Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Could anyone inform me as to why there are riots in Ukraine and why the Ukrainian people are revolting against the government? I've been seeing it all over the news, saw a picture of Kiev at the town square and it was once a beautiful site, now partially burned..
The Ukrainians opposing the government wants to pursue a closer trade, financial and economic relationship with the European Union with the eventual membership in the EU as opposed to what the Ukrainian government is doing now by spurning the European Union and forging closer economic and financial ties with Russia.
The Ukrainians opposing the government wants to pursue a closer trade, financial and economic relationship with the European Union with the eventual membership in the EU as opposed to what the Ukrainian government is doing now by spurning the European Union and forging closer economic and financial ties with Russia.
Could anyone inform me as to why there are riots in Ukraine and why the Ukrainian people are revolting against the government? I've been seeing it all over the news, saw a picture of Kiev at the town square and it was once a beautiful site, now partially burned..
For Ukraine ( as much as Russia) the chance of becoming the prosperous, democratic countries in post-Soviet times were ruined in a big way by the involvement of the US and IMF, which didn't care at that point in time about the word of law in those countries, but only about the destruction of the Soviet state and profits for American corporations. As the direct consequence of it, both countries became corrupt entities, with huge division between the rich and the poor, but with somewhat different results. Russia ( that started from Ukraine back in history,) was always rich in natural resources and it was traditionally supporting Ukraine, that didn't have much in this respect. Ukraine on another hand was the most productive agricultural part of the Russian Empire. So Russia still having the natural resources, stayed afloat in economic and political sense of it, while Ukraine sunk deeper and deeper in poverty, desperation and political instability, having big national debt (to Russia including.)
Now since Russia grew more and more insubordinate to Western interests, when she decided to basically purchase the neighboring Ukraine and thus expand her economic power and influence, the EU became adamant, because Europeans have set their eyes on Ukraine themselves, with the purpose of
1. Expending their own economic/political interests in the area
and 2. Curbing Russia's political/economic interests.
At the time of the the bargain, however, Russia could afford to offer much more than E.U, and Ukrainian government being in desperate need of financial help, accepted Russia's offer, since it realized that if the EU offer is accepted with all the applied conditions, the consequences ( sort of what you see in Greece) will be yet another upheaval and overthrowing of the very government that accepted this offer.
Ukrainian population on another hand ( at least part of it,) didn't want to hear anything about Russia, because to them ( as naive as they are,) Russia meant more corruption and suffering, while the EU meant salvation.
They don't want to believe, of course, that for the West it's not about their well-being, their "freedom and democracy," ( otherwise the financial offer would have been much more generous,) but about the desire to curb Russia's aspirations. Part of Ukrainians however (I assume) have already wizened up after the nineties and not all that eager to trust Western promises.
So that's what we are witnessing now - the proxy war between Russia and the West, with Ukraine caught in-between.
Hope this helps.
For Ukraine ( as much as Russia) the chance of becoming the prosperous, democratic countries in post-Soviet times were ruined in a big way by the involvement of the US and IMF, which didn't care at that point in time about the word of law in those countries, but only about the destruction of the Soviet state and profits for American corporations. As the direct consequence of it, both countries became corrupt entities, with huge division between the rich and the poor, but with somewhat different results. Russia ( that started from Ukraine back in history,) was always rich in natural resources and it was traditionally supporting Ukraine, that didn't have much in this respect. Ukraine on another hand was the most productive agricultural part of the Russian Empire. So Russia still having the natural resources, stayed afloat in economic and political sense of it, while Ukraine sunk deeper and deeper in poverty, desperation and political instability, having big national debt (to Russia including.)
Now since Russia grew more and more insubordinate to Western interests, when she decided to basically purchase the neighboring Ukraine and thus expand her economic power and influence, the EU became adamant, because Europeans have set their eyes on Ukraine themselves, with the purpose of
1. Expending their own economic/political interests in the area
and 2. Curbing Russia's political/economic interests.
At the time of the the bargain, however, Russia could afford to offer much more than E.U, and Ukrainian government being in desperate need of financial help, accepted Russia's offer, since it realized that if the EU offer is accepted with all the applied conditions, the consequences ( sort of what you see in Greece) will be yet another upheaval and overthrowing of the very government that accepted this offer.
Ukrainian population on another hand ( at least part of it,) didn't want to hear anything about Russia, because to them ( as naive as they are,) Russia meant more corruption and suffering, while the EU meant salvation.
They don't want to believe, of course, that for the West it's not about their well-being, their "freedom and democracy," ( otherwise the financial offer would have been much more generous,) but about the desire to curb Russia's aspirations. Part of Ukrainians however (I assume) have already wizened up after the nineties and not all that eager to trust Western promises.
So that's what we are witnessing now - the proxy war between Russia and the West, with Ukraine caught in-between.
Hope this helps.
Thank you and that does help immensely. In regards to the current amount of deaths (39 as of several days ago) would you or anyone else anticipate the riots to continue to get more violent. If so, what would you believe is the worst case scenario?
Thank you and that does help immensely. In regards to the current amount of deaths (39 as of several days ago) would you or anyone else anticipate the riots to continue to get more violent. If so, what would you believe is the worst case scenario?
