On Ukraine and Russia - as someone who has lived in both countries

[Dabbakai]

About me: I have lived in both Ukraine and Russia (not for studies) and have been a geopolitical analyst. I have many close friends in both countries and I speak fluent Russian and some Ukrainian.

Why I am writing this post? I see so many fellow Indians who have difficulty "choosing a side" or understanding why India is being neutral. Also, just trying to basically figure out what's going on in Ukraine.

Unlikely that you will read all of it but if you have an ounce of interest and want to really figure out what's going on - sit back and read this with a cup of tea.

History you should know:

• Ukrainian and Russian history is extremely intertwined. There are no direct comparisons for India here. It's not exactly like India/Pakistan fwiw. Ukraine and Russia share a history, culture, and relationship that go over a thousand years old - in a way, Russian history emerged from the area that is modern Ukraine. When you hear comments about Russia and Ukraine being "brotherly nations", it really is true. In fact, earlier Ukraine was known as Malorussia ('Little Russia').

• Ukrainian and Russian languages are very similar (like Hindi and Marathi or even Maithali, probably). Note - most Ukrainians are bilingual and can understand both Russian/Ukrainian.

• One crucial point is the wrong usage of "Russians in Ukraine". In Russian language, there are 2 terms for 'Russians' - ethnic Russians are called Русский (Russkiy) and Russian citizens are called Россиянин (Rossiyanin). This follows that, a person can be Russkiy but not Rossiyanin - due to the historical nature, they may be living in many countries like Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan etc apart from Russia itself. Why is it important? Because Western media often makes this a Black & White story when its not. A Russkiy in Ukraine (Russian with Ukrainian citizenship) would have extremely close ties (socio-culturual) with a Russkiy Rossiyanin (ethnic-Russian and Russian citizen) and would favor a closer/stronger relationship with Russia. Note two things - I said a stronger relationship which does not imply becoming a part of Russia itself. And that while this could be a majority position, this is not every ethnic Russians' opinion.

• Both Russia and Ukraine share the same vices: both are extremely corrupt and have oligarchs who just know how to suck money out of state resources. Importantly, I find citizens in both countries are very politically apathetic (in contrast to India). Personal opinion but this is why, claiming that one of the countries is a beacon of democray is just plain false.

• Crash course on Ukraine's internal economy: Easten Ukraine (Donetsk, Lugansk, and Dnipro along with Kharkiv) have more population and industrial bases - industries in Donetsk/Lugansk naturally became destroyed after the Maidan. Kharkiv remains a major IT hub. Crimea is a massive tourist hub, fisheries industry, as well as has a strong Naval Base (always been controlled by Russians). Western (Lviv) and Central Ukraine (Kyiv) are primarily agrarian and service-oriented. West and East are divided right in the middle with River Dnieper.

• Modern Ukraine's current borders were, for a significant time in history, under Russian Empire and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth's rule. By and large, Eastern Ukraine (Kharkiv, Lugansk, Donetsk, Dnipro) and Southern Ukraine (Odessa and Crimea) were a part of Russian Empire for ages, are predominantly Russian-speaking, and have majority ethnic Russians. Western Ukraine (Lviv, Lutsk) were part of PLC (Polis-Lithuanian Commonwealth), are predominantly ethnic Ukrainian, and Ukrainian-speaking, and have a stronger affinity to work/stay in Poland and Czech Republic. Kyiv is right in the middle - and is mixed in every sense of the word.

• During the Second World War, while Ukraine - being part of the Soviet Union - fought valientl against fascists, many Ukrainians in the Western Ukraine sided with...the Nazis with one of their leaders being Stepan Bandera. Many viewed it as their "freedom struggle" against Nazis. In India too, Subashchandra Bose attempted to forge an alliance with Hitler but the difference is Bandera and his forces actually committed atrocities against the Communists and Polish peasants alike, making sure that modern Russia and Poland, both hate him equally.

• During the time of USSR, some territories in the East/South (like Crimea) were "transferred" to Soviet Ukraine for better administrative management. Naturally, at that time, nobody foresaw that the USSR would break. Even once it broke down, there was no regard to transfer them back as people assumed that things between Russia and Ukraine would continue as is.

Background information you should know:

• Modern Ukraine came into being in August 1991, amidst dissolution of the Soviet Union, via referendum. Interestingly, Eastern and Southern Ukraine had a very low % of "yes-" votes even at that time. Since that time, unfortunately, the country did not really have a very stable politics at all.

