist. By adding to every line you drop somewhere “Hey, the NYT published me !” you falsely suggest to have been published for being a serious commentator, columnist or author. Which you clearly aren’t.

There are plenty of analysts and critics who never were published by the NYT, simply because they never wrote a letter to its editors or didn’t feel like writing a column there.

This definitely does not make them worse than you are, or the other way around, makes you better than they are.

Everbody has (at some time) a dream about what he / she wants to become in life. Some want to become a firefighter, some want to become a cosmonaut. Some manage to make this dream come true and to achieve their goal. Others fail. You obviously want to become a famous journalist, analyst and critic. You’ve failed up to now. And this is the reason why some od your “friends” accuse you of actually flipping hamburgers at Wendy’s and not making a living of being a great analyst and critic.

Someone who travelled to Star City and was permitted to wear a real cosmonaut’s helmet once is as much a real cosmonaut as someone only writing letters to the editors of the NYT is a co-editor of this newspaper. Regardless how many times he / she claimes the opposite.

For the record. The young gentleman I mentioned is my youngest son not my grandson. I am no grandfather yet, although my older children are of an age when the easily could be parents already.

True, you’ve “provided” a lot of stuff. And a lot of the stuff you “provided” wasn’t published at all. You keep complaining yourself intensively enough about how much of your stuff is not published and accuse those who refuse to publish you of applying censorship and suppressing you.

May the real analysts and critics decide whether the stuff you provide, and which is “published”, is fact based and original or not.

My opinion doesn’t count as I am no self-proclaimed independent analyst and media critic. Your “independent” reads “unemployed”, this explains why you are so desperately in need of attention.

Or is your behaviour simply the symptom of a tremendous Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ? This would explain the massive flooding of blogs and message boards you (not only) lately produce.

Timeout, please.