It is difficult to get good info on the English-speaking internet. I have been following the Russian-speaking Internet + I have personal contacts (I was born in the Crimea, and raised in Odessa). I am happy to answer questions.
edit: the outside view of this reminds me of the European middle ages. Much of European politics was dominated by the conflict between France (a unified autocratic state), and the Holy Roman Empire (a highly decentralized “superstate” but dominant in central Europe). France was often able to exploit the decentralization of the HRE, and the lack of effective political power of the Hapsburg emperor to get its way, even though a unified HRE would easily defeat it. In fact, one of the stated foreign policy goals of France was to keep the HRE divided, which was accomplished by siding with individual german princes against the Hapsburg emperor (and doing scandalous things like allying with the Ottoman empire, which was a muslim state).
The EU is a kind of modern, liberal HRE, and is having the same difficulties solving coordination problems.
A who’s who chart with the power players would be a good start.
But it’s hard to ask the right questions without having a background. I would have never asked whether the Egyptian military has a problem with Mubarak following Washington consensus policies. Yet it’s something very important for understanding why they allowed the mob to remove Mubarak from power. It’s also the kind of thing that you don’t get to read in Western mainstream media.
By the way, I am not avoiding this question, I simply have no useful information to give you.
The non-obvious part is the Ukrainian government. I can say that Russia is not entirely incorrect when it claims there are radical elements there, but I do not think these elements form anywhere near the dominant majority (a similar situation with iffy radical elements often happens in parlamentary democracies).
The issue also is that Russia uses “fascist” as a rather flexible label. For example, the “Nashi” (“Ours”) youth group:
I have been following the Russian-speaking Internet + I have personal contacts (I was born in the Crimea, and raised in Odessa). I am happy to answer questions.
What are the top reasons people provide when asked why they want to join the EU or the Russian Federation?
How strong is the correlation between the language people speak and their desire to either strengthen the ties with Russia or the EU?
Do people living in the Crimea mostly listen to Russian media or also Ukrainian and western media?
Did at any point, since the crisis started, Russian people in the Crimea seriously feared for their lives/safety?
How is the relation between Russian people in the Crimea and Crimean Tatars?
What are the top reasons people provide when asked why they want to join the EU or the Russian Federation?
Because Ukraine is fairly large, it has complicated demographics (both ethnically and in terms of opinion).
The educated middle class in Ukraine understands that Ukraine inherited weak (in the sense of huge corruption drag on everything) Soviet institutions, feels a sense of shame because of this, and wants to modernize institutions using western Europe (and e.g. Poland) as an example to follow. I think the main push to join EU is this (obviously people also want to do well economically, but I think pride/shame has a lot to do with this as well). I think Russo-sphere is a profoundly dysfunctional and “third world” place in many respects. For example, here is a (russian-speaking, but pictures speak for themselves) url showing what some hospitals look like in Russia (w/ some comparison to how the elite live): http://lj-editors.livejournal.com/393747.html
The intelligentsia (both in Ukraine and Russia) is ashamed and deeply critical of Putin. Many Russian members of intelligentsia are ashamed to be Russian right now. There are anti-war protesters in Russia that are getting jailed.
It is also true that there is a segment of the population in Ukraine that does not like Russians (and Jews!), and some of these folks are fairly radical, and further some of these folks were involved in the February revolution. Some of these folks view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera as a folk hero, although he has a negative status in Russia as a Nazi collaborator (the worst thing you could be in Russia). “Banderan” is a typical slur/catchall used against radical nationalist Ukrainians. These folks have motivations that are obvious.
It is also true that there are a lot of Russians/Russian speaking people living in the Ukraine, and when Ukraine obtained independence it started making moves that made this group unhappy (e.g. mandating Ukrainian for official use, and for education). There is a (racist) perception among some Russians that the Ukrainian language is a kind of “village dialect” of Russian, and not a real language (which is of course preposterous). Some of these folks worry about that an independent, Europe-oriented Ukraine will suppress Russian language and culture, and for this reason may prefer a more Russia-oriented stance.
