I’m here because I think what happens in Ukraine matters. It is not a complicated conflict. Ukraine wants to remain a democratic country where its 40 million people determine their own future. Russia wishes to conquer it and turn it into a puppet state, or even use it as the start of reforming the former Soviet Union. It’s probably the most morally unambiguous conflict since World War II.
So what happens is vitally important to 40 million Ukrainians who are fighting for their nation’s survival as an independent democratic country, but it is also important to the world and New Zealand. As one of the smallest and least powerful countries in the world, we benefit the most from a rules based international order, as opposed to a might based international order. A defeat in Ukraine will not just encourage further Russian expansion in Europe, but will embolden other autocratic regimes.
So when I was given the opportunity to attend the Forum, I thought about it for many weeks, only making a final decision to attend a few weeks ago. I feel very strongly my responsibility to my seven and four year old to remain alive many more years for them, and to be more risk adverse than in my youth. But weighing up against that, the actual risk is very low for me – not zero, but very low. Odessa is a fair way from the frontlines. There are missile attacks from Russia, but a very useful phone app warns you of them, and tells you where the closest shelter is. So far the biggest risk was probably the three hour drive from Moldova, where my driver weaved in and out of traffic constantly as he overtook anyone slower than us.
Ukraine being at war is noticeable. There are military vehicles everywhere along the main road.
Ukraine is not a wealthy country, like many former Soviet countries. The GDP per capita is less than 10% of NZ or around 25% on the PPP basis. Around the same as Vietnam and Ecuador. The outskirts of Odessa look very typical Eastern European, but once you get to the city centre, you have remarkable beauty.
So when I was given the opportunity to attend the Forum, I thought about it for many weeks, only making a final decision to attend a few weeks ago. I feel very strongly my responsibility to my seven and four year old to remain alive many more years for them, and to be more risk adverse than in my youth. But weighing up against that, the actual risk is very low for me – not zero, but very low. Odessa is a fair way from the frontlines. There are missile attacks from Russia, but a very useful phone app warns you of them, and tells you where the closest shelter is. So far the biggest risk was probably the three hour drive from Moldova, where my driver weaved in and out of traffic constantly as he overtook anyone slower than us.
Ukraine being at war is noticeable. There are military vehicles everywhere along the main road.
Ukraine is not a wealthy country, like many former Soviet countries. The GDP per capita is less than 10% of NZ or around 25% on the PPP basis. Around the same as Vietnam and Ecuador. The outskirts of Odessa look very typical Eastern European, but once you get to the city centre, you have remarkable beauty.
The Odessa Opera House which happened to have on a stunning performance of the Don Quixote ballet the evening I arrived.
Every building (and I mean every) in Odessa flies the Ukrainian flag. It is a reminder of how powerful national symbols can be as a unifying force.
The City Gardens, which is surrounded by cafes with outdoor dining, so was my dinner venue last night.
Deribasovskaya Street.
As I said at the beginning, I can’t yet blog details of the speakers and discussion (or venue) of the Forum, but will do so when I can.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
33 comments:
The writer labours the point that Ukraine is a 'democratic country'. It is also recognised as the most corrupt country in Europe and one may wonder how 'democratic' that renders it and whether most people could care less.
He asserts that Russia may be trying to use Ukraine as a first step towards reforming the USSR. Has he a scrap of evidence to the effect that Moscow is intent on bringing back the USSR or something very much like it?
He also speaks of FURTHER Russian expansion in Europe. It is NATO and not Moscow that has been doing the 'expanding'. As for Moscow seeking to 'turn it into a puppet state', that may apply more to Donetsk and Luhansk as buffer states between the Russian homeland and an expanding NATO.
How can GDP be so low and the country fuction reasonably? Is it that few do useless or make work tasks? (like teaching to reo, or shepherding road conesPresumably a war footing hugely boosts g.d.p.
Barend NATO is a defense alliance not a state.
Any country has the right to align with any other group. They make their choices and NATO has been a very reluctant participant since formation.
"I’m here because I think what happens in Ukraine matters. It is not a complicated conflict. Ukraine wants to remain a democratic country where its 40 million people determine their own future. Russia wishes to conquer it and turn it into a puppet state, or even use it as the start of reforming the former Soviet Union. It’s probably the most morally unambiguous conflict since World War II."
Yet Farrah is a diehard supporter of his co-ethnics in Israel destroying and driving out the population of Gaza. He has no interest in Palestinian self-determination, yet he is apparently all aboard for Ukrainian self-determination (a nation that had been a puppet state of the United States since the US-instigated coup in 2014).
