Ukrainian Conflict 2014 - ? (Take II)

K-9

Mod:

Seriously, cop on. Stop the kindergarten level digs, thanks.

Gatling

Seems all is not well in eastern Ukraine.
Cossak forces are been regularly ambushed by separatists forces wholm apparently want them out of East Ukraine all together.
So sent by Putin to fight and now been pushed out by the same rebels

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/world/europe/cossacks-face-reprisals-as-rebel-groups-clash-in-eastern-ukraine.html?referrer=

Dannyboy83

Here's How Russia Will Reclaim Its Future From Vladimir Putin
By Mikhail Khodorkovsky

Interesting & somewhat overly optimistic opinion piece by Khodorkovsky, examining how Russia may potentially roll back the monopolization of the economy, the destruction of freedoms and civil liberties and the liquidation of democratic institutions.

Also,
Putins War - English
The report which Boris Nemtsov was completing at the time of his murder, ultimately completed by Open Russia.

Count Dooku

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Also,
Putins War - English
The report which Boris Nemtsov was completing at the time of his murder, ultimately completed by Open Russia.

Any facts/fakes there, which wasn't known before it published?

Elmer Blooker

Washington based 4freerussia.org seems like a reliable source to me if you're looking for facts Count.
I think the only thing they want to "free" in Russia is what's under the ground!

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Washington based 4freerussia.org seems like a reliable source to me if you're looking for facts Count.
I think the only thing they want to "free" in Russia is what's under the ground!

Do you expect it to be based in the not free Russia.
People running it would die in sucides and accidents in a few weeks

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

Do you expect it to be based in the not free Russia.
People running it would die in sucides and accidents in a few weeks

So why people who wrote so called "Nemtsov report" are still alive and still in Russia?

PopePalpatine

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Washington based 4freerussia.org seems like a reliable source to me if you're looking for facts Count.
I think the only thing they want to "free" in Russia is what's under the ground!

Have you ever considered that Putin has a hard-on for authoritarianism?

Dannyboy83

Count Dooku wrote: »

So why people who wrote so called "Nemtsov report" are still alive and still in Russia?

Wel, Boris Nemtsov has already been murdered, remember?
I don't think they can kill him again, although he may be airbrushed out of history like Kasparov

Zhanna Nemtsova, fled Russia
Khodorkovsky, fled Russia
Ksenia Sobchak, fled Russia

And 'Novaya Gazeta' itself is facing closure, after printing part of a swear word
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/novaya-gazeta-newspaper-critical-putin-faces-closure-after-warning-about-foul-language-1512077

It will be viewed as a humiliating defeat for Putin, the murder of 5 journalists and a lawyer couldn't intimidate Novaya Gazeta into silence, so they actually have to muzzle them by removing their mass media license.

Anyway, since we are on this topic, the Litvinenko Inquiry concluded on 31st July 2015 in London, the report is due soon.
Here is a particularly interesting document from the inquiry:
https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence
INQ006067

TLDR version;

The rare radioactive substance used to poison Alexander Litvinenko in London could only have come from Russia, a world-leading expert has told the inquiry into the former spy’s murder.

Norman Dombey, emeritus professor of theoretical physics at the University of Sussex, said the polonium was produced at a closed nuclear facility in the city of Sarov, 450 miles south-east of Moscow. Its Soviet-era Avangard plant was the only place in the world with a polonium “production line”, he said.

“In my opinion, the Russian state, or its agents, was responsible for the poisoning,” Dombey said.

Dannyboy83

http://www.rferl.org/content/russian-television-whistleblowers-kremlin-propaganda/27178109.html
Former employees of Russia’s largest state-media holding have divulged behind-the-scenes details about what they portray as a Kremlin propaganda campaign to deliberately mislead and inflame television audiences with news coverage of the Ukraine conflict.

The Russian culture website Colta.ru this week published tell-all accounts by two people about their time working at VGTRK, Russia’s main state broadcasting company, whose networks included the national Rossia-1 channel.

