6 ms·

The Donbass Paradox

42 points by iamjeff 10y ago

epicureanideal 10y ago
Obvious propaganda piece. Both sides are doing bad things. Intelligent observers can read about the situation widely and decide for themselves what the drivers of the situation are, but this piece doesn't add much. Just for the sake of fairness, I could play devils advocate for either side, but an intelligent reader will do that for themselves, so I'll skip it. Also, I checked their list of stories, and they all seem to be negative...
- qaq 10y ago
  Would be interesting to see what do you think Russia is doing right in this conflict?
  - finid 10y ago
    It's interesting how people take sides on these issues. Many in the US who can count all the wrongs Russia is guilty of in the conflict in Ukraine see nothing wrong with the US position in Syria.
    - qaq 10y ago
      This itself could be a subject of a long discussion, but does not seem to be related to the topic at hand.
  - solnyshok 10y ago
    from Putin's Russia standpoint, it is probably best to maintain fire in the conflict, without adding too much powder or lending overwhelming force to separatists. He uses Donbass conflict as "grappling hook" in the Ukraine's back, that basically prevents it from joining EU or NATO. (Current regulations deny membership to any country that has unresolved territorial claims or participates in the military conflict.) And it bleeds Ukrainian resources, destablilizes economy, etc. So, he is pretty much doing best by not winning this conflict decisively. (btw, why don't you ask yourself what EU/USA is doing right in this conflict?)
    - qaq 10y ago
      I meant right in a different sense, but you provide a fairly accurate description about what is going on. US and some EU members and China are pretending Budapest memorandum does not exist, which serves them well in the short term, but will obviously have severe consequences in the long term.
- hourislate 10y ago
  Why is it obvious propaganda? I didn't find anything wrong with the article. It presents a story. Small and medium size business have been crushed and most have been pillaged by mercenaries and gangsters in the free for all the followed Russian adventurism. Readers here are intelligent enough to see your poor attempt at discrediting an article that is what it is. How much proof do you need and why defend the indefensible?
- dgudkov 10y ago
  >Both sides are doing bad things. Such statements downplay the root cause and pretend like all parties are equally guilty which is never the case. All sides did bad things in WW2, although it doesn't make all parties equally guilty. It was Hitler who started it. It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. He personally and Russia in general bear the responsibility for the war they planned, prepared, started, financed and still keep running.
  - douche 10y ago
    The bigger issue might have been the settlement after the fall of the Soviet Union that kept Russia away from the Black Sea ports. It was almost a historical inevitability that Russia would seek a warm-water port. Sevastopol is the major Russian Black Sea port, and always has been.
    - niftich 10y ago
      Novorossiysk is an existing Russian warm-water port on the Black Sea, with better links to the Russian heartland. Sevastopol's chief geopolitical advantage over Novorossiysk is force projection, as it sits closer to the Turkish Straits and nearby foreign ports like Odessa, Constanta, and Varna, outside and/or wanting to be outside of Russia's sphere of influence.
  - lolc 10y ago
    Wars are not a simple "he started it" deal. One could draw uncanny parallels between the current situation and the conflicting alliances during World War 2.
  - finid 10y ago
    > It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. What happened before Russia annexed Crimea? If you can answer that question honestly, you'll get to the root of that conflict. Just be honest with yourself.
    - dgudkov 10y ago
tristanj 10y ago
This was a very engaging, high effort piece of journalism from an org I've never heard of before. Content like this is not cheap to make which gave me the something's not right here vibe, so I tried to find out who paid for this. Their about page says they received a grant from the The German Marshall Fund of the United States, which was founded during the Cold War as a way to promote ties between the US and West Germany. Some digging shows the org is funded by the German/US governments and has at least $200m in endowment. So be aware this journalism is funded by US interests.
- hourislate 10y ago
  Why should we be aware of journalism funded by the US or their interests. Where should I get my news from RT or Sputnik?
  - toyg 10y ago
    In the same way as you shouldn't blindly consume RT, you shouldn't blindly consume stuff from Washington, London, Paris or anywhere else. There is precious little journalism that is not a front for someone's agenda, so it's important to know that agenda and "weight" content accordingly.
  - finid 10y ago
    Because "journalism funded by the US or their interests" is most likely propaganda. Why do we not get similar long form articles about Saudi Arabia?
    - andres_kytt 10y ago
      Russian doctrine of information warfare seeks to create confusion, distrust and ambiguity about truth. Part of this ideology is to label everything as propaganda, to claim there is no objective truth, that everything is influenced by the funding agent. This allows to claim, that Russian-backed news sources that form an integral part of their information warfare machinery and spread blatant lies, are as legitimate as any other source of information. This allows the state to keep the monopoly of truth which allows for removal of any accountability from government actions. Which perpetuates status quo of power. There are in fact shades of grey. All journalists are biased by their world-view and of course backers at least fund the ones the views of whom they like. But there is such thing as journalist ethics and not all funders exercise the sort of control over the writers as the fsb does. Not all media is propaganda. We don't get such articles about Saudi Arabia because there is no war there.
x0 10y ago
Whatever side you're on, it's a damn shame what's happened in the Donbass. All the industry bombed to shit, thousands killed, more jobless and forced into poverty. And it doesn't look like it will be over anytime soon. I just hope the people there get enough aid to survive, and maybe a hand rebuilding out of the rubble once the fighting stops. Слава україні, героям слава.
PoroTheMurderer 10y ago
Yet another piece of ukrainian 'journalism' trying to ridicule those calling new ukrainian government 'fashists'. In Ukraine there is nothing wrong these days to be a nazi or a 'patriot' how they call themselves. There are plenty of evidence on the web how pro-nazi volunteer battalions came to Donbass to kill those who didn't support new government came to power in the result of coup d'état in February 2014. Neo-nazis in Ukraine are respectable people, they have connections with the government, recently neo-nazi battalion Azov has been integrated into Interior Ministry as special police battalion. Here is very good investigation of Ukrainian blogger that lives in Europe about nazis in Ukraine. But in Ukrainian media reality they are 'patriots' or 'activists'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tJphAe9h0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tJphAe9h0w Ukrainian 'journalists' often drop inconvenient fact that the government after February 2014 is illegal and people of Donbass did not recognize it. And the protests in Donetsk and other cities started only when ultra nationalist Oleg Tyagnibok announced that the very first thing the will do in the Parliament is that they are going to cancel the regional status for Russian language and they actually did it.
stefancandea 10y ago
@tristanj: thanks for reading the piece. theblacksea.eu is run by the romanian centre for investigative journalism, a romanian non-profit (www.crji.org). RCIJ is part of various international networks, including the latest www.eic.network you can check the RCIJ/CRJI for investigating the CIA black-sites, partnering with Wikileaks on the cable gate, and other investigative stories; the black sea website had a grant from the Black Sea Trust, operated by GMFU, in 2012 for one year, in order to build the site from scratch under free software licence and to perform the initial 10 stories or so. that grant expired in 2013, 3 years ago. we would love some more funding, but for now most of the work is done pro-bono or on a freelance basis.