I don't know what's the worst case scenario what's not, but I foresee the arising conflict between the Western part of Ukraine with South-Eastern part of it.
I'll re-post here couple of videos from "Europe" forum - there are quite few threads there on current events in Ukraine.
This is recent pro-Russian event in Sebastopol, Crimea ( Southern part of Ukraine)
I don't know what's the worst case scenario what's not, but I foresee the arising conflict between the Western part of Ukraine with South-Eastern part of it.
I doubt the East-West division is going to be an issue in the near future. Neither Russia nor Europe seem to be interested in splitting up the Ukraine, for now, and there is more separatist hot air coming from some activists in the East than there is popular outrage. Crimea may be the one exception, but Russia again is not interested in taking control over it. Sevastopol will be placated and "pacified" soon, but with little to no violence so as not to provoke Russia.
Now, here are the problems. Two powerful fractions came to power as a result of the Maidan uprising: the Oligarchy and the Ukrainian Nationalists (I'll call them the Neo-Nazis, from now on: to see why anything else would be misleading, acquaint yourself with the history of the Svoboda party - the second major party of the Opposition - and the Right Sector, the well-armed brownshirt brigades that currently patrol the streets of Kiev and western Ukrainian cities).
But the dominant party of the Opposition is the Fatherland party, lead by Julia Tymoshenko (anyone interested in Ukrainian politics should acquaint himself with her very checkered past). It is the party of the Oligarchy that Yanukovich managed to alienate over the course of his presidency. It is the party of the owners of the press and of the industrial infrastructure left over from the Soviet days and stolen by the oligarchs in the heady 1990's (with Tymoshenko being one of them). They felt Yanukovich was a threat (when he imprisoned Tymoshenko and started to "expropriate the expropriators", turning his son and Serhiy Kurchenko, his son's shady 28-year-friend into billionaires over the course of a few years), so they turned against him, including those who financed his election back in 2010. They pandered to the Ukrainian Nationalists, to Western Ukraine, but this is pure cynical political pandering: most of the Oligarchs and the Fatherland party leadership are from the East, very few of them are native Ukrainian speakers, only a minority of them are ethnic Ukrainians.
This is the fraction that the US and Europe backed when they started throwing gasoline into the Ukrainian fire. The calculation was that it would be nothing more than a repeat of the Orange Revolution, which brought Yuschenko and Tymoshenko to power, and everyone went home. The problem is, this time there were the Neo-Nazis. The Neo-Nazis, though weak overall (Svoboda gets about 10% of the national vote in national elections, meaning around 25-30% in the western regions, much less so in central regions and virtually none in the east and south), are militant, exceedingly well organized and are lead by fairly intelligent people. Currently, the Ukrainian police is demoralized, the special forces (Berkut) were disbanded under the pressure of the Neo-Nazi fraction, and the party of the Oligarchy is as weak, purely in the sense of the number of people with guns they have at their disposal, as Yanukovich was the day of his flight. The Neo-Nazis, though their brownshirt brigades are relatively few in number, at the most a few thousand people nationwide, are armed, unified, motivated, and militant. They control Kiev, as the local police is disorganized and scared of repressions (some Berkut officers were executed on the spot when caught, most others are on the run or hiding and waiting to be arrested, which was a brilliant strategic move by the Neo-Nazis at demoralizing the police).
The Oligarchy may try to use the army to put down the Maidan rebellion and the Right Sector brigades (with the West press hailing it this time as victory over counter-revolutionaires and terrorists, even though it will be largely the same people getting mowed down that Yanukovych tried to remove), but this creates the possibility of a military coup and other unpredictable and unpleasant consequences.
And so, there is a stand-off. Neo-Nazis versus the Oligarchs. The Neo-Nazis will not leave the Maidan, even when the common people, disillusioned and bitter over what they have wrought, will, and so it'll be interesting to see how it will play out.
I predict that the Oligarchy will win and disperse the neo-Nazis without having to share power. Tymoshenko already ruled as Prime Minister for most of 2005-2010, so Ukrainians know what to expect in theory (not much, business as usual), but unfortunately the IMF loan conditions and the inerasable mark on Ukraine - "Politically Unstable. Dangerous for Private Property" - will finish off what's left of the Ukrainian economy until the next election cycle, after which either a dictatorship will have to be declared, or massive voting fraud perpetrated, or the new Rada (Parliament) will be made up largely of Neo-Nazis from the West and Communists and Separatists from the East. This will lead to a non-functional Parliament and either the end of Ukraine as a single country, or the end of democracy in the country.
And yes, most Maidan rioters only wanted to protest the extreme corruption, oligarchic thievery and poverty in the Ukraine. What they brought upon themselves is the destruction of the Ukrainian economy and quite likely of Ukraine itself. Kinda similar to Russia in 1917, which makes their ongoing destruction of Lenin statutes ironic on quite a few levels.
The Ukrainians opposing the government wants to pursue a closer trade, financial and economic relationship with the European Union with the eventual membership in the EU as opposed to what the Ukrainian government is doing now by spurning the European Union and forging closer economic and financial ties with Russia.
It doesn't make sense to burn your own cities for that.
Riots are interesting -- and it would be interesting to ask many individuals in the mobs exactly why they are doing what they are doing -- probably many are just stirred up by some leader and they didn't have much else to do with their time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