Interesting article on how the Kremlin controlled a disinformation campaign on the covert war in Ukraine, based on the statements of 2 former employees/whisteblowers.

feargale

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And 'Novaya Gazeta' itself is facing closure, after printing part of a swear word

Hasn't Putin himself publicly used unparliamentary language on occasion? A bit rich, I should think.

Count Dooku

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Zhanna Nemtsova, fled Russia
Khodorkovsky, fled Russia
Ksenia Sobchak, fled Russia

One oligarch and few kids of politicians, who was robbing Russia during Yeltsin rule
You can add Maria Gaidar to them
Hardly many people in Russia will miss them

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Interesting article on how the Kremlin controlled a disinformation campaign on the covert war in Ukraine, based on the statements of 2 former employees/whisteblowers.

Interesting article on how the former Kremlin critic left Radio Liberty to stay away from disinformation campaign funded by Department of State
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/10/putin-russia-donetsk-andrei-babitsky

Gatling

Count Dooku wrote: »

One oligarch and few kids of politicians, who was robbing Russia during Yeltsin rule
You can add Maria Gaidar to them
Hardly many people in Russia will miss them


Interesting article on how the former Kremlin critic left Radio Liberty to stay away from disinformation campaign funded by Department of State
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/10/putin-russia-donetsk-andrei-babitsky

" In early 2000, during the first months of Vladimir Putin’s presidency, Babitsky was kidnapped by Russian forces and disappeared for many weeks:"

"He said he caused controversy with an article he wrote last year in which he supported Putin’s annexation of Crimea (or “Putin’s decision to support the population of Crimea” as he called it). "

"In the separatist-held areas, journalist Pavel Kanygin from independent Russian paper Novaya Gazeta was detained and assaulted by security forces when in the republic last month. The BBC’s Natalia Antelava was told she would not be given accreditation to work in the republic after accusing separatists and Russian television ofinventing the death of a ten-year-old girl."

"A number of commentators have accusedthe Kremlin of fighting an “information war”, using fake stories and doctored photographs to skew events.

"Babitsky, however, said western media coverage of the conflict has been unfair, focusing on Russian aggression and ignoring the local context. "

Looks and sounds like Babitsky was given a talk to by the Russian military who kidnapped him .


What local context is he on about .
There was peace and no history of any upraising or civil unrest with kiev when the minority pro Russians controlled most of the country .
Minorities controlling the Majority sounds wrong doesn't it .almost south African minus blacks vs whites.
He thinks we should forget all about Russia aggression intresting idea if only Russia withdraws all its military forces from the Sovereign state of Ukraine and allow Ukraine to govern itself without Kremlin interference or military threats

Dannyboy83

Count Dooku wrote: »

One oligarch and few kids of politicians, who was robbing Russia during Yeltsin rule
You can add Maria Gaidar to them
Hardly many people in Russia will miss them

You didn't ask if mattered - you asked why people connected to the report on the covert war haven't been killed.
I answered you:
A) some already have been killed,
some have moved themselves beyond the immediate reach of the Kremlin
C) the Kremlin is attempting to close Novaya Gazeta

i.e. the Kremlin is retaliating in any way it can.

I happen to agree with you, the bulk of the Russian people find them irrelevant or dishonest... Russian propaganda is working within Russia, (for now) - while failing catastrophically outside Russia.

But If you wish to discuss cases which have left egg on Russia face - there are plenty of examples, and Paul Durov is a very good starting point.

Could you imagine Richard Branson 'fleeing' the UK? I doubt it.
If Mark Zuckerberg had to 'flee' America, it would be international news, carried via every single media form.
Yet when his Russian counterpart, Paul Durov has to 'flee' Russia, nobody bats an eyelid...


Such is the reputation of Russia in the world today. A country where quasi-official media outlets issue death threats against journalists:

https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/06/10/russia-investigative-journalist-facing-death-threats
In a May 19, 2015 editorial, Grozny Inform, which is the Chechen Republic’s most widely read media outlet and closely linked to the republic’s leadership, intoned that Elena Milashina could meet the same fate as Anna Politkovskaya, the Novaya Gazeta journalist murdered in 2006, and Boris Nemtsov, the Russian political opposition leader murdered in February 2015.

