PBS Documentary on the Ukraine

[db_zero]

Watched a PBS documentary on the conflict in the Ukraine that was on Netflix.  Never really understood the whold thing, but now that I know a little more all I can say is what a mess. Things have changed quite a bit since the documentary was made. I'd really like to see some more stuff that explains whats going on.

Edited February 15, 2015 by db_zero

[Alexey K]

I think today all we a bit too involved into situation. No media coverage is unbiased.

May be 10 year into the future we will get some answers.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Alexey K

[kulik]

I concur, there is no way to get unbiased info on the issue, many topics are outright contradictory, you can read something on pro-western media and the exact opposite "facts" on Russia today.

[db_zero]

I'm no expert on the matter, but from a laymans perspective I can't see the Russians/Putin ever granting the Ukraine independence. I don't see the US or West directly getting involved with air or boots on the ground and Putin knows this. I have doubts that arming the Ukranians with sophisticated weapons will make a difference in the end. It may make it more bloody for the Soviets, but they would just amp up the pressure.

 

Still it looks like some of the urban areas would be very difficult to take from determined defenders.

Edited February 15, 2015 by db_zero

[Michael Emrys]

I think today all we a bit too involved into situation. No media coverage is unbiased.

May be 10 year into the future we will get some answers.

 

I seldom even bother to listen to reports of ongoing conflicts. Even when the reporting is done with the best of intentions—and that is itself rare enough—the confusion and fog of war all combine to make it mostly meaningless as far as knowing what is really going on. You may get flashes of truth now and then and an astute follower of the news might be able to piece out a general outline of events, but a lot of what we "know" just isn't so. We are still learning things about WW II and that was ~75 years ago. Is it going to take us 75 years to know and understand what is happening in Ukraine right now?

 

Michael

[kulik]

What do you guys think about the geopolitical situation prior to the conflict?

 

I think that the impetus to make Ukrajine pro-western was a mistake, the preasure it puts on Russia was slowly ramping up, they had to take a stand somewhere. I mean, you can't get much closer to Russia than Ukrajine, it's like trying to make Canada pro-russian. On the other hand, I believe that no group of citizens has the right to split a country of which border sovereignity is guaranteed by international law, no matter their number in a given region of the country.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I think today all we a bit too involved into situation. No media coverage is unbiased.

May be 10 year into the future we will get some answers.

 

Alexey I don't know if you are of Russian nationallity. I have no problem with that if you are. You are correct that media coverage alwayss has a degree of bias. So do histrians - and having a degrewe in History andPolitics this is something Ican understand very well. Take a history of the Battleof Waterloo for instance and we will see national bias for a start. Thegreat British cavalryy charge is seen by British histrians is seen as a glorious feat of arms by the British Cavalry. And they charged the French Grand Battery no less sabering many of the gunners.The death of Ponsonby at the hands of French lancers shortlyy after is considered,with, let us say, a very dim view. French historians would view the same events in a very differwent light.

 

We couldconsider events in Ukraine in a similar way. Thereare many facors to consider. Past history for  a sart.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

What do you guys think about the geopolitical situation prior to the conflict?

 

I think that the impetus to make Ukrajine pro-western was a mistake, the preasure it puts on Russia was slowly ramping up, they had to take a stand somewhere. I mean, you can't get much closer to Russia than Ukrajine, it's like trying to make Canada pro-russian. On the other hand, I believe that no group of citizens has the right to split a country of which border sovereignity is guaranteed by international law, no matter their number in a given region of the country.

 

On the other hand we might look at why many, non Russian Ukranians mightnot want to be under Russian control. The Soviet Ukranian War 1917 - 1921,, the Famine of 1932 - 33, the forced Collectivisation under Stali, the experiences of WW2 and the aftermat including the suppression of the anti Soviet Partisans. Russins will of course differ in their views of the same events and of course the Western view will differ as well. Maybe their past experience with Russia was a strong motivation for Ukranians to move away from Russia towards the West, Just as the experiences of Russian Ukranians in the past encouraged their move towards Moscow.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I seldom even bother to listen to reports of ongoing conflicts. Even when the reporting is done with the best of intentions—and that is itself rare enough—the confusion and fog of war all combine to make it mostly meaningless as far as knowing what is really going on. You may get flashes of truth now and then and an astute follower of the news might be able to piece out a general outline of events, but a lot of what we "know" just isn't so. We are still learning things about WW II and that was ~75 years ago. Is it going to take us 75 years to know and understand what is happening in Ukraine right now?

 

Michael

I try to use multiple sources to try to get the best understanding possible of the different sides and views to make the best informed assessment I can reach given the information available. It is the way one is taughtto study when one studies history at degree level as I did. But it is often very difficlt to achieve

[Michael Emrys]

I try to use multiple sources to try to get the best understanding possible of the different sides and views to make the best informed assessment I can reach given the information available. It is the way one is taughtto study when one studies history at degree level as I did. But it is often very difficlt to achieve

 

Yes, if one must follow current events, that is the most responsible way to go about it. But at best, IMHO, that only yields a vague approximation to the truth. With the passage of time and a very careful sifting of the available information, the picture can come into sharper focus. But we never get it all. To a certain extent, reality remains always inscrutable. We poor mortals must cope with that as best we can.

