Ukraine's government was overthrown in 2014, and the new government banned certain opposition parties, which alienated a lot of people in eastern Ukraine, many of whom have cultural ties to Russia, and a seperatist movement seized control of Donbas. The two sides signed a cease-fire, Minsk II, but Ukraine violated that cease-fire by shelling civilian targets, causing Russia to answer the request for aid by the seperatists.
The perspective of NATO supporters is that the seperatists are just a Russian proxy while the Russian perspective is that Ukraine's new government is a NATO proxy. It's difficult to evaluate what people actually want, but the fact that Ukraine felt the need to ban opposition parties and the fact that there are a bunch of people with Russian ties in the disputed territories indicates that the seperatists have some genuine support.
There were many diplomatic off-ramps that could've been taken to avoid the conflict, such as upholding the cease-fire, or perhaps giving the disputed territories a referendum to leave. As it stands, the war has reached a standstill and the general perspective here is that Ukraine can either give up some territorial concessions now, or give up some territorial concessions after throwing a bunch more lives into the meat grinder. Peace now is the best option for the Ukrainian people, but likely US pressure will keep the war going because it's profitable for the defense industry.
Also, Ukraine has a significant Nazi problem, including both paramilitary groups and the government itself. For instance, Ukraine had to fire their ambassador to Germany after he engaged in Holocaust denial right on TV.
Thank you for the reply! This has been super helpful in guiding some reading and providing some context. It's very interesting that there was quite a bit of criticism from all sides about the laws outright banning discussion and support of communism. Following that, there didn't seem to be much in the way of responsiveness to that criticism. Even the Venice Commission was pretty highly critical of it, and of conflating Communism with Nazism.
Afaik, no far-right parties were banned under the law. There are a lot of Banderites in Ukraine and that's where "Slava Ukrani" comes from. Bandera worked for Nazi military intelligence and wanted an independent Ukraine closely allied with Nazi Germany, and enthusiastically performed pogroms on his own initiative (denying his role in the Holocaust was specifically what happened with the Ukrainian ambassador). The only thing was that Hitler didn't want Ukraine as an ally but under his direct control, so that's where they came into conflict.
its a Deeply Divided Country , they only present you the Western Part as "Ukraine" wihle denying any agency of the Eastern Part thats under Attack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWHqj8g7Bk
Ukraine's government was overthrown in 2014, and the new government banned certain opposition parties, which alienated a lot of people in eastern Ukraine, many of whom have cultural ties to Russia, and a seperatist movement seized control of Donbas. The two sides signed a cease-fire, Minsk II, but Ukraine violated that cease-fire by shelling civilian targets, causing Russia to answer the request for aid by the seperatists.
The perspective of NATO supporters is that the seperatists are just a Russian proxy while the Russian perspective is that Ukraine's new government is a NATO proxy. It's difficult to evaluate what people actually want, but the fact that Ukraine felt the need to ban opposition parties and the fact that there are a bunch of people with Russian ties in the disputed territories indicates that the seperatists have some genuine support.
There were many diplomatic off-ramps that could've been taken to avoid the conflict, such as upholding the cease-fire, or perhaps giving the disputed territories a referendum to leave. As it stands, the war has reached a standstill and the general perspective here is that Ukraine can either give up some territorial concessions now, or give up some territorial concessions after throwing a bunch more lives into the meat grinder. Peace now is the best option for the Ukrainian people, but likely US pressure will keep the war going because it's profitable for the defense industry.
Also, Ukraine has a significant Nazi problem, including both paramilitary groups and the government itself. For instance, Ukraine had to fire their ambassador to Germany after he engaged in Holocaust denial right on TV.
Thank you for the reply! This has been super helpful in guiding some reading and providing some context. It's very interesting that there was quite a bit of criticism from all sides about the laws outright banning discussion and support of communism. Following that, there didn't seem to be much in the way of responsiveness to that criticism. Even the Venice Commission was pretty highly critical of it, and of conflating Communism with Nazism.
Afaik, no far-right parties were banned under the law. There are a lot of Banderites in Ukraine and that's where "Slava Ukrani" comes from. Bandera worked for Nazi military intelligence and wanted an independent Ukraine closely allied with Nazi Germany, and enthusiastically performed pogroms on his own initiative (denying his role in the Holocaust was specifically what happened with the Ukrainian ambassador). The only thing was that Hitler didn't want Ukraine as an ally but under his direct control, so that's where they came into conflict.
its a Deeply Divided Country , they only present you the Western Part as "Ukraine" wihle denying any agency of the Eastern Part thats under Attack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWHqj8g7Bk