Toward the end of the lengthy editorial, the author suggested that nameless forces were preparing the ground for Milashina to be victimized “…f you go through all the potential victims, then by all indications, the latest hero who will pay for their life for ‘the defense of human rights’ in Russia will be our Novaya Gazeta special correspondent

Milashina told Human Rights Watch she believed the editorial is “saying I’ll be killed and it’s been decided…. It’s a new sort of a death threat – not by phone, not by SMS, not by email but rather published in a state-sponsored media outlet…. It’s an attempt to silence me by threats, death threats actually, to prevent me from continuing my Chechnya reporting.”

Interesting article on how the former Kremlin critic left Radio Liberty to stay away from disinformation campaign funded by Department of State
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/10/putin-russia-donetsk-andrei-babitsky

Thanks for the link, although I was already aware of this story (and expected you to attempt to use it as a rebuttal)

My opinion on the Babitsky case, based on the information which is in the public domain, is that RFE/RL acted incorrectly or at the very least - stupidly - by playing straight into the hands of Kremlin propaganda.
It's impossible to comment further than that, because neither party have disclosed the specifics

A spokesperson for RFE/RL, Martins Zvaners, said while the organisation could not discuss the specifics of Babitsky’s case it was “totally false” to say he had been fired for his personal views

And Babitsky himself refuses to answer questions.


More importantly, Babitsky's criticism of Western Journalism amounts to 'too much focus on Russian aggression, not enough focus on the local aspect & the civil war'.
And while that may have been a valid criticism during the Crimea annexation - it hasn't been valid criticism since Russia's covert invasion of Ukraine.

For the rest of the world, that very much is the story.

Count Dooku

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And Babitsky himself refuses to answer questions.

He said that

“I had filmed a piece about the exhumation of bodies of people shot by the Aidar [pro-Ukraine volunteer] battalion, and they cut it heavily and created a huge scandal. The Ukrainian service said that with my views I should not be sent to Donbass.”

At this time West couldn't admit crimes committed by pro-Kiev paramilitaries, even later it was confirmed first by Amnesty International and local authorities
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR50/040/2014/en/
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/kyiv-post-plus/governor-of-luhansk-region-accuses-aidar-of-terrorizing-the-region-385054.html
But for Western propaganda it was important to keep image of Ukrainian far right and radical nationalists as patriots and Western media simply couldn't afford to admit that Russian media were telling truth about reign of terror in controlled by Kiev parts of Novorossia
The goal was to move attention away to create impression that Kiev is fighting against regular Russian army and hide everything what could give justification for Russian involvement. This strtegy works well in West where main media outlets can hide truth about what is happening on East of Ukraine, but achieves opposite for people with brains and in Russia, where people have direct access to information from Novorossia even without TV

Dannyboy83

Count Dooku wrote: »

He said that

At this time West couldn't admit crimes committed by pro-Kiev paramilitaries, even later it was confirmed first by Amnesty International and local authorities
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR50/040/2014/en/
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/kyiv-post-plus/governor-of-luhansk-region-accuses-aidar-of-terrorizing-the-region-385054.html

But for Western propaganda it was important to keep image of Ukrainian far right and radical nationalists as patriots and Western media simply couldn't afford to admit that Russian media were telling truth about reign of terror in controlled by Kiev parts of Novorossia

I noticed you quoted Amnesty International in support of your point.
Do you feel this is a reliable source, given that Russia in the process of banning NGOs?

Amnesty International said the law threatened "fundamental freedoms." Human Rights Watch called it a "piece of repressive legislation."

Anyway, the erroneous belief you articulated is quite easy to debunk, but I urge you to broaden your sources.