 

Michael

[db_zero]

I was never crazy about the expansion of NATO after the fall of the Soviet Union. Improved relations yes, but creating military alliances and expansion east no. I figured that would create a reaction from Russia.

There is IMO a neoconservative element in the west that believes in exporting democracy. For a while they had the reigns of power or had a sympathetic ear in high places.

I think that some countries like Poland are discovering that there is a limit to just how far the west will honor commitments when push comes to shove.

You may get a commitment from one American administration, yet something else when another one gets elected.

[Michael Emrys]

I was never crazy about the expansion of NATO after the fall of the Soviet Union. Improved relations yes, but creating military alliances and expansion east no. I figured that would create a reaction from Russia.

 

Exactly. What the hell did they think Russia was going to do, roll over and let us rub its tummy? It doesn't have a history of doing that.

 

 

Michael

[db_zero]

There was also talk at one time of building a ballistic missile defense system in Poland. When the Russians complained the American response was the Russians are welcomed to join in. That left me scratching my head.

Perhaps the thinking was after the fall of the Soviet Union was western capitalism would take hold in Russia and soon they would be just like any other Western style republic or democracy.

[Alexey K]

I seldom even bother to listen to reports of ongoing conflicts. Even when the reporting is done with the best of intentions—and that is itself rare enough—the confusion and fog of war all combine to make it mostly meaningless as far as knowing what is really going on. You may get flashes of truth now and then and an astute follower of the news might be able to piece out a general outline of events, but a lot of what we "know" just isn't so. We are still learning things about WW II and that was ~75 years ago. Is it going to take us 75 years to know and understand what is happening in Ukraine right now?

 

Michael

 

It's not only information that comes to us, it's also our own biases. The point is that it's all happening right now and I'am personally involved to some extent.

I have relatives in Ukraine and many people I know are from Ukraine. For example, workers that built my country house are from Lisichansk - a small town near Lughansk that saw heavy action. It affects the way I'am filtering incoming information and I perfectly aware of it.

[Alexey K]

Alexey I don't know if you are of Russian nationallity. I have no problem with that if you are. You are correct that media coverage alwayss has a degree of bias. So do histrians - and having a degrewe in History andPolitics this is something Ican understand very well. Take a history of the Battleof Waterloo for instance and we will see national bias for a start. Thegreat British cavalryy charge is seen by British histrians is seen as a glorious feat of arms by the British Cavalry. And they charged the French Grand Battery no less sabering many of the gunners.The death of Ponsonby at the hands of French lancers shortlyy after is considered,with, let us say, a very dim view. French historians would view the same events in a very differwent light.

 

We couldconsider events in Ukraine in a similar way. Thereare many facors to consider. Past history for  a sart.

 

Yeah, It is like Jutland battle. Every side says it has won

 

Right now we have too few hard facts and every of then is interpreted differently depending in who you are. There is not unity eveng among Russians. There are a lot of "pro-Russian" Russians and a lot of "pro-Western" Russians These to groups interpret same events absolutely differently

[kulik]

On the other hand we might look at why many, non Russian Ukranians mightnot want to be under Russian control. The Soviet Ukranian War 1917 - 1921,, the Famine of 1932 - 33, the forced Collectivisation under Stali, the experiences of WW2 and the aftermat including the suppression of the anti Soviet Partisans. Russins will of course differ in their views of the same events and of course the Western view will differ as well. Maybe their past experience with Russia was a strong motivation for Ukranians to move away from Russia towards the West, Just as the experiences of Russian Ukranians in the past encouraged their move towards Moscow.

 

Sure, that can't be denied, the impetus I'm talking about however came from the Ukrajine-European Union Association Agreement which, as I understand it, was signed without a referendum. And, as I heard, was unnecessary for Ukraine's economy and trade, and which sole point was to put more pressure on Russia. 

 

I of course lack any solid ground for these allegations, that's only what I heard.

[Alexey K]

On the other hand we might look at why many, non Russian Ukranians mightnot want to be under Russian control. The Soviet Ukranian War 1917 - 1921,, the Famine of 1932 - 33, the forced Collectivisation under Stali, the experiences of WW2 and the aftermat including the suppression of the anti Soviet Partisans. Russins will of course differ in their views of the same events and of course the Western view will differ as well. Maybe their past experience with Russia was a strong motivation for Ukranians to move away from Russia towards the West, Just as the experiences of Russian Ukranians in the past encouraged their move towards Moscow.

Ukranians and not united in their views and opinions. That is essential problem of Ukraine as political entity. People I know from Eastern Ukraine express strong pro-Russian sentiments while Western Ukranians of pro-Westerners.  So, when your are talking about Ukraninans your should be careful to mention what kind of Ukranians you are referring to

[Michael Emrys]

It's not only information that comes to us, it's also our own biases. The point is that it's all happening right now and I'am personally involved to some extent.

