Why do some keep calling it a civil war instead of a revolution? Sure, the government has hired/collaborated with non-government people to cause trouble/beat up the protesters, but which tyrannical government doesn't do that during a revolution? They all do it.
Because the descendands of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lviv_pogroms
perpetrators will want an ethnically pure Ukraine. And East/South of Ukraine will not allow it.
US state department is interested in the break up and pushing west ukr down the throat of EU(Germany) which really
is not interested in that right now (EU is going down with PIIGS, but US needs even weaker EU with +50mil dirt poor Ukrainians with extremely corrupt political system ). Russia probably wants the split too, east ukr will be easier to control and they get rid of western ultra-right/nazi/Bandera followers.
This is not correct. I don't know any influential Ukrainian nationalists who want ethnic purity to rule them all. Even Stepan Bandera welcomed Russians and Jews (!) who aren't enemies of Ukrainian state.
Please stop this crazy Nazi bias and fear mongering. Yes, there were some parts of nationalist movements during WWII who tried to use Nazi force to establish Independent Ukraine, but this union was situational, tense and fragile (and I am not proud of it).
From the videos I saw and from what I tried to read on the subject, large portion of the black clad youth on the square belongs to ultra right "Svoboda" party ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svoboda_(political_party)#Ideol... ) and others . These are not your regular tired of corruption ukrainians but highly trained defacto militia.
I just constantly compare it with Egypt's revolution and the people on the street looked very different from Maidan . It was more popular, spontaneous uprising , in ukraine it looks extremely organized and professional. The whole things smells heavy of outside intervention, just my personal opinion
Svoboda had to give up much of its "radical" appeal to gain real popularity. Now its target audience is not marginal skinheads and radical nationalists, Svoboda has attracted a lot, a lot of people (10% of votes in Ukraine in 2012) who don't want to vote for the old corrupted opposition (Tymoshenko's "Batkivshchyna", Socialist Party of Ukraine, Green Movement, etc) and don't trust their hollow "patriotism". Yes, you can find old videos where Tyagnybok says all kind of far right things, but he's too much of a politic, he says what gains popularity in his target audience and he's a hostage of the strongly patriotic crowd now. Far right radicals are now out of Svoboda making Right Sector, which is partly responsible for Hrushevskogo actions.
> it looks extremely organized and professional
- you haven't seen the first days of Maidan when it was chaotic and crystallizing before our eyes. I'd ascribe its amusing (but not supernatural) self-organization to powerful social networking and Orange Revolution experience.
Constantly burning car tires, large-scale production of Molotov cocktails, great skills at building barricades, lots of people wearing body protection ... This does not look like self-organization at all. Surely, someone has been seriously training for this.
> Constantly burning car tires
- that does not require any training and was invented after few days of inhaling police tear gas.
> large-scale production of Molotov cocktails
- please see the previous HN post (by a russian blogger, Zyalt) where you can see _poorly_ made "cocktails" that often ignite the thrower. They're made in a hurry by women behind the front line. The large slingshot is also quite a masterpiece of preparation (irony)!
> Body protection
- is essential to be protected from police assaults later. I saw those protesters in the first day when they were completely unprotected.
> great skills at building barricades
- sure, peaceful guards of Maidan had a great opportunity to learn how to do that during several police assaults at nights long before the violent resistance began (there were 2 months of peaceful protests at Maidan before radicals started violent actions on Hrushevskogo street - and Maidan is still a place for peaceful protest). Large barricades appeared after a police raid at night on December 11 when police tried to disassemble fences around Maidan using tear gas, sticks and physical pressure. Nobody used explicit violence at that time, but that was a great lesson how to defense.
This is ridiculous... Except of few crazy people no one wants ethnically pure Ukraine. I grew up in western Ukraine and I have never seen single person discriminated for being Russian. I don't know why would you post that wiki link, WW2 situation was complex, but 100 years passed and it has nothing to do with current situation.
"One of the major forces at Euromaidan is the far-right xenophobic party ‘Svoboda’ (‘Freedom’). They are dominant among the volunteering guards of the protest camp and are the vanguard of the most radical street actions such as the occupation of the administrative buildings in the center of Kiev. Before 2004 ‘Svoboda’ was called Social-National Party of Ukraine and used Nazi ‘Wolfsangel’ symbol. The party leader Oleh Tiahnybok is still known for his anti-Semitic speech. Even after its re-branding, Svoboda is establishing cooperation with Neo-Nazi and neofascist European parties such as National Democratic Party of Germany and Forza nuova of Italy. Its rank-and-file militants are frequently involved in street violence and hate crimes against migrants and political opponents". [1]
You should have also cited some Russian news...