• Russian politics: High-level overview for Russian politics is as follows - 90s were extremely tough time for Russia (and Ukraine). Many American supported organizations swept in to influence the country, Yeltsin came to the power who pretty much embarrassed every Russian, and Russia faced growing separatism in Chechnya. Ultimately, Putin came to the power and put an end to all that and cemented Russia's territorial integrity. Further, Putin also ensured that Russian economy leaps forth which it did, thanks to crumpling down on the oligarchs, some reforms, and rising oil prices. Russia's GDP per capita remainds higher than Ukraine/Belarus etc.

• Crimea: Crimea has warm water ports and Russia had a deal with Ukraine to have Naval Base there. Not much is talked about it but Crimea actually had a Referendum back in 1994 as well which was based on demand for greater autonomy from Ukraine and closer ties with Russia. 80%+ votes favored it. Crimea - as to what I have observed and learned - was long ignored in terms of development by the politicians in Kyiv. While 2014 Referendum was illegitimate by all means, to this day, every independent poll says that Crimeans are glad to be with Russia.

• Orange Revolution in Ukraine: (2004-2005) was a turning event for Ukrainian politics when attempt to rig election failed and protests ensued. Why is it a turning event? Well, the event gave rise to many major parties in Ukraine today and one of the politicians to rig election was Yanukovych.

• Ironically, the people who did come to power (Yushchenko et al) were ineffective and made the Ukrainian economy go dive further. Yushchenko was very hostile against Ukraine which alienated a big chunk of Ukrainian population and was ambitious for NATO membership. Ukraine's economy was one of the most affected during the 2008 Financial Crisis and this ultimately meant that Yanokovych came to the Power.

• Yanukovych Presidency (2010-14): Yanukovych had heavy affinity towards Russia but proclaimed he would seek close ties with both the EU (to accommodate needs of Western Ukraine) and Russia while keeping Ukraine as a Neutral State, with no alliance in NATO/CSTO (Russia's version of NATO). He also tried to get Eastern Ukraine's votes suggesting to make Russian as a second state-language. Importantly, he continued the trend of being as corrupt as his predecessors.

• 2013/14 Euromaidan Protests: When time came to sign EU-Association agreement (which is not for EU membership but closer alliance) as per his earlier proclamation, Yanukovych decided to stall. This annoyed large portion of electorate and massive protests ensued. My personal take is that these protests were directly supported by the US/EU and were an attempt at Color Revolution that was in trend. Yanukovych made a gaffe by using Special Forces against his own citizens, making sure that everyone was pissed. Ultimately, there was a change of power and Yanukovych was deposed - "coup" as per Russians (as due process wasn't followed and he had to run for his life) and "step towards democracy" according to the West (as people's protest implied they didn't want Yanukovych anymore). This is where the historical close relations between Ukraine and Russia went downhill fast.

• Far-right forces in Western Ukraine became further fueled by Maidan. Following Maidan, Yanukovych was ousted and some atrocities were committed during the protests, particularly aimed at Russian-speaking East. Result: Growing separatism and discontent which ultimately transitioned to Russia annexing Crimea without a single shot and Donetsk and Lugansk forming resistance backed by Russia. New President, Poroshenko, did not do much to solve this as any action against growing Ukrainization was now viewed as "siding with Russia". Strict quota against Russian language in media was introduced in Ukraine and many Russian websites were censored, topmost one being VK (which is like Russian Facebook). More and more people in the East felt alienated. Most political parties that represented Eastern Ukraine/pro-Russia view were sidelined or forcefully closed.

• Modern Ukraine started decommunization in order to build a separate identity but let far-right fraction gain more and more influence in politics, army, and national discourse. This is an important point because a lot of modern neo-Nazi Ukrainians hail Bandera as their hero, do Nazi salutes, and this is the biggest reason why Putin says Ukraine has tons of Nazis/far-rights. Poroshenko also followed the corruption while paying lip service of moving towards the path of EU.

• After Poroshenko, Zelensky came to power who had no political background to this but was extremely popular TV-actor. As tradition follows, previous President Poroshenko was found culprit of corruption and was charged with treason. Zelensky, who actually is ethnic Russian himself, did what politicians do and followed the rhetoric of strengthening Ukraine's own identity and affirmed that Ukraine would follow path to the EU and seek NATO membership. This was a turn from his earlier political campaign where he said there should be referendum in Ukraine for NATO membership, to ensure all voices were heard. Hostility in Donetsk and Lugansk continued and many protests against Zelensky continued as he inched towards authoritarianism. Interestingly, despite being a media person himself, he went on further with tighter restrictions around media and news.

• In the backdrop of all this, events continued around the world (Second Libyan War, Syrian War) which further decimated Russias interests and soft power. Ukraine continued inching further towards the US and EU. Eastern Ukraine turned into a frozen conflict with many civilian casualties.

