3 ms·

> If you want to believe that Russia had no military forces in Ukraine before 2022 that's not what i said, and supporting a warring faction doesn't really qual

by znort_ 4mo ago

> If you want to believe that Russia had no military forces in Ukraine before 2022 that's not what i said, and supporting a warring faction doesn't really qualify as "invasion" nor "taking territory". also, i would recommend very strict skepticism about politically sensitive content on wikipedia. it can still be useful for general timelines, but a simple check at the sources (when there are any) will reveal they tend to be overwhelmingly one-sided. it's fine if you want to learn about, say, birds, engines or stars, though.

mopsi 4mo ago
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has established that there was no genuine separatism in Eastern Ukraine in 2014. From the get-go, these were operatives of Russian military and special services, or people under their direct control. Girkin, one of the main leaders of Russian forces in Ukraine, has confirmed the same: there was no grassroots action; it was them who started the war in 2014. Removing insignia from uniforms does not make it any less of a foreign invasion. ECHR's lengthy verdict on the responsibility of the MH-17 shootdown lays out all the relevant facts.
- znort_ 4mo ago
  without even commenting the evidence considered (mainly 'osint' claims) that ruling completely disregards the right of donbas to self-determination (wether organized or not). it was clearly a political ruling. you know, as an european over sixty that actually voted to join the eu i have long learned that ... european courts are full of shit, as are most of the institutions of the "international rules based order" btw. i know, that's the best we have. which means we're fucked. but funnily enough and back to the question: that ruling not even suggests the concepts of "invasion" and "territiorial gains". https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22Ukraine%20and%20the%20Netherlands%20v.%20Russia\%22%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-244292%22]} https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22Ukraine%... one has to wonder... if donbas didn't really want to secede (or didn't know how), and it was all russian troops ... why would kiev shell residential areas in donetsk with massive civilian casualties in july of 2014? so they would actually have a reason to secede? doesn't that court full of shit have a case for that?
  - mopsi 4mo ago
    > that ruling completely disregards the right of donbas to self-determination Because there are no grounds for it. The right to self-determination is the right of an ethnicity to self-govern. The people of Donbas are not a distinct ethnicity, but almost entirely either Ukrainians or Russians. That's a very clear-cut case. > if donbas didn't really want to secede (or didn't know how) There was no secession movement. Opinion polls placed secession in the "fringe" category. More people in Texas support secession than did in the eastern regions of Ukraine.
    - znort_ 4mo ago
      > The right to self-determination is the right of an ethnicity to self-govern there isn't really a clear definition of what constitutes "a people". etnicity might be a common trait but it doesn't have to. basically if all or a considerable majority in a territory want's to self-govern, the un charter recognizes that right. in practice this right has never been honored unless these people found a way to enforce it. > There was no secession movement oh, there was. prior to 2014 there was a consistent history of voting pro-russian parties, like the "party of regions". as early as in the 90s the "interfront of donbas" was advocating for regional autonomy, federal structure, recognition of russian as an official language and consultative referenda were held showing consistent support. kiev obviously ignored all this, but there was clear a will for self-govern and attachment to russia. indeed not secession outright. secession is a bold move. that happened immediately after the coup in 2014, because all these people felt betrayed and threatened (and with good reason). excuse me if they weren't as orgnaized as the eu would demand. one irony of that eu ruling is not only that it fails to consider the right to self-determination, but that it recognizes the ukranian government as the administrator of donbas completely obviating the fact that that was an ilegitimate government, installed by a foreign power (we have victoria nuland on record reciting her staff picks for that) after ousting the elected government, that then immediately started to exert discrimination against culturally russian ukranians, particularly in donbas. it all went to hell form there.
      - mopsi 4mo ago
        > there isn't really a clear definition of what constitutes "a people". It's true that the wording is open to interpretation, but not in the case of Ukraine. Nobody considers the Ukrainians and Russians living in the Donbas as a separate ethnicity or people; not they themselves, nor anyone else. > after the coup in 2014 There was no coup. "Ukrainian MPs have voted to oust President Viktor Yanukovych and hold early presidential elections on 25 May." (BBC, 22 February 2014).
ethbr1 4mo ago
> supporting a warring faction doesn't really qualify as "invasion" nor "taking territory" Doing so with active duty military forces absolutely does.