The geopolitical case for the Russian invasion of Eastern Ukraine is much strong than anything Israel is doing, and the Russians have been far more restrained in their operations – yet Farrah would have us believe that Ukraine is somehow comparable to WW2 in its ramifications?
David Farrah is not a smart man, and what’s more, he obscures his true interests behind irrational and faux moral argumets, and this article is further proof.
Barend
Indeed. The writer is an excellent example of someone who rolls out irrational statements with no evidence, deploys exaggerations and hyperbole, and he does this in the cases he supports as well as the cases he opposes.
Дужа дякую David. It is indeed unfortunate that we have those like Barend who know little about the history of this region of Europe. Yes, Ukraine does need to deal with corruption, although unlike Russia it endeavours to do so. Corruption is the lever Russia employs in an effort to control its neighbours. Ukraine, traditionally has close connections to Europe. It is the borderland between east and west and the people have chosen to look westwards, to develop a democratic state. They, like any other nation, deserve the right to self determination. Perhaps if Barend or his family lived through Holodomor or collectivisation he would think differently.
Poppy Cock, Ukraine is the aggressor nation in this situation, the Nazi Azov opened fire on Russian Civilians in the breakaway republics in 2014 enabled bye the U.S. C.I.A, with the plan of taking over the Ukraine's mineral wealth, all your leftist bullshit cant change the facts, reap the wind sow the whirlwind
Well, I seem to have started a lively discussion here! Great!
Both supporters and detractors will invariably claim that they know their history better. I tend to pay more attention to points made that have not been addressed by the critics, such as Donetsk and Luhansk, and the almost absurd suggestion that the Kremlin is intent on doing a Lazarus job on the USSR.
I maintain that it is the expansion of NATO that has brought about this stupid war - an expansion largely attributable to the Yanks who should mind their own business and leave us in Europe to mind ours.
"It’s probably the most morally unambiguous conflict since World War II."
Further to this claim, it's a huge stretch to claim that WW2 was morally unambiguous.
I'd place the myth of WW2 as being "the Good War" (the founding myth of the post WW2 era) as right up there with the more contemporary claims that Ukraine and now Gaza are similarly "Good Wars" with no room for nuance and shades of grey.
Remember, the same people who make the claim about WW2 are those making the two latest claims. Because we can see how ludicrous the latter two claims are, and because the same people are making them, even before we investigate deeply for ourselves the wider context, the motivations of the key actors, and the true causes of WW2 for ourselves, we are justified in being very sceptical of the cartoonish "Good v Evil" depiction of the mid-20th century conflict(s).
Read the NYT article on the leaked peace accord in 2022 and its obvious that Russia don't want the whole country. They asked the Crimea be Russian. Donetsk and Lugansk be independent states and Ukraine be neutral. All agreed by to by Ukraine but shut down by the visit of Boris Johnson. It's the war machine in the west that keeps that war going. There is something desperately evil about that.
David C
There are many that see the survival and success of the Ukraine to be an absolute. The destruction of Putin a similar absolute. Politicians and civilians around the world demand victory.
Yet these same people have zero interest in any skin in the game. Even the author had to weigh up the very slight risk of going against his desire to be seen as being on the right side. Then wears his 'bravery' like some earned medal. Risk to life and property is left to the Ukrainians. They must be fed into the meat grinder of war so the supporters can sit in the comfort of their warm homes, all while claiming 'we' must prevail. As if their distant support gives them some moral claim to being a part of it all. I have no time for such cowards, pretending they are standing up to the bully from behind the skirts of the Ukraine.
What I have wondered, from the beginning of this war, is - where are the adults. The west is behaving like a bunch of children baying at a fight in the playground, running for cover at the first sign of a teacher. Why has there been no sign of a true leader. Perhaps because the west no longer has any. It should never have got to this stage of destruction.
I note Transparency International currently ranks Russia as being very substantially more corrupt than Ukraine. How on earth does that give the Russians the justification to invade a free and independent neighbour ?
Nato was formed in 1949 and since then have invaded no one . Since 1949 Russia has invaded Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1967, Afghanistan in 1979, Chechynya in 1994, Georgia in 2008 and now Ukraine. Have I missed anyone Mr Vlaardingerbroek. They do seem to make quite a habit of it.
And we remember the the Russian genocide of between 3 and 5 million Ukrainians in the 1930's.
Yes I bet the Ukrainians are looking forward to being taken over by the Russians again.