Further, some (generally older) folks (Russian or not) share Putin’s view that the breakup of USSR diminished Russia’s place in the world, and for this reason prefer a stronger “USSR sphere” which would include Ukraine staying in Russia’s sphere.
How strong is the correlation between the language people speak and their desire to either strengthen the ties
with Russia or the EU?
I hope the above answered some of this. I think Putin’s invasion showed his true colors, and radicalized Ukrainians against Putin’s Russia. For example, in Donetsk (eastern “russian” part of Ukraine), the pro-Ukraine demonstrations are now vastly larger than anti-Ukraine. Odessa had very large pro-Ukraine demonstrations (some say largest in Odessa history).
Do people living in the Crimea mostly listen to Russian media or also Ukrainian and western media?
I do not have the information to answer this. I know independent Russian-speaking news sites are under continuous DDOS attack from Russia (but generally are handling it well, and are staying up). There is a huge activity of pro-kremlin 50-centers (“Kremlinbots” as they are called) on all major news media sites with comments.
The internet (especially social media) is making it far easier to get reasonable news quickly, despite disruption attempts from Russia.
Did at any point, since the crisis started, Russian people in the Crimea seriously feared for their lives/safety?
I would find troops with guns milling around and military tech scary. The point of the invasion is to pass a referendum in Crimea to join Russia under the barrel of a gun. I do not think the Crimeans were genuinely worried about the Russian spetsnaz, e.g. opening fire on them. However, military units in the Crimea who are loyal to Kiev are under tremendous pressure/siege to surrender. Some Ukrainian personnel were wounded with non-lethal stuff the Russians are using (e.g. flash grenades).
How is the relation between Russian people in the Crimea and Crimean Tatars?
What follows is conventional history (e.g. don’t need me for this, but providing as a reference):
There is a lot of bad blood between Crimean tatars and russians for historical reasons. The tatars are a turkish people that migrated with the mongols and were a part of the Horde (original connotation of “Yurt”/”Orda”, meaning a nomadic tent) that conquered Rus (what we call “mongols”, russians call “mongol-tatars”.) When the original Horde fell apart, the Crimean tatars had a Khanate that included Crimea and most of southern Ukraine, and were allied with the Ottomans. Tatars were a heavily oppressed minority during Tsarist Russian days, and were relocated from the Crimea to central Asia by Stalin around the time of the second war due to the same worries that led to japanese-american internment.
Despite the bad blood, the sides mostly kept to themselves, and the situation resembled typical ethnic tensions found in many other places (e.g. nowhere close to genocide).
Ukraine’s standard of living is very low, so it is difficult to compare directly with a middle class in a Western country. But by “educated middle class” I mean, roughly, college graduates, white collar workers, engineers, teachers (many quite poor by our standards!) The kinds of people that make a living in a way a middle class person does, and that have received a certain basic education level.
How many percent of the population would you count into that class?
I am not sure. I think at most half of the population is middle class, and some proportion of this is educated. Maybe 10-20% of the overall population? This is me shooting from the hip.
Thanks! Could you also comment on the following points published by the U.S. Department of State: President Putin’s Fiction: 10 False Claims About Ukraine. Who is less wrong about those 10 claims, Putin or the U.S. Department of State?
Putin is farcically lying about 1. We can even identify specific units sent (for example the “East” battallion sent to Dzhankoy). Not even mentioning, e.g. russian license plates on military tech. Putin’s claim that the troops wear uniforms “that you can buy in any store” are widely ridiculed in the Russosphere. The troops in the Crimea are Russian infantry Spetsnaz.
2: there might be some scope for Russian troop presence, but I did not read the agreement in detail. Not willing to pass judgement yet.
4: legitimacy is a matter of interpretation, so a tie.
Russian state TV is farcically lying about 5 (e.g. they are showing footage of what is supposed to be the Ukrainian/Russian border with a string of refugees, but is in reality the Ukrainian/Polish border identifiable by landmarks, with regular car traffic).
8: it is difficult to say because of the possibility of “black ops.” I have heard an account from a Crimean Rabbi that there was a swastika graffiti that appeared the day after Russian troops arrived (and this sort of thing never happened before).
