Violent Clashes in Kharkiv [Ukraine] Leave Dozens Injured
Source: Euronews
Dozens of people have been hurt in clashes in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv. Violence reportedly broke out when pro-Russia activists stormed the regional governments headquarters.
Thousands of people had gathered outside the building during a protest against Ukraines new leaders who ousted President Viktor Yanukovych a week ago. They denounced the Kyiv authorities that have been installed - and called for reunification with Russia. A Russian flag was later seen being raised.
As well as Kharkiv, protests have also taken place in other cities including Donetsk, Yanukovychs home town and power base.
The violence in Kharkiv highlights the challenges Ukraines new leaders could face in mainly Russian-speaking regions which oppose the largely pro-Western course charted by the newly installed government.
Read more: http://www.euronews.com/2014/03/01/ukraine-violent-clashes-in-kharkiv-leave-dozens-injured/
That's the whole article.
The Russians taking Crimea is one thing, the specter of a Ukrainian civil war is another.
applegrove
(118,457 posts)that there is no bloody civil war of any kind. The real problem is the economy is based on bribes. So ones welfare really does depend on whether your guy is in power. Right now the russian side has lost power and all the government contracts, legit or not, that go with it. No wonder the Russian side of the Ukraine is supportive of all things Russian right now. It is corruption that makes democracy so vulnerable. It is like a teeter totter. When your leader is in power you get $$$$$$$$. When the other side is in power you are in so much penury that you dont care if there is war. That graft is dangerous for any country that wants to be democratic. People will fight to the death almost to keep power. In the USA the graft is called tax cuts and it has destroyed the soundness of democracy there and elsewhere. Look at Canada where the conservatives are beingining to play with peoples right to vote. Ukraine needs to come to tems with the poison all across the country that is corruption. But good luck getting Ukrainians to focus on that instead of each other.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)headquarters." quote from the post
For DU posters who seem to think that the only ones in this mess who are at risk of violence are ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, this article suggests just the opposite.
But really, when wars hurt everyone.
That's why those who start them should be roundly condemned.
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)ms way. The other side is. The eastern side are the mass murderers. The western side (majority ) is not going to sink to their level unless forced.
Igel
(35,270 posts)In this case a number of them are whipped into an anti-Ukrainian frenzy by a bunch of rumors. When the Westerners are called "Banderist" it calls to mind a small number of things--actively fighting Stalin, helping Hitler, and ethnically cleansing Poles.
Repealing a language rights law was deemed the same as making Russian illegal. They think that's coming. They fear repression--they still rather like Stalin and Khrushchev in some areas and view their actions as reasonable. But they fear such "reasonable" actions being imposed on them.
They also are terrified. The Donbas is not prosperous. It's obsolete heavy industry. High unemployment, high social dysfunction. Not all that educated. If the political power shifts west for any length of time, they'll be even less prosperous.
They're already pre-demogogued. They tend to vote as a nationalist bloc. They tend to think of themselves as both privileged and underserved, but the most important part of Ukraine. They're ripe for populist thinking, through no fault of their own.
There's also the issue of the Berkut, who have every interest in revenge. Their best course for regaining prestige and importance after being slighted by the ethnic Ukrainians and humiliated by their loss and the exit of their boss is to get Russia to take over and restore their role. If they fail in that, this kind of activity at least restores their sense of personal integrity, as they get revenge for what they perceive as an unmerited wrong.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)He needs to get data analysis people involved and only encroach on areas that they believe are going to be friendly to his imperialist invasion troops. Some of the larger industrial cities in the east are where large numbers of ethnic Ukrainians live (50/50 split in many cases). Some of those may or may not be bothered by the Russian symbols flying on their convoys.
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)Notice how no one was threatening ethnic Russians at any point during the unrest. Now all of a sudden they're "maybe in the future under threat" and need to be pre-emptively rescued by Russia. With pro-Russian forces instigating violence against their Ukrainian countrymen.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Having ethnic Russians go on the attack would be absolute folly. Those doing this are fools.
He can only really claim Crimea, and that's after forced relocation in order to quell dissent.
DFW
(54,268 posts)Putin will be more careful than Hitler was, and the Ukraine is a very weak state, but dismembering a neighboring country just because "it's mine and I want it" has never been a universally accepted foreign policy.
Igel
(35,270 posts)When it dismembered Poland before WWII, when it claimed land as reparations from Germany after WWIi, when it finlandized Finland prior to WWII, when it pushed Poland westward and ethnically cleansed Poles from their traditional lands (if only because Poland, long part of the Russian empire, dared to resist Lenin and Budyonnyi, the ingrates).
It seized the Baltics before WWII and only relinquished them briefly to Hitler, and well nigh went to war with them when they left the USSR.
It has all but annexed Abkhazia and S. Ossetia, taken in two separate operations a decade apart.
It has no problems subjugating surrounding territories--gas and economic blockade of the Baltics, occupation of Georgia, gas stoppages to Ukraine.
It issued Russian passports to many Crimeans during the last tension over the Crimea a decade ago, and has resumed the practice. Putin claims the inherent right to defend (1) ethnic Russians, (2) Russian speakers, (3) Russian citizens, (4) Russian interests--pick a couple for any context.
Now territorial soveignty is the most important criterion. Now territorial integrity. Now Russian interests. It varies. But it's always the one eternal criterion. Go figure.
And everybody's too afraid to do anything about the inconsistency. Big words spoken over Ukraine last time. They echoed once or twice before the energy dissipated into heat. Georgia? Ethnic cleansing of Abkhazia?
Abkhazia made the last 20 years of the IP conflict look tame in the amount of population shifts, resettling, confiscation of land, death toll. But we don't care because Russia's big and we're afraid we might get hurt. Israel's safe. This is what's been said about Gandhi--had he faced Hitler, he'd have been quickly killed and remained a nobody, but because he picked a milquetoast foe he was a giant. We think ourselves giants because we pick small, safe foes, and find excuses to avoid taking on a big foe that might hurt.
That's the universally accepted foreign policy. Russia will do pretty much what it wants to, to the extent that it feels like ignoring the West unless it thinks that there will be actual consequences. We dither and show there will be no consequences; to that extent we embolden Putin and reveal what the actual internationally accepted policy on the ground is.