But there's some truth in this - 'Svoboda' is indeed far-right party, but it definitely doesn't have trained militants and I don't recall any "hate crimes against migrants and political opponents".
'Svoboda' is only one of the forces, having or not having Svoboda there doesn't change anything.
I do investigate my sources of information and, when discussing anything, I always try to use sources that are legitimate to all discussing parties.
So, please, don't invent stuff. This information source is not sympathetic to Russia. Also, it supports the Ukrainian protests. I have yet to read a single article from Cпільне that is pro-Russia in even the slightest way.
> Having or not having Svoboda there doesn't change anything.
Back in the autumn on one of the Moscow suburban electric train stations I've spoken to a man from Ukraine that has said that the economic situation in the country is terrible and it is on the brink of the civil war.
I wish Ukrainians all the best in their struggle for freedom and better life, but the main players of Ukrainian opposition might be much better off not allying itself with Nazi sympathizers. If they won't do it, they might alienate Eastern Ukrainians that also hate Yanukovych to the point that they might have an armed internal conflict.
I'm not familiar with the source, but abstract you cited is manipulation. There's no trained militants, nazi, etc.
Such texts are used to divide East/West Ukraine, so current regime can survive (classic divide and conquer).
I'm serious, I lived 25 years in Western Ukraine and I don't remember single person having issues because of being Russian.
A lot of my friends are Russian and they freely spoke Russian as their everyday language (not just at home).
There's no evidence the US wants a "weaker EU" and I doubt you personally have access to classified state department documents, and nothing of this sort was in any of the documents leaked by Manning. A weak EU is not in America's interest with a rising China and waning influence. The US has continuously asked allies to increase their military spending, so you are just spouting off run-of-the-mill incredulous and unthoughtful anti-american cynicism.
Yes. In a revolution, the population is more or less united against the government. In a civil war, there are two opposing sides, both made up of the general population fighting against each other. One of the factions in a civil war can also be supported by the government, but the point is there are civilians fighting on both sides, whereas in a revolution there are civilians only on one side.
I think there is often mass support for the government during a revolution. There were Americans loyal to the crown during the American revolution, and no shortage of people at least opposed to the revolutionaries during the French revolution (War in the Vendée and so on).
I would suggest the dual of your definition: in a revolution, there are established political actors only one side, whereas in a civil war, they are on both sides. The English civil war looks very much like a revolution (people vs king and nobility), but the fact that parliament was on the people's side makes it a civil war. The American civil war pitted various states against the United States.
Or more broadly, civilians vs. people in power, whether they're a part of the government or not. (E.g. the French revolution which targeted the aristocracy.)
There is little connection if any between people speaking Russian and those wanting a "Russian" Ukraine. I come from russian-speaking part of Ukraine myself and hardly anyone here supports current government.
Most Ukranians speak Russian due to eastern/southern parts larger than the western part. A lot of Ukranians speak "surjik" which is a mix between Russian and Ukranian and Western Ukranians speek a mix of Polish and Ukranian. I'd say there aren't many people that speak perfect Ukranian. Do you count people speaking "surjik" as Russian or Ukranian speakers?
There is no civil war, if it was a civil war the western part wouldn't survive a day. Nor the Russian speaking Ukranians want "Russian" Ukraine.
The eastern part is mostly Russian-speaking but that does not mean all they want to speak Russian, it is just a convention there that slowly breaks up. Ethnic Russians are only 17% of the population and mostly live in Crimea and Donetsk/Lugansk oblasts. Most of people in Kharkov, Dnipropetrovsk, Odessa are still Ukrainians under heavy influence of Russian media and culture. "Russian Ukraine" is more of Crimea myth. People from all regions are ok with the existing Ukrainian state as far as they don't feel they are discriminated or demonized for other parts (it's a part of grudge between West Ukraine and Donetsk Ukraine, they often fault each other, Russia helps the latter much to do that, depicting evil Westerners as unbridled Nazi nationalists).
It's not so much about whether they speak Russian or not. Eastern Ukraine is just generally closer ideologically to Russia whereas Western Ukraine prefers to maintain close ties with Europe.
You can see that reflected quite clearly in the split between west and east in where the protests are.
In general the president is supported by the eastern part of Ukraine, but is also a convicted criminal who sent the previous president to jail on trumped up charges (which is what's blocking their entry into the EU.)
FWIW, the linked presentation gives a pretty good overview of the dynamics at play at the moment... from the perspective of the protesters of course.
Yes, Tymoshenko is not an angel by any means, but her conviction was clearly a political act to frighten other possible rivals with selective justice. Also, this was a great deal to gain some Putin's favor.