Interests of Ukraine:

Ukraine did not follow a specific and set foreign policy for a long time, firstly fixating on being a Neutral State, but the latest ambition since 2014 is to towards the EU and NATO membership (which is directly against Russian national interests).

• First and foremost, membership in the EU means heavy economic revival. EU invests significantly in new countries, particularly in the East, and with new investment coming in, Ukraine would see economic boom.

• For Ukraine, this is also about being at Big/Good Boys Club where they could not be kicked out, even if they act undemocratically (eg. Poland, Hungary, Turkey etc.) and can get bailed out despite economic mismanagement (eg. Greece, Cyprus). Combine this with the fact that many Ukrainians emigrate and have affinity to emigrate to the EU: an EU citizenship would mean no restrictions thereafter.

• Ukraine's EU and NATO aspirations may be (my personal opinion) heavily influenced by the geopolitics of Poland, which aims to consoldiate its soft power within the EU by having Ukraine, Czechia, Slovak Republic, Hungary, and Baltic countries as allies, to hedge against German and French interests in the EU. Multitude of favorable appointments were given to ex-PMs, politicians, and bureaucrats of Poland/Baltics post 2014.

• Ukraine is also opposed to NS2 gas pipeline (from Russia) which is recently constructed and provides direct access to Germany. Ukraine earns a significant commission from the gas pipeline that flows gas from Russia to the EU in the form of transit fee. This is extremely critical but lengthy point and several altercations have been there between Russia and Ukraine when it comes to Natural Gas.

Interests of Russia:

For Russian geopolitics, following countries matter the most as its sphere of influence: Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and the Caucasus (Georgia/Armenia/Azerbaijan).

• For Russia, this is not about short to mid-term economic losses which they anyhow accounted for. They genuinely believe the red line has been crossed and they had to intervene! Everybody who I know in Russia - from average person to political class - does not want this war (note comment above about "brotherly nation") There are many family ties and cultural ties with Ukraine. And yet, many want that Ukraine strictly does not go for NATO membership, are aghast with (in their view) atrocities against Eastern Ukraine and that some action had to be taken.

• Soviet Union was verbally promised that the NATO borders will not move further Easterward after Germany. They did. While every country is sovereign and have their interests and rights, for Soviet Union (and its successor state, Russia), with every move, they had to spend more and more on defence and protecting their interests. They view this as a subtle bullyism. There is no reason for nations to form a defense pact whose sole aim is to contain Russia: 1999 - Poland, Hungary, Czechia; and 7 Southern and Eastern European countries in 2004.

• Recent events imo only sparked that further: remember protests in Belarus in 2020 (which they view as attempt of Color Revolutions) and very recent protests in Kazakhstan in late 2021. Every single event made Russian geopolitical analysts further believe that this is a direct and indirect encroachment by the US and its allies to fuel discontent into what Russia views as its sphere of influence.

• Recent comments (in last 1-2 years) by Ukrainian government about joining NATO alarmed Russia - Putin ultimately realized that if Ukraine was going to join anyhow, then there better be a buffer zone by capturing Eastern Ukraine. Very few people in Russia want to have a war with Ukraine but they are super pissed about NATO encroachment and ignorance of DNR/LNR. According to Russians, the cost of war that residents in DNR/LNR (Donetsk and Lugansk) have paid for last 8 years is seldom mentioned in Western media if it does not align with the Western point of view.

• "But why should Russia have a say in what's happening in Ukraine? They should be free to follow their destiny". That'd be true but realpolitik does not work that way - see "Cuban Missile Crisis" or "Monroe Doctrine". US placed nuclear weapons in Turkey which led to the Soviet Union placing nuclear weapons in Cuba, less than few hundred kilometers to Florida. That sent the US war machinary into full-throttle and ultimately a resolution was reached when weapons from respective countries were pulled back. Similarly, Monroe Doctrine explicitly dictates that the entire Western Hemisphere is the US backyard. All in all, every major country tries to have a Sphere of Influence (in India's case, that'd be Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, and to a degree Bangladesh). Part of the reason why Indian diplomacy, army, and media alarmed when China tried to encroach around Bhutan.

• And here is the thing: Ukraine is a flatland with its borders being <500km to Moscow and to most strategic Russian resources and oil-fields. NATO forces there means direct threat to Russia and exorbitant amount of money and resources spent on defense and monitoring. More importantly, this sets a precedent of losing one of the most important nation in its sphere of influence - which, as Putin declared, Russia will not accept.

[Piracy Raja]

inta sadavla ippudu

[Dabbakai]

5 minutes ago, Piracy Raja said:

inta sadavla ippudu

sadavaku