I have relatives in Ukraine and many people I know are from Ukraine. For example, workers that built my country house are from Lisichansk - a small town near Lughansk that saw heavy action. It affects the way I'am filtering incoming information and I perfectly aware of it.

 

Yep. You can't not care. You can only try to know where your caring will lead you.

 

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Ukranians and not united in their views and opinions. That is essential problem of Ukraine as political entity. People I know from Eastern Ukraine express strong pro-Russian sentiments while Western Ukranians of pro-Westerners.  So, when your are talking about Ukraninans your should be careful to mention what kind of Ukranians you are referring to

 

It seems to me that over the last 70 years or so whenever there has been civil conflict within a country super power involvement has only made it worse, bigger and bloodier but with probably the same outcome. There may be exceptions, but it appears to me that that serves as a general rule of thumb.

 

Michael

[Alexey K]

It seems to me that over the last 70 years or so whenever there has been civil conflict within a country super power involvement has only made it worse, bigger and bloodier but with probably the same outcome. There may be exceptions, but it appears to me that that serves as a general rule of thumb.

 

Michael

 

Can't say anything about outcomes, but completely agree that external involvement tends to make civil wars bloodier.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Yeah, It is like Jutland battle. Every side says it has won

 

Right now we have too few hard facts and every of then is interpreted differently depending in who you are. There is not unity eveng among Russians. There are a lot of "pro-Russian" Russians and a lot of "pro-Western" Russians These to groups interpret same events absolutely differently

 

Even when we do have hard facts they will often be disputed or interpreted differently by historians. I use the example of Waterloo because it is a famous battle i British and indeed European history. As well as nationalist bias there are also issues around the personl bias of the writyer? Does he admire Napoleon? How does he regard Wellington?

 

There are Westerners who are a lot more pro Russian thinking, for example that the conflict is down to big business, oil and gas concerns etc.

 

Most likely there are actually multiple factors causing the conflict. Oil and gas among them

 

http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=up

 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/mar/06/ukraine-crisis-great-power-oil-gas-rivals-pipelines

 

http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/Ukraine2012_free.pdf (lengthy report - you will probably just want the Executive Summary)

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26387353 Some very useful and easily digestable informtion including some very informative maps and charts

 

 

Much of the industry and ntural resources seem to be located in the east of the country

 

Russia's historical goal of obtaing warm water ports is also likely to be a significant factor. Russi secured (or annexed depending on how one looks at it) the Crimea last year. But had not secured a land route to the Crimean ports (apparently there are discussions about a bridge over theKerch Straits) The land route through to the Crimean ports goes through exactly the areas that are being fought over. ThisI susppect is likely to be at the heart of th conflict

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Sure, that can't be denied, the impetus I'm talking about however came from the Ukrajine-European Union Association Agreement which, as I understand it, was signed without a referendum. And, as I heard, was unnecessary for Ukraine's economy and trade, and which sole point was to put more pressure on Russia. 

 

I of course lack any solid ground for these allegations, that's only what I heard.

 But what about Russia's Eurasian Econmic Union project?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26387353

 

And arguably this s also about he old Ruussian fear of being economically and militarily encircled by the West. However, back in the 18t Century under Peter he Great and Catherine th Great Russia was reaching out to the West and was Westernising in many ways as she recovered from the effects of the Mongol invasions (Golden Horde) Somewhere along the line it all went wrong. Perhaps it was thwe Swedish invasions, perhaps Napoleon, perhaps the "Great Game" rivalrywith Britain or the events of the two world wars.

[Childress]

Ukrainians have a legit grievance against Russia as a result of the forced collectivization and subsequent famine that followed. But these events occurred in the 1930s. Russia has since transitioned from a totalitarian to an authoritarian nation.It's economy has taken off, many of its citizens have entered the middle class. Ukraine has remained mired in poverty despite squatting on the most fertile grain fields in the world. Their government is heavily in debt and the ruling class is even more kleptocratic than Russia's. Ukraine is a failed state.

 

Western medias have framed the conflict as the Big Bully picking on the scrappy little guy. I remain unsympathetic with this view.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Childress

[kraze]

Alas russian invasion into Ukraine is not 30s, it's 2014 and now.

Edited February 16, 2015 by kraze

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Alas russian invasion into Ukraine is not 30s, it's 2014 and now.

 

Surely missing the point. As in the Balkans there are long meomories regarding past conflicts and atocities/ These are one factor in the conflict now. As is Western and Russian mutual suspicion dating from the Cold War. WW2 and earlier (consider the Polish and Swedish invasions of Russia during the 17th Century and earl 18th Century, the Napoleonic invasion of 1812. Poland of corse will remember the Partitions of the mid 18th Century, the 1830 uprising. The Baltic States will recall being forcibly incorporated into the Siet Union in 939 and again in 1945.

 

There s a lot of history all round which s why the historical factors are important both in regard to Ukraine itself and the wider potential conflict. Historical factors are however only a part of the factors behind the Ukraine conflict and a potential war in Eastern Europe. There are the strategic issues. ethnicities and border disputes and economic factors.

Edited February 16, 2015 by LUCASWILLEN05