9: I don’t know what Putin is trying to say here.
10: there is some radical influence in the Rada, but I do not think the radicals form anywhere near a dominant majority.
I have been following the Russian-speaking Internet + I have personal contacts (I was born in the Crimea, and raised in Odessa). I am happy to answer questions.
My girlfriend was born in Odessa, has family there, all pure-blood Ashkenazi. I’ve heard that Russian control of Ukraine would be better for Ukrainian Jews. It’s not a precise claim, but do you think it’s accurate?
“They lost their lives because they defended men and women, children and the elderly who found themselves in a situation facing a threat to be killed by invaders and sponsored by them subhumans. First, we will commemorate the heroes by wiping out those who killed them and then by cleaning our land from the evil”
That’s the prime minister. From Ukrainian embassy website. Those who speak Russian don’t have to wait for such things to be translated to English.
Ukrainians are quite anti-semitic, but so are russians. Probably given this, an autocratic asshole with an interest in appearing photogenic would seem like a better deal. Historically persecuted minorities do worse under weakened centralization.
Though if your choices are such that Putin is a better idea, then it seems to me that the correct response for an Odessan jew is to move to Brooklyn (?).
This is a good question! Very rich folks like Victor Pinchuk in that part of the world are hard to know well. I am guessing he covertly supported the February revolution, and probably has ties with the new government.
The thing that I don’t quite understand is why someone who’s financial interests are about selling pipes to Russian companies will found the Yalta European Strategy to increase ties between the EU and the Ukraine?
While this is an interesting conversation to have, I should point out that I no longer claim any sort of special knowledge due to being from that part of the world, or being able to read Russian language news. This is the sort of question you need a highly paid analyst for.
Pinchuk seems smart (I have read an interview of his). I think he basically realizes people like him do best in the long run in a legally stable environment, which means EU and not Russia. The issue with Russia is very weak institutions, that is a government of men and not laws. Bad for business (though well connected people can become very rich in such an environment, crucially they cannot reliably count on staying rich, or free, or alive).
This is the sort of question you need a highly paid analyst for.
To me it seems like a straightforward question. Russian mainstream media probably won’t ask it but there might be good blogs who do.
As far as I understand the situation at the moment and please correct me if I got something wrong or missed something important:
The EU proposed an association agreement last year that would have integrated the Ukraine into military exercises with EU countries and that would prevented the Ukraine from having a trade free agreement with Russia.
The Ukrainian president Yanukovych said no. Then the Yalta group headed by Pinchuk got angry. Europe didn’t wanted to do that much about it but the US was willing to spend 5 billion to buy a revolution to switch the regime of Yanukovych with one that would accept the association agreement.
From an EU perspective, we have enough trouble on our own supporting countries like Greece but there are still US policy makers who believe in cold war containment, so they choose to play strongly. Figures like George Soros are willing to fund related courses.
Pinchuk made his money with selling pipes but owns 1⁄3 of the Ukrainians media. For a while he was in parliament but he thinks he can do more working outside of it. He also made Time 100 most influential people once, his company was the first to go to Davos. He knows the US people, he signed Bill Gates pledge. He does a lot to combat AIDS but a lot of his charitable donations go into building civil society organisations that serve his political ends which happens to get the Ukraine into EU.
He wasn’t just a passive spectator. “We were on the phone constantly–with businessmen, with politicians, with our Western and Eastern friends, discussing what all of us could do.”
Other interesting information from the article:
Pinchuk’s fortune is tied to trade with Russia. Lest he forget that, Vladimir Putin’s regime recently imposed crippling tariffs on his core asset, the steel tube company Interpipe.
Recently is an interesting word. Having a date would be nice to understand the timeline of events better.
It seems very much like someone overplayed their hand. They gave weapons to facists that aren’t really nice. They didn’t anticipate that the Crimerian government rather wants Crimeria to be part of Russia than of the Ukraine. The didn’t anticipate that Russia can just move in and take Crimeria.