Like a hole in the head .
Tom, you're cheating by including hostile actions by the USSR. The cheat is compounded by alluding to the Stalinist era. The last two interventions have been very different in motivation from the earlier ones during the Soviet era. Major powers tend to intervene when there is a threat to their stability on their doorstep. The US did so in Grenada, for instance.
Nobody ever said that the Russians went into Ukraine because of corruption. Burning straw men doesn't impress anybody.
To understand what is really going on, here’s something the mainstream media (MSM) go to great trouble to avoid – background and context. In World War II the Soviet Union lost an estimated 25 million people, or 14% of its population. Of these, 12 million were military and 13 million were civilians, so the realities of war were seared into Soviet culture.
By comparison, the USA lost around 400,000 military deaths, and about 12,000 civilian deaths; or about 0.3% of the 1941 U.S. population. And none of the few civilians who died had their homes bombed. The American civilian experience of war came essentially courtesy of John Wayne et al.
So, whereas American experience of war is shallow and vicarious, the Russian experience is reality-based. It’s in this context that the Eastward expansion of NATO in the last 30 years should be viewed.
Central to the issue is the 1990 undertaking by U.S. Secretary of State James Baker that, as a condition for accepting German re-unification, NATO assured the Soviet Union that NATO would not expand “one inch further East”. Indeed, the German weekly Der Spiegel reported that in talks on German unification in March 1990, Western officials made it “clear” to the Soviet Union that NATO would not push into territory east of Germany.
So, what was this promise worth? From 1999, 14 countries were admitted to NATO: Czechia, Hungary and Poland in 1999, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia in 2004, Albania and Croatia in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, and North Macedonia in 2020.
One might think that an essential item in the negotiator’s toolbox would be to put oneself the other’s position. It’s therefore not a great stretch to imagine how the U.S would feel if Russia were to install bases in Canada and Mexico.
Having trusted the U.S., Russia now finds itself almost surrounded on its Western side by NATO military bases. Yet western media failed to connect them to provide context. Given the shortness of public memory, they get away with a great deal.
Your logic is very hard to follow Mr Vlaardingenbroek.
You tell us that Ukraine is highly corrupt. Transparency International measures Russia as being very substantially more corrupt. I bet the Ukrainians do care very very much that they run their own country no matter how corrupt it may be .
You tell us that the US [which is not Nato] invaded Grenada implying further justification for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Nor did you deny that Nato has never invaded any other state.
And you accept that Russia has made a habit of invading neighbouring countries and now Ukraine . Just tell us all again how many states Russia/USSR has invaded since Nato was formed .
And you don't deny that Russia committed genocide in the Ukraine in the 1930's. They may well have exterminated as many people there as there are currently living in New Zealand.
Then you dance on a pinhead that the USSR and Russia are different. Historians state that there was only ever one city in the USSR . All roads have always led only to Moscow,the source of all power and authority and the capital of Russia.
Ukrainian apartment buildings ,schools, hospitals childrens daycare centres have all being demolished by Russian missiles. Tens of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed.
Yes I bet the Ukrainians just can't wait to wave the Russian flag at the invaders and shower them with flowers.
And you seem to take delight in the controversy you think you have stirred up.
Human lives should not be fodder for your weekend semantics Mr Vlaarding
“It is not a complicated conflict. Ukraine wants to remain a democratic country where its 40 million people determine their own future. Russia wishes to conquer it and turn it into a puppet state, or even use it as the start of reforming the former Soviet Union. It’s probably the most morally unambiguous conflict since World War II.”
First of all, it IS a complicated conflict with more than a hundred years of history.
The Ukraine is NOT a democratic country. Elections have been suspended and political opponents of Zelensky and the church are have harassed and leaders and journalists critical of the regime are being imprisoned.
As for conquering the Ukraine and the ridiculous statement that Putin wants to reinstate the Soviet Union, this is solely done to frighten the population in the US and the West to support the ongoing war in the Ukraine which in turn supports the (US) military–industrial complex.
Time and time again Russia has been clear what it wants and it is NOT to conquer Ukraine. I wanted the Minsk accords honoured, and limited political and cultural independence in the Russian speaking Donbass region where the majority is ethnic Russian. It also wants the Ukraine and the West to honour their promise to not expand NATO any further East.
As for a puppet state, it was the US state department (Nuland) and probably the CIA that instigated, funded and supported a coup d’état and removed a democratically elected government in the Ukraine with the help of ultra nationalist ( NAZI) groups turning it into a European\US puppet state that immediately send troops to the Donbass region, terrorised the population and implemented several policies suppressing the Russian culture and language.