42 points by iamjeff 10y ago

Obvious propaganda piece. Both sides are doing bad things. Intelligent observers can read about the situation widely and decide for themselves what the drivers of the situation are, but this piece doesn't add much. Just for the sake of fairness, I could play devils advocate for either side, but an intelligent reader will do that for themselves, so I'll skip it. Also, I checked their list of stories, and they all seem to be negative...

qaq 10y ago
Would be interesting to see what do you think Russia is doing right in this conflict?
- finid 10y ago
  It's interesting how people take sides on these issues. Many in the US who can count all the wrongs Russia is guilty of in the conflict in Ukraine see nothing wrong with the US position in Syria.
  - qaq 10y ago
    This itself could be a subject of a long discussion, but does not seem to be related to the topic at hand.
- solnyshok 10y ago
  from Putin's Russia standpoint, it is probably best to maintain fire in the conflict, without adding too much powder or lending overwhelming force to separatists. He uses Donbass conflict as "grappling hook" in the Ukraine's back, that basically prevents it from joining EU or NATO. (Current regulations deny membership to any country that has unresolved territorial claims or participates in the military conflict.) And it bleeds Ukrainian resources, destablilizes economy, etc. So, he is pretty much doing best by not winning this conflict decisively. (btw, why don't you ask yourself what EU/USA is doing right in this conflict?)
  - qaq 10y ago
    I meant right in a different sense, but you provide a fairly accurate description about what is going on. US and some EU members and China are pretending Budapest memorandum does not exist, which serves them well in the short term, but will obviously have severe consequences in the long term.
hourislate 10y ago
Why is it obvious propaganda? I didn't find anything wrong with the article. It presents a story. Small and medium size business have been crushed and most have been pillaged by mercenaries and gangsters in the free for all the followed Russian adventurism. Readers here are intelligent enough to see your poor attempt at discrediting an article that is what it is. How much proof do you need and why defend the indefensible?
dgudkov 10y ago
>Both sides are doing bad things. Such statements downplay the root cause and pretend like all parties are equally guilty which is never the case. All sides did bad things in WW2, although it doesn't make all parties equally guilty. It was Hitler who started it. It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. He personally and Russia in general bear the responsibility for the war they planned, prepared, started, financed and still keep running.
- douche 10y ago
  The bigger issue might have been the settlement after the fall of the Soviet Union that kept Russia away from the Black Sea ports. It was almost a historical inevitability that Russia would seek a warm-water port. Sevastopol is the major Russian Black Sea port, and always has been.
  - niftich 10y ago
    Novorossiysk is an existing Russian warm-water port on the Black Sea, with better links to the Russian heartland. Sevastopol's chief geopolitical advantage over Novorossiysk is force projection, as it sits closer to the Turkish Straits and nearby foreign ports like Odessa, Constanta, and Varna, outside and/or wanting to be outside of Russia's sphere of influence.
- lolc 10y ago
  Wars are not a simple "he started it" deal. One could draw uncanny parallels between the current situation and the conflicting alliances during World War 2.
- finid 10y ago
  > It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. What happened before Russia annexed Crimea? If you can answer that question honestly, you'll get to the root of that conflict. Just be honest with yourself.
  - dgudkov 10y ago