Here I will quote an article from the BBC, 2014 for you:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30414955
Ever since Ukraine's February revolution, the Kremlin has characterised the new leaders in Kiev as a "fascist junta" made up of neo-Nazis and anti-Semites, set on persecuting, if not eradicating, the Russian-speaking population.
This is demonstrably false. Far-right parties failed to pass a 5% barrier to enter parliament, although if they had banded together, and not split their vote, they would have probably slipped past the threshold.
Only one government minister has links to nationalist parties - though he is in no way a neo-Nazi or fascist. And the speaker of parliament, Volodymyr Groysman, is Jewish. He has the third most powerful position in the country after the president and prime minister.
But Ukrainian officials and many in the media err to the other extreme. They claim that Ukrainian politics are completely fascist-free. This, too, is plain wrong.
As a result, the question of the presence of the far-right in Ukraine remains a highly sensitive issue, one which top officials and the media shy away from. No-one wants to provide fuel to the Russian propaganda machine.

But this blanket denial also has its dangers, since it allows the ultra-nationalists to fly under the radar. Many Ukrainians are unaware that they exist, or even what a neo-Nazi or fascist actually is, or what they stand for.

Not only is this phenomenon not denied in Western media, it is openly discussed.

You are lumping 'Western media' and 'Ukrainian media' into one category, when there is the comparatively pronounced difference of the the Ukraine resisting a covert military invasion by a belligerent former ally.

And as stated in the article, the disinformation onslaught being waged by the Kremlin in parallel with the covert assault of Ukraine, has deplorable repercussions, such as tyrants escaping justice - whether that involves Ukrainian miscreants murdering civilians or NovoRossian xenophobes shooting down civilian airliners.

Count Dooku wrote: »

The goal was to move attention away to create impression that Kiev is fighting against regular Russian army and hide everything what could give justification for Russian involvement. This strtegy works well in West where main media outlets can hide truth about what is happening on East of Ukraine, but achieves opposite for people with brains and in Russia, where people have direct access to information from Novorossia even without TV

Given that we have established it is a fallacy, I would counter that the reason this misconception is so pervasive in Russia, is as I stated in the previous post:

Russian propaganda is working within Russia, (for now) - while failing catastrophically outside Russia.

Add in a Patriotic Russian internet, limiting foreign ownership of media to 20% maximum, elimination of any indepedent media (Dozhd TV/Novaya Gazeta), and it's clear that the only opinion reaching the isolated Russian people is the one being fed to them at the behest of the Kremlin controlled state media.

When the pluralism of opinions has been eliminated, only the opinion permitted by the Kremlin remains.
The Russian people are not bad, but they are being terribly misled.

Count Dooku

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I noticed you quoted Amnesty International in support of your point.
Do you feel this is a reliable source, given that Russia in the process of banning NGOs?

Do you mean that only USA can have Foreign Agents law?

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Not only is this phenomenon not denied in Western media, it is openly discussed.

Really? I see only that it have been mentioned few times in places where nobody will read them to pretend for "balanced" coverage

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Add in a Patriotic Russian internet,

Has it been implemented?

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

limiting foreign ownership of media to 20% maximum,

Up to recently foreign ownership in US media have been limited to 25% and nobody complained
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-15/u-s-exploring-easing-limit-on-foreign-ownership-of-broadcasters
Even now it will be eased on case-to-case basis

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

elimination of any indepedent media (Dozhd TV/Novaya Gazeta), and it's clear that the only opinion reaching the isolated Russian people is the one being fed to them at the behest of the Kremlin controlled state media.

I presume you understand "independence" as being pro-USA
Anyway, why Dozhd TV and Novaya Gazeta are not eliminated yet?

BoJack Horseman

You boys seem obsessed with copying the US in everything.

Talk about hero worship!

Dannyboy83

Count Dooku wrote: »

Do you mean that only USA can have Foreign Agents law?

Up to recently foreign ownership in US media have been limited to 25% and nobody complained
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-15/u-s-exploring-easing-limit-on-foreign-ownership-of-broadcasters
Even now it will be eased on case-to-case basis

That's a strawman argument of course, I didn't suggest it, I believe sovereign nations are free to implement their own legislation, including Russia or Ukraine.