Given what happened in Georgia that seems stupid on the part of the US but it’s the US.
The alternative is that Pinchuk was angry at Russia for the tariffs and therefore gave the US bad intel about Crimeria to get them into play.
It is difficult to get good info on the English-speaking internet. I have been following the Russian-speaking Internet + I have personal contacts (I was born in the Crimea, and raised in Odessa). I am happy to answer questions.
edit: the outside view of this reminds me of the European middle ages. Much of European politics was dominated by the conflict between France (a unified autocratic state), and the Holy Roman Empire (a highly decentralized “superstate” but dominant in central Europe). France was often able to exploit the decentralization of the HRE, and the lack of effective political power of the Hapsburg emperor to get its way, even though a unified HRE would easily defeat it. In fact, one of the stated foreign policy goals of France was to keep the HRE divided, which was accomplished by siding with individual german princes against the Hapsburg emperor (and doing scandalous things like allying with the Ottoman empire, which was a muslim state).
The EU is a kind of modern, liberal HRE, and is having the same difficulties solving coordination problems.
A who’s who chart with the power players would be a good start.
But it’s hard to ask the right questions without having a background. I would have never asked whether the Egyptian military has a problem with Mubarak following Washington consensus policies. Yet it’s something very important for understanding why they allowed the mob to remove Mubarak from power. It’s also the kind of thing that you don’t get to read in Western mainstream media.
By the way, I am not avoiding this question, I simply have no useful information to give you.
The non-obvious part is the Ukrainian government. I can say that Russia is not entirely incorrect when it claims there are radical elements there, but I do not think these elements form anywhere near the dominant majority (a similar situation with iffy radical elements often happens in parlamentary democracies).
The issue also is that Russia uses “fascist” as a rather flexible label. For example, the “Nashi” (“Ours”) youth group:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nashi_(youth_movement%29 http://www.nashi.su/
is called an “anti-fascist” youth organization, but is precisely the opposite (heavy shades of Hitler youth).
Those two pieces are both useful information. On their own not enough but they help with building the full picture. Knowing things is hard.
What are the top reasons people provide when asked why they want to join the EU or the Russian Federation?
How strong is the correlation between the language people speak and their desire to either strengthen the ties with Russia or the EU?
Do people living in the Crimea mostly listen to Russian media or also Ukrainian and western media?
Did at any point, since the crisis started, Russian people in the Crimea seriously feared for their lives/safety?
How is the relation between Russian people in the Crimea and Crimean Tatars?
Because Ukraine is fairly large, it has complicated demographics (both ethnically and in terms of opinion).
The educated middle class in Ukraine understands that Ukraine inherited weak (in the sense of huge corruption drag on everything) Soviet institutions, feels a sense of shame because of this, and wants to modernize institutions using western Europe (and e.g. Poland) as an example to follow. I think the main push to join EU is this (obviously people also want to do well economically, but I think pride/shame has a lot to do with this as well). I think Russo-sphere is a profoundly dysfunctional and “third world” place in many respects. For example, here is a (russian-speaking, but pictures speak for themselves) url showing what some hospitals look like in Russia (w/ some comparison to how the elite live): http://lj-editors.livejournal.com/393747.html
The intelligentsia (both in Ukraine and Russia) is ashamed and deeply critical of Putin. Many Russian members of intelligentsia are ashamed to be Russian right now. There are anti-war protesters in Russia that are getting jailed.
It is also true that there is a segment of the population in Ukraine that does not like Russians (and Jews!), and some of these folks are fairly radical, and further some of these folks were involved in the February revolution. Some of these folks view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera as a folk hero, although he has a negative status in Russia as a Nazi collaborator (the worst thing you could be in Russia). “Banderan” is a typical slur/catchall used against radical nationalist Ukrainians. These folks have motivations that are obvious.
It is also true that there are a lot of Russians/Russian speaking people living in the Ukraine, and when Ukraine obtained independence it started making moves that made this group unhappy (e.g. mandating Ukrainian for official use, and for education). There is a (racist) perception among some Russians that the Ukrainian language is a kind of “village dialect” of Russian, and not a real language (which is of course preposterous). Some of these folks worry about that an independent, Europe-oriented Ukraine will suppress Russian language and culture, and for this reason may prefer a more Russia-oriented stance.