tristanj 10y ago

This was a very engaging, high effort piece of journalism from an org I've never heard of before. Content like this is not cheap to make which gave me the something's not right here vibe, so I tried to find out who paid for this. Their about page says they received a grant from the The German Marshall Fund of the United States, which was founded during the Cold War as a way to promote ties between the US and West Germany. Some digging shows the org is funded by the German/US governments and has at least $200m in endowment. So be aware this journalism is funded by US interests.

hourislate 10y ago
Why should we be aware of journalism funded by the US or their interests. Where should I get my news from RT or Sputnik?
- toyg 10y ago
  In the same way as you shouldn't blindly consume RT, you shouldn't blindly consume stuff from Washington, London, Paris or anywhere else. There is precious little journalism that is not a front for someone's agenda, so it's important to know that agenda and "weight" content accordingly.
- finid 10y ago
  Because "journalism funded by the US or their interests" is most likely propaganda. Why do we not get similar long form articles about Saudi Arabia?
  - andres_kytt 10y ago
    Russian doctrine of information warfare seeks to create confusion, distrust and ambiguity about truth. Part of this ideology is to label everything as propaganda, to claim there is no objective truth, that everything is influenced by the funding agent. This allows to claim, that Russian-backed news sources that form an integral part of their information warfare machinery and spread blatant lies, are as legitimate as any other source of information. This allows the state to keep the monopoly of truth which allows for removal of any accountability from government actions. Which perpetuates status quo of power. There are in fact shades of grey. All journalists are biased by their world-view and of course backers at least fund the ones the views of whom they like. But there is such thing as journalist ethics and not all funders exercise the sort of control over the writers as the fsb does. Not all media is propaganda. We don't get such articles about Saudi Arabia because there is no war there.

x0 10y ago

Whatever side you're on, it's a damn shame what's happened in the Donbass. All the industry bombed to shit, thousands killed, more jobless and forced into poverty. And it doesn't look like it will be over anytime soon. I just hope the people there get enough aid to survive, and maybe a hand rebuilding out of the rubble once the fighting stops. Слава україні, героям слава.

PoroTheMurderer 10y ago

Yet another piece of ukrainian 'journalism' trying to ridicule those calling new ukrainian government 'fashists'. In Ukraine there is nothing wrong these days to be a nazi or a 'patriot' how they call themselves. There are plenty of evidence on the web how pro-nazi volunteer battalions came to Donbass to kill those who didn't support new government came to power in the result of coup d'état in February 2014. Neo-nazis in Ukraine are respectable people, they have connections with the government, recently neo-nazi battalion Azov has been integrated into Interior Ministry as special police battalion. Here is very good investigation of Ukrainian blogger that lives in Europe about nazis in Ukraine. But in Ukrainian media reality they are 'patriots' or 'activists'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tJphAe9h0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tJphAe9h0w Ukrainian 'journalists' often drop inconvenient fact that the government after February 2014 is illegal and people of Donbass did not recognize it. And the protests in Donetsk and other cities started only when ultra nationalist Oleg Tyagnibok announced that the very first thing the will do in the Parliament is that they are going to cancel the regional status for Russian language and they actually did it.

stefancandea 10y ago

@tristanj: thanks for reading the piece. theblacksea.eu is run by the romanian centre for investigative journalism, a romanian non-profit (www.crji.org). RCIJ is part of various international networks, including the latest www.eic.network you can check the RCIJ/CRJI for investigating the CIA black-sites, partnering with Wikileaks on the cable gate, and other investigative stories; the black sea website had a grant from the Black Sea Trust, operated by GMFU, in 2012 for one year, in order to build the site from scratch under free software licence and to perform the initial 10 stories or so. that grant expired in 2013, 3 years ago. we would love some more funding, but for now most of the work is done pro-bono or on a freelance basis.