Skip to main content

In the city of Donetsk a pro-Russian group has declared independence.

Pavel Gubarev spearheaded a takeover of the government headquarters by a mob that broke through security grilles and smashed down the doors on Monday. A day later supporters of the new regime filled the red leather seats in the provincial chamber to consider his agenda.
The advertising executive declared he would co-opt a planned local vote on autonomy from Kiev and tilt the city away from Ukraine in a new alignment with Russia.
It appears that the break up of Ukraine into east and west continues.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Kharkov is next eom (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, corvo, whizdom

    We're shocked by a naked nipple, but not by naked aggression.

    by Lepanto on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 01:29:59 PM PST

  •  There have been several pro Russian demonstrations (18+ / 0-)

    in Ukrainian cities. It is probably a bit early to know what the import of this declaration is. However, I suppose that the pronouncements of this mob have as much validity as the pronouncements of the mob in Independence Sq in Kiev. It all depends on who is interested in listening to you.

  •  Will Putin put down this (15+ / 0-)

    mob action and return the duly elected representatives to power, comporting with his statement of earlier today?

    "So listen, oh, Don't wait." Vampire Weekend.

    by Publius2008 on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 01:35:08 PM PST

  •  Donetsk is Ukraine's most pro-Russian large city (8+ / 0-)

    "If Wall Street paid a tax on every “game” they run, we would get enough revenue to run the government on." ~ Will Rogers

    by Lefty Coaster on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 01:37:48 PM PST

  •  Not to worry, they're sending in the oligarchs (9+ / 0-)
    As tensions rose on the streets of the Russian-speaking eastern portion of Ukraine, the response of the new government in the capital on Sunday was not to send troops, but to send rich people.
  •  Does anybody know if the Archduke Ferdinand is OK? (15+ / 0-)

    He hasn't been in the news.

    Rivers are horses and kayaks are their saddles

    by River Rover on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 01:43:54 PM PST

  •  Thanks for posting this. (7+ / 0-)

    I have actually spent some time in Donetsk.

  •  Kiev will not allow this to stand (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, cotterperson, cville townie

    They will send troops to block an expected deployment of Russian troops.

    The Stars and Bars and the red swastika banner are both offerings to the same barbaric god.

    by amyzex on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 01:58:25 PM PST

    •  The question now is what the ethnic (6+ / 0-)

      make up of the military is and how loyal the ethnic Russians are in the Army. Also how well they take the removal of Yanukovych, whether they see it as legitimate or not. He was elected president by a majority a number of times and as much as some folks don't like him they like his ouster even less.

      I suspect the current leadership in Ukraine, whatever  that means for now, is hesitant to confront Russia for these reasons.

      If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

      by AoT on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:03:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is a mess... (5+ / 0-)

    I saw some polling done on the language across the Ukraine and some results from the previous election. It would appear that Eastern Ukraine and Crimea likely want to side with Russia.

    To be first in the soil, which erupts in the coil, of trees veins and grasses all brought to a boil. -- The Maxx

    by notrouble on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 01:59:00 PM PST

    •  It's a little more complicated than that, (0+ / 0-)

      I think.

      The 2001 Ukrainian census surveyed native language in each province. Note that is native language, not everyday language; Russian may be a lingua franca in a few more eastern areas that are well divided. Only 3 provinces (oblasts) are majority native Russian speakers; two of them are Crimea and Donetsk. Three more provinces are more evenly divided, including Kharkhiv and Odessa. In between are areas which are fairly evenly divided politically and majority Ukrainian speakers, including Kherson oblast just north of the Crimea.

  •  a most excellent idea (6+ / 0-)

    we should get involved in picking the next leader of a unified Ukraine.  
    It is too important to leave to the Ukranians to decide.

  •  Soviets (5+ / 0-)

    The Soviets "integrated"  its colonies to make its rule easier.  Same tactic done by most colonial powers, with the same results, an unstable populace once freedom is achieved.  Ukraine is no different than India in this regard--or most Middle East former colonies.  Mapmakers also combined and extracted, the result was unstable countries.  Sadly, the old Ukraine no longer exists, and a split up is inevitable.  A nation is defined by similar people speaking one language--and, eventually, that's what we'll have here.  

    Remember--terrorists are called freedom fighters by the resultant nations.  Washington was a terrorist.  Gandhi was a terrorist.  Mandela was a terrorist.  Today they are heroes.  Colonialism was a cancer, what we see here are some of the results--uncontrollable bleeding and amputation.

    Actions speak louder than petitions.

    by melvynny on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:04:04 PM PST

    •  From what I've been reading, the Russians (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      did the genocide by forcibly shipping the Tatars out of their homeland in the Crimea and off to Kazakstan, and only about 2/3 survived the trip.  Maybe a number of countries have integrated their colonies, but the list of those who conducted genocide is fewer, with Russia, the (colonies and country of) US and Germany pretty close to the top of the list.

      I'm sure others can fill in the information about SE Asia, Armenia, Australia, Africa...