Further, some (generally older) folks (Russian or not) share Putin’s view that the breakup of USSR diminished Russia’s place in the world, and for this reason prefer a stronger “USSR sphere” which would include Ukraine staying in Russia’s sphere.
I hope the above answered some of this. I think Putin’s invasion showed his true colors, and radicalized Ukrainians against Putin’s Russia. For example, in Donetsk (eastern “russian” part of Ukraine), the pro-Ukraine demonstrations are now vastly larger than anti-Ukraine. Odessa had very large pro-Ukraine demonstrations (some say largest in Odessa history).
I do not have the information to answer this. I know independent Russian-speaking news sites are under continuous DDOS attack from Russia (but generally are handling it well, and are staying up). There is a huge activity of pro-kremlin 50-centers (“Kremlinbots” as they are called) on all major news media sites with comments.
The internet (especially social media) is making it far easier to get reasonable news quickly, despite disruption attempts from Russia.
I would find troops with guns milling around and military tech scary. The point of the invasion is to pass a referendum in Crimea to join Russia under the barrel of a gun. I do not think the Crimeans were genuinely worried about the Russian spetsnaz, e.g. opening fire on them. However, military units in the Crimea who are loyal to Kiev are under tremendous pressure/siege to surrender. Some Ukrainian personnel were wounded with non-lethal stuff the Russians are using (e.g. flash grenades).
What follows is conventional history (e.g. don’t need me for this, but providing as a reference):
There is a lot of bad blood between Crimean tatars and russians for historical reasons. The tatars are a turkish people that migrated with the mongols and were a part of the Horde (original connotation of “Yurt”/”Orda”, meaning a nomadic tent) that conquered Rus (what we call “mongols”, russians call “mongol-tatars”.) When the original Horde fell apart, the Crimean tatars had a Khanate that included Crimea and most of southern Ukraine, and were allied with the Ottomans. Tatars were a heavily oppressed minority during Tsarist Russian days, and were relocated from the Crimea to central Asia by Stalin around the time of the second war due to the same worries that led to japanese-american internment.
Despite the bad blood, the sides mostly kept to themselves, and the situation resembled typical ethnic tensions found in many other places (e.g. nowhere close to genocide).
What people count into the middle class in Ukraine? How many percent of the population would you count into that class?
Ukraine’s standard of living is very low, so it is difficult to compare directly with a middle class in a Western country. But by “educated middle class” I mean, roughly, college graduates, white collar workers, engineers, teachers (many quite poor by our standards!) The kinds of people that make a living in a way a middle class person does, and that have received a certain basic education level.
I am not sure. I think at most half of the population is middle class, and some proportion of this is educated. Maybe 10-20% of the overall population? This is me shooting from the hip.
Thanks! Could you also comment on the following points published by the U.S. Department of State: President Putin’s Fiction: 10 False Claims About Ukraine. Who is less wrong about those 10 claims, Putin or the U.S. Department of State?
Will add to this post as I collect my thoughts:
Putin is farcically lying about 1. We can even identify specific units sent (for example the “East” battallion sent to Dzhankoy). Not even mentioning, e.g. russian license plates on military tech. Putin’s claim that the troops wear uniforms “that you can buy in any store” are widely ridiculed in the Russosphere. The troops in the Crimea are Russian infantry Spetsnaz.
2: there might be some scope for Russian troop presence, but I did not read the agreement in detail. Not willing to pass judgement yet.
4: legitimacy is a matter of interpretation, so a tie.
Russian state TV is farcically lying about 5 (e.g. they are showing footage of what is supposed to be the Ukrainian/Russian border with a string of refugees, but is in reality the Ukrainian/Polish border identifiable by landmarks, with regular car traffic).
8: it is difficult to say because of the possibility of “black ops.” I have heard an account from a Crimean Rabbi that there was a swastika graffiti that appeared the day after Russian troops arrived (and this sort of thing never happened before).