by znort_ 4mo ago

mopsi 4mo ago

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has established that there was no genuine separatism in Eastern Ukraine in 2014. From the get-go, these were operatives of Russian military and special services, or people under their direct control. Girkin, one of the main leaders of Russian forces in Ukraine, has confirmed the same: there was no grassroots action; it was them who started the war in 2014. Removing insignia from uniforms does not make it any less of a foreign invasion. ECHR's lengthy verdict on the responsibility of the MH-17 shootdown lays out all the relevant facts.

znort_ 4mo ago
without even commenting the evidence considered (mainly 'osint' claims) that ruling completely disregards the right of donbas to self-determination (wether organized or not). it was clearly a political ruling. you know, as an european over sixty that actually voted to join the eu i have long learned that ... european courts are full of shit, as are most of the institutions of the "international rules based order" btw. i know, that's the best we have. which means we're fucked. but funnily enough and back to the question: that ruling not even suggests the concepts of "invasion" and "territiorial gains". https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22Ukraine%20and%20the%20Netherlands%20v.%20Russia\%22%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-244292%22]} https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#{%22fulltext%22:[%22\%22Ukraine%... one has to wonder... if donbas didn't really want to secede (or didn't know how), and it was all russian troops ... why would kiev shell residential areas in donetsk with massive civilian casualties in july of 2014? so they would actually have a reason to secede? doesn't that court full of shit have a case for that?
- mopsi 4mo ago
  > that ruling completely disregards the right of donbas to self-determination Because there are no grounds for it. The right to self-determination is the right of an ethnicity to self-govern. The people of Donbas are not a distinct ethnicity, but almost entirely either Ukrainians or Russians. That's a very clear-cut case. > if donbas didn't really want to secede (or didn't know how) There was no secession movement. Opinion polls placed secession in the "fringe" category. More people in Texas support secession than did in the eastern regions of Ukraine.
  - znort_ 4mo ago
    > The right to self-determination is the right of an ethnicity to self-govern there isn't really a clear definition of what constitutes "a people". etnicity might be a common trait but it doesn't have to. basically if all or a considerable majority in a territory want's to self-govern, the un charter recognizes that right. in practice this right has never been honored unless these people found a way to enforce it. > There was no secession movement oh, there was. prior to 2014 there was a consistent history of voting pro-russian parties, like the "party of regions". as early as in the 90s the "interfront of donbas" was advocating for regional autonomy, federal structure, recognition of russian as an official language and consultative referenda were held showing consistent support. kiev obviously ignored all this, but there was clear a will for self-govern and attachment to russia. indeed not secession outright. secession is a bold move. that happened immediately after the coup in 2014, because all these people felt betrayed and threatened (and with good reason). excuse me if they weren't as orgnaized as the eu would demand. one irony of that eu ruling is not only that it fails to consider the right to self-determination, but that it recognizes the ukranian government as the administrator of donbas completely obviating the fact that that was an ilegitimate government, installed by a foreign power (we have victoria nuland on record reciting her staff picks for that) after ousting the elected government, that then immediately started to exert discrimination against culturally russian ukranians, particularly in donbas. it all went to hell form there.
    - mopsi 4mo ago
      > there isn't really a clear definition of what constitutes "a people". It's true that the wording is open to interpretation, but not in the case of Ukraine. Nobody considers the Ukrainians and Russians living in the Donbas as a separate ethnicity or people; not they themselves, nor anyone else. > after the coup in 2014 There was no coup. "Ukrainian MPs have voted to oust President Viktor Yanukovych and hold early presidential elections on 25 May." (BBC, 22 February 2014).

ethbr1 4mo ago

> supporting a warring faction doesn't really qualify as "invasion" nor "taking territory" Doing so with active duty military forces absolutely does.