      •  In terms of Genocide virtually every colonial (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ColoTim, melvynny, Wreck Smurfy

        power was guilty of it to some extent or another. It's the rule rather than the exception. Certainly Britain and Spain are a couple of the worst offenders, Germany just gets more notice because it's the most recent.

        If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

        by AoT on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:32:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Germany (0+ / 0-)

          Their genocide is in a class of itself.

          Actions speak louder than petitions.

          by melvynny on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 03:01:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not really (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Except in that it was more recent. The Belgian genocide in Congo was as bad in terms of sheer numbers, as was the genocide of American Indians, and the English genocide of the Irish.

            Certainly Germany used different methods, but the idea that it was substantially worse than other genocides is just wrong.

            If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

            by AoT on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 03:33:06 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Do you think there is any worthwhile (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              distinction between policies that may have genocidal effects and a conscious policy of racial extermination?

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 04:29:01 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, not really (0+ / 0-)

                And there are plenty of intentional genocides, especially when we're talking about the British. The genocide of the American Indians was intentional, as was the genocide of the Irish. I suppose it makes the people who planned them worse, but not the actual genocides. I don't think anyone who died in the Belgian Congo was thinking "Well, at least it's just neglect and not active genocide."

                But I'm generally more concerned with effect as opposed to intention. If a group continues a policy despite the genocidal effect it has then they are as bad as a group who is intentionally wiping out a people. If they cause widespread damage through some horrible coincidence and then stop once they realize then they themselves aren't as bad, but the act may well be.

                Either way, most people have a near complete lack of knowledge as to the colonial/capitalist history of genocide. They think that Germany was somehow uniquely bad. I disagree.

                If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                by AoT on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 04:41:58 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I agree entirely with your second paragraph (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  I must disagree with the first though, if only for the practical reason that there is a greater chance for survival where physical extermination isn't the actual goal.

                  Nothing human is alien to me.

                  by WB Reeves on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 04:49:02 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That's not always true though (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    WB Reeves

                    The British and the Spanish both managed to actually genocide entire peoples and never "intentionally" did so. The Tasmanians being the best know example. Often unintentional genocides can be more deadly than intentional ones, the genocide in the Belgian Congo being an obvious example.

                    If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                    by AoT on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 05:14:33 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  This is one reason why I appreciate our (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:

                      exchanges. You always send me off to investigate. The Tasmanian tragedy I knew of but knew little about.

                      Your larger point stands but I have one caveat. I don't think that one can automatically include deaths due to the introduction European disease under the heading of genocide. Particularly when such occurred prior to any knowledge of germ theory or immunity.

                      Rahael Lemkin, who first coined the term Genocide, defined it as follows:

                      "Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups."
                      (emphasis added)

                      There are newer, competing definitions but I know of none that elide the requirement that Genocide be the product of an intentional plan or design. Some degree of agency is required.

                      Since the highest mortality from introduced disease amongst first nations peoples occurred in the initial stages of European contact and colonization, a period when the Europeans themselves were ignorant as to the sources of disease and infection, these deaths cannot be ascribed to any genocidal intention or policy. Otherwise any mortality from diseases introduced by contact between previously distinct populations would be genocide.

                      The destruction of the Arawak peoples through the Spanish Economedia is probably a more apt example. Even here though the question of intentionality is significant, perhaps key, since the Economedia was finally abolished through the efforts of Spaniards who opposed its abuse and enslavement of native peoples. A conscious policy of extermination would have precluded such reforms, since indigenous populations would likely have been wiped out before before they could be effected.

                      Similarly, if a conscious policy of extermination had been pursued consistently in North America, there would likely be no native populations extant today. The actual record of atrocity is horrific enough but it could have been even worse.

                      Nothing human is alien to me.

                      by WB Reeves on Wed Mar 05, 2014 at 01:13:55 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Again, I see the result as more important (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        WB Reeves

                        but I do see the point your making. There were various intentional attempts to kill off native peoples, and while I do think it's a bit unfair to blame Europeans for the introduction of diseases they had no control over or knowledge of, I was thinking of the intentional destruction of social and political institutions as much as the huge number of deaths. And that was most certainly an intentional project in the US, one that continues today in some places and ways, albeit now less intentionally most of the time, although not always.

                        The other example would be the destruction of the native people in the bay area and other parts of California when anglos started settling. Although the Spanish also pursued genocide under the broad definition with the Christianization and destruction of local languages. That's been the most common form of genocide under colonialism from what I can tell.

                        I should add that the main reason I reject the intentionality as making it worse is that we currently have a system that is theoretically entirely race and gender neutral, and yet in fact exhibits incredible racism, sexism, and other things of that sort. I'm of the opinion that excluding the unintentional will mean that those things continue because the argument always ends up with "but it isn't intentional" as if that makes it better. I run into this so often that I tend to take a pretty hard line stance. Additionally, as someone with a philosophy degree who studied far more ethics than I ever intended, I'm skeptical of ethical arguments abut intention and the like. Especially when I see people claiming things like the US doesn't intentionally kill children even though the US drops bombs it reasonably knows will kill children. So I admit I may go a bit overboard, but I find it a useful heuristic in evaluating actions.