There is a caveat however;
Foreign Agent Restrictions are dangerous in a country with high levels of censorship and low levels of Press Freedom; this is symptomatic of Totalitarianism -a political system in which the state holds total control over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life wherever possible.

Freedom House ranks Ireland at 16/180countries in the Freedom of the Press Index, and it has never been out of the top 20 places.
Russia ranks at 148/180countries and has never been below 120 since Putin's reign began.

Of all industrialised nations with well educated populations, Russia has the highest level of censorship and lowest levels of press freedom.

Most importantly however, Russia has one of the highest rates of murder for journalists of any industrialised country (at least 28 known since Putin's ascension, though the suspected figure is 3 times that amount).

So now that I have clarified my position regard Foreign Agent Restrictions, I ask you to clarify - how do you reconcile your usage of NGOs to validate your assertion, when Russia is banning NGOs?
Do you feel it is a credible source?
Do you feel there are exceptions to the general rule of NGOs being unreliable?
Please elaborate.

Really? I see only that it have been mentioned few times in places where nobody will read them to pretend for "balanced" coverage

The BBC is hardly exotic, and that was the first result produced by google after a 10 second search.
Here, I have even saved the search for you, based on a statement you made!
Click Me


Western Journalism has varying degrees of impartiality, but you are relying on anecdotal evidence and extremely limited sources, that's why you have formed such an erroneous impression - hence I asked you to broaden your sources. That applies to both Russians and non-Russians.

One outside a totalitarian system could be equally misled by relying on limited sources, e.g. Fox News resembles Sputnik i Pogram and the vast majority of Russian media - heavy distortion of facts, heavy censorship, incitement of xenophobia (Mexicans/Central Asians) - and is ridiculed worldwide, just like the majority of Russian media. They are devoid of credibility.

Has it been implemented?

Russian Freedoms have been gradually eroded for years:

Bloggers Law in Russia

Putin Allies sieze control of vKontake

[URL="Russian Internet 'One Step Away' From Chinese Firewall
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russian-internet-one-step-away-from-chinese-firewall/499121.html"]Russian Internet 'One Step Away' From Chinese Firewall
[/URL]

I presume you understand "independence" as being pro-USA

The corollary being that since I'm anti-Totalitarian, I must be Pro-American.
Well, it must be nice to have such a high opinion of America, but I'm afraid that's terribly flawed logic!

You 'presume' because you think in tribal terms and assume I am also supporting a tribe.
Given that my partner is Russian, I would be too confused about which tribe to support, tovarish...:D

Anyway, why Dozhd TV and Novaya Gazeta are not eliminated yet?

Because nobody cares anymore, Russia has become totally isolated.

Elmer Blooker

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

You boys seem obsessed with copying the US in everything.

Talk about hero worship!

Would yourself and especially Dannyboy who highlights at every opportunity how dysfunctional he perceives Russia to be explain these all white gunmen/vigilantes who call themselves Oath Keepers patrolling a black neighbourhood in Ferguson with impunity?
I will of course be accused of "whataboutery" and going off topic but this is a very relevant and connected post I'm making.

Dannyboy83

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Would yourself and especially Dannyboy who highlights at every opportunity how dysfunctional he perceives Russia to be explain these all white gunmen/vigilantes who call themselves Oath Keepers patrolling a black neighbourhood in Ferguson with impunity?
I will of course be accused of "whataboutery" and going off topic but this is a very relevant and connected post I'm making.

I don't dispute the word you have used - disfunctional, although there is an important distinction.

My opinion is that Russian society is generally not disfunctional (Russian government is).

Russia's problems originate almost entirely from the top; America's problems emerge at every level, but particularly from the grassroots.

America's problems will take generations to sort out; many of Russia's can be sorted in a week.

ancapailldorcha

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Would yourself and especially Dannyboy who highlights at every opportunity how dysfunctional he perceives Russia to be explain these all white gunmen/vigilantes who call themselves Oath Keepers patrolling a black neighbourhood in Ferguson with impunity?
I will of course be accused of "whataboutery" and going off topic but this is a very relevant and connected post I'm making.