9: I don’t know what Putin is trying to say here.
10: there is some radical influence in the Rada, but I do not think the radicals form anywhere near a dominant majority.
My girlfriend was born in Odessa, has family there, all pure-blood Ashkenazi. I’ve heard that Russian control of Ukraine would be better for Ukrainian Jews. It’s not a precise claim, but do you think it’s accurate?
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:W7a815ys0XwJ:usa.mfa.gov.ua/en/press-center/news/24185-mi-uvichnimo-pamjaty-gerojiv-ochistivshi-nashu-zemlyu-vid-nechistiarsenij-jacenyuk-u-spivchutti-ridnim-i-blizykim-zagiblih-vojiniv-u-lugansyku+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk
before the cache updates, quote:
That’s the prime minister. From Ukrainian embassy website. Those who speak Russian don’t have to wait for such things to be translated to English.
Ukrainians are quite anti-semitic, but so are russians. Probably given this, an autocratic asshole with an interest in appearing photogenic would seem like a better deal. Historically persecuted minorities do worse under weakened centralization.
Though if your choices are such that Putin is a better idea, then it seems to me that the correct response for an Odessan jew is to move to Brooklyn (?).
Given this, doesn’t look likely.
Well Masha Gessen is not necessarily the most trustworthy source on these matters.
After reading a bit, I got a decent question: Who does Victor Pinchuk happen to be in your opinion?
This is a good question! Very rich folks like Victor Pinchuk in that part of the world are hard to know well. I am guessing he covertly supported the February revolution, and probably has ties with the new government.
The thing that I don’t quite understand is why someone who’s financial interests are about selling pipes to Russian companies will found the Yalta European Strategy to increase ties between the EU and the Ukraine?
While this is an interesting conversation to have, I should point out that I no longer claim any sort of special knowledge due to being from that part of the world, or being able to read Russian language news. This is the sort of question you need a highly paid analyst for.
Pinchuk seems smart (I have read an interview of his). I think he basically realizes people like him do best in the long run in a legally stable environment, which means EU and not Russia. The issue with Russia is very weak institutions, that is a government of men and not laws. Bad for business (though well connected people can become very rich in such an environment, crucially they cannot reliably count on staying rich, or free, or alive).
To me it seems like a straightforward question. Russian mainstream media probably won’t ask it but there might be good blogs who do.
As far as I understand the situation at the moment and please correct me if I got something wrong or missed something important:
The EU proposed an association agreement last year that would have integrated the Ukraine into military exercises with EU countries and that would prevented the Ukraine from having a trade free agreement with Russia.
The Ukrainian president Yanukovych said no. Then the Yalta group headed by Pinchuk got angry. Europe didn’t wanted to do that much about it but the US was willing to spend 5 billion to buy a revolution to switch the regime of Yanukovych with one that would accept the association agreement.
From an EU perspective, we have enough trouble on our own supporting countries like Greece but there are still US policy makers who believe in cold war containment, so they choose to play strongly. Figures like George Soros are willing to fund related courses.
Pinchuk made his money with selling pipes but owns 1⁄3 of the Ukrainians media. For a while he was in parliament but he thinks he can do more working outside of it. He also made Time 100 most influential people once, his company was the first to go to Davos. He knows the US people, he signed Bill Gates pledge. He does a lot to combat AIDS but a lot of his charitable donations go into building civil society organisations that serve his political ends which happens to get the Ukraine into EU.
Forbes description of Pinchuk during the crisis:
Other interesting information from the article:
Recently is an interesting word. Having a date would be nice to understand the timeline of events better.
It seems very much like someone overplayed their hand. They gave weapons to facists that aren’t really nice. They didn’t anticipate that the Crimerian government rather wants Crimeria to be part of Russia than of the Ukraine. The didn’t anticipate that Russia can just move in and take Crimeria.
Given what happened in Georgia that seems stupid on the part of the US but it’s the US. The alternative is that Pinchuk was angry at Russia for the tariffs and therefore gave the US bad intel about Crimeria to get them into play.