                        If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                        by AoT on Wed Mar 05, 2014 at 01:38:11 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I understand and appreciate (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          your concern but I think it falls under the heading of moral and ethical judgment.

                          Not being any sort of Priest or considering myself a spiritual guide, my concern lies with material outcomes. If the Europeans had followed a conscious and consistent policy of physical extermination, I think there's little doubt that that they would have succeeded. Certainly they would have in North America.

                          I don't believe this in any way excuses what actually occurred. I do think that the distinction has a profound impact on how we can effectively oppose policies that have genocidal outcomes. Where such outcomes are unintentional, they can be combated by by exposing their actual character to public scrutiny. Those who support such policies because they desire genocidal outcomes must be dealt with in a far different manner.

                          I likewise agree that intentionality is largely irrelevant to the issues of institutional racism, sexism, etc., except as it impacts the effectiveness of our own efforts as cited above.  

                          Nothing human is alien to me.

                          by WB Reeves on Wed Mar 05, 2014 at 02:14:26 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                •  The mechanization of it was unique, if not (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT, JrCrone

                  uniquely worse.

                  •  The mechanization was unique (0+ / 0-)

                    Although to some extent they learned from other earlier genocides, such as that of the American Indian. But I think that was merely a result of the time it occurred. If Andrew Jackson has access to the same technology I don't doubt he would have used it on the American Indians.

                    I should add that I don't mean to minimize the holocaust. I want instead to bring forward other genocides as equally deserving of remembrance as the holocaust, some more so.  And the fact that Germany is the only country that has really been held to account for genocide is the result of this historical blindness.

                    If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                    by AoT on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 05:11:15 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Didn't take you as minimizing. And I have little (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:

                      doubt if Jackson had the tech, he would have employed it.

                      At least to some extent.

                      But it does, nevertheless, make it unique.

                      And I doubt Jackson would have been as well organized.  That organization seems to have been a unique coming together of lots of historical stuff.

                      Stalin didn't mechanize like the Germans did, though could have.  

                      But again, I think it had something to do with Germany's particular culture at that particular time.

  •  Hell, Perry may invite Putin to the coast of (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ColoTim, Mogolori, JrCrone

    Texas to facilitate secession.

    Ted Cruz president? Pardon my Vietnamese, but Ngo Pho King Way.

    by ZedMont on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:15:05 PM PST

  •  Russia launches nuclear missile today (0+ / 0-)

    The test was carried out ,with notice too the US ,Russia shoot at Ukraine soldiers order them back to barrack ,other than that Syrian continue to be slaughtered in  Syria, African  die in Congo war ,Christian force Muslim out of Congo

  •  What I find most interesting is the EU's lack (5+ / 0-)

    of support for sanctions.

    Germany and other EU members don't want sanctions and Germany is against expelling Russia from the G8.
    The UK is for sanctions, but only insofar as they don't affect London finance (pardon my mirth) !

    Perhaps, just perhaps, the long-run effect of this crisis will be the EU coming closer to Russia and the diminution of US influence.

    Can't help thinking that underneath it all (and despite the usual words, which are easily said and extremely cheap) the EU is not entirely unhappy at Putin's intervention (that will keep the gas coming...) and is somewhat pissed off by Neocon-Nuland's interference in what was happening in the Ukraine.

    But that's just my highly imaginative 2c's worth.

    We're shocked by a naked nipple, but not by naked aggression.

    by Lepanto on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:23:03 PM PST

  •   it will be very interesting to watch how (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, Richard Lyon

    the vote ends up, after all of these protests (if a vote is ever allowed to be held). it is curious that the article makes no estimate of the size of the protest, nor whether it was larger than the pro-kiev counterprotest that followed the action.

    •  I suspect there will be a "vote" and it will ... (0+ / 0-)

      end up showing that 99% of the voters support secession, just like the 99% votes for the rulers of the former Soviet Union.

      Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

      by leevank on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 04:53:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Putin telegraphed this at his press conf. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    When he said he reserved the right to intervene in eastern and southern Ukraine to protect Russian speakers there, I thought he was telegraphing that there would be "spontaneous uprisings" there that forced him to intervene.

    Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

    by leevank on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 04:51:33 PM PST

  •  Also on the topic of who exactly is speaking for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the US and with what voice, there are three articles in Consortium News that are very unsettling.  

    Not just Neo Cons but Neo Nazi.  

    Yeah, there is that other N word we keep being told not to use.
    Like the old joke goes, If the Foo Bird shits, you have to wear it.

    Neocons Move to Exploit Ukraine Crisis http:/Neocons Move to Exploit Ukraine Crisis

    What Neocons Want from Ukraine Crisis http:What Neocons Want from Ukraine
    A Shadow US Foreign Policy A Shadow US Foreign Policy

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site