Please don't drag the thread off topic.

johnnyskeleton

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I will of course be accused of "whataboutery" and going off topic but this is a very relevant and connected post I'm making.

Mod:

Thats exactly what youre being accused of. Now, back on topic everybody

Elmer Blooker

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Russia's problems originate almost entirely from the top; America's problems emerge at every level, but particularly from the grassroots.

America's problems will take generations to sort out; many of Russia's can be sorted in a week.

It doesn't occur to you that the current Russian government might be the one that Russians want and if the "west", meaning the US of course, doesn't like that then too bad. Apparently the Russian government under Yeltsin and his oligarchs (many now born again democrats exiled in the west) wasn't a "problem" when life expectancy had fallen into the 50s and Russians were starving in the streets. The last I heard Putin's popularity stands at 85%.

InTheTrees

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

The last I heard Putin's popularity stands at 85%.

:pac:

Right up there with Kim Jung Un's

Elmer Blooker

InTheTrees wrote: »

:pac:

Right up there with Kim Jung Un's

Interesting to note that the Putin poll was carried out by the Levada Centre.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/why-the-kremlin-hates-levada-center/480433.html

SamHarris

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Interesting to note that the Putin poll was carried out by the Levada Centre.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/why-the-kremlin-hates-levada-center/480433.html

Can you point to a single poll in history where a leader had as much support in any country that we could all agree had anything approaching a free media?

You might notice a pattern.

Even if it was completely true and not the result of a state stranglehold on all information sources in the country (though Im sure youll admit that has something to do with it, no?), what would be your point, exactly? That enormous institutional corruption, aggression towards numerous neighbouring states resulting in thousands of deaths and the brutal oppression of various groups within a country should be, what, ignored by the West because the leader is popular? They pretty much always are in totalitarian states. To anyone with any knowledge of opinion polls in free societies your citation of 85% support does the exact opposite of what you think it does.

Also you imply in the previous post that the only people that have a problem with Putins policies is the US (no doubt because they are youre big boogie men so its helpful to lay anything you perceive as negative at their feet) well I'm afraid that is just very far from the case. It's his list of international allies that is thin. It's other neighbouring states that are by far the most wary and critical.

SamHarris

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/12/propaganda-watch-listen-to-two-russians-badly-impersonate-cia-spies-to-pin-mh17-on-u-s/?utm_content=bufferaf772&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

An interesting piece. It's a little sad that anyone outside of Russia still takes anything said by its government or state controlled media outlets at face value.

Also a helpful reminder that not even the Russian government could get their story straight on what happened to the plane.

It's all a little worrying though. The Russian government clearly has no way of responding to either the allegations or to Western sanctions (as demonstrated by the childish destruction of massive amounts of already paid for food). They have managed to back themselves into a corner and have very few ways to effectively fight back. For a nuclear armed state that makes it far more dangerous than if it could compete in other, more traditional ways, with the West.

K-9

Mod:

The mod warnings about keeping it on topic also includes stuff like saying others view the US as big boogie men too. It covers both sides of the discussion because it would be inconsistent otherwise. Thank you.

BoJack Horseman

SamHarris wrote: »

It's all a little worrying though. The Russian government clearly has no way of responding to either the allegations or to Western sanctions (as demonstrated by the childish destruction of massive amounts of already paid for food). They have managed to back themselves into a corner and have very few ways to effectively fight back. For a nuclear armed state that makes it far more dangerous than if it could compete in other, more traditional ways, with the West.

Didnt 'WakeUp' expend hundreds of posts telling us that Russia with its economy smaller than Italy had the West in the palm of its hand & would be crushed under the might of Putin?

The sanctions, such as they are (and they are pretty modest) were the least the West could do.

They aren't without consequence though as they coincide with the drop in EU dairy quotas so its a factor in causing the drop in milk prices.