I am not a great fan of Putin but calling this the most morally unambiguous conflict since World War II is ridiculous and fails to take into account the history of the region, the checkered part the Ukraine has played and especially the part of the EU, the US State Department and the various NGO’s.
Add to this the the involvement of the US Military-Industrial complex and the shady dealings of several US politicians (Burisma anybody?) that are\have been making a mint out of this situation and this whole “most morally unambiguous conflict since World War II” is starting to stink like high heaven.
And that’s not just my opinion…..
Tom, you appear to have some comprehension problems. NATO is headed by the US which tends to regard the alliance as a means of getting Moscow over a barrel. Grenada has nothing to do with either NATO or Moscow but exemplifies the typical big-power response to threats in their back yard, the big power in this instance being the US. You synonymise Russia with the USSR but that's a gross oversimplification. The mass-murderous Stalinist regime has as much relevance to this issue as does the Third Reich to today's Germany. Anyway I'll leave it to readers to make up their own minds as to which of us has problems with logical argumentation.
And yes, I am glad I have been the catalyst for a flurry of comments from both sides of the debate - there is not enough of that on this site.
In 2011, Ukraine said its human organ trafficking problem was out of control. Evidence suggests Ukraine is still engaged in the mass harvesting of human organs--with US complicity. "The year of 2010 has witnessed a sharp increase in human organ trafficking in Ukraine."
Biden commits U.S. taxpayers to 10 years of ‘blank check’ funding of war in Ukraine: War’s ‘dark side’ includes organ harvesting and child sex trafficking.
Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Zelensky are planning to sign a deal for long-term US military assistance for Ukraine, a country whose government we now know is involved in the trafficking of children for sex and harvesting the organs of its own soldiers for profit.
Let’s call it what it is: A blank-check commitment to a corrupt foreign government that has completely obliterated the freedom of the Ukrainian people. Elections have been cancelled. Media outlets and churches that voice opposition to the war have been closed, young and middle-aged men are being kidnapped and sent to die at the front. How is this freedom?
But the Western corporate media thinks this is great. They don’t even question it.
Again Mr Vlandingerbroek your logic is somewhat hard to follow. Nato is definitely not headed by the US, your statement is totally false. Your statement to that effect just cannot be defended at all.
It is extremely hard to understand your expressed relevance between Grenada and the current situation in Ukraine. And I cannot agree with your comment that the US ever felt threatened by whatever was going on in Grenada.
And I can't imagine you have sat down and asked anyone from the Ukraine if they could see any difference between the Russians who ran the USSR in the
1930's who murdered millions of their countrymen then, and the Russians now invading. My neighbours over the road are from the Ukraine and I promise you, they can't see any difference.
But then it's all so clear from this part of the world. My neighbours must have it wrong !
Cor Blimey, Tom, it's the US that calls the NATO shots. Where have you been for the past 60-odd years?
OK so the US doesn't feel threatened by what happens in its back yard...... um, again, where have you been for the last 60-odd years?
You operate at a very subjective level....... ask someone who lives there, you say, and ask them about what's happening now and what was happening almost a century ago under a very different regime...... oh dear.
You win, some, you lose some..... this one you have definitely lost, Tom.
Have another Scotch. That's what I'm doing.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52044.html
The U.S.A has been a member of NATO since it's inception!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
People interesting reading all the comments - I wonder with 'many "if we can apply the Jacinda Ardern principle - misinformation, disinformation etc. et al.
When you read this please note -
- Putin is on written record in stating he believes "the collapse of the USSR was a bad thing, and as President it was his intent to reinstate the USSR.
- with previous Soviet Countries, please note how many "ran the NATO HQ" to become "paid up members" and that included Turkey (ask yourself why?)
- why has Finland (who after all these years of having a border with Russia, now feels threatened) & Sweden become NATO Allies and as to Sweden, to
become a NATO Member that means their neutrality no longer exists.
- Putin is also 'on written record "as to his beliefs on Ukraine"(historical - it relates to Ukraine's alliance with Germany WW2- if you know the history of same, you will understand Master Putin's approach.
- the final matter, everyone produces reams of words re Ukraine, BUT no one seemed to ask - WHY is David Farrar is attending a conference - "Sea Security Forum"- read his opening statement - he is only a Journo - so David please explain why you have the 'privilege' of being a guest & why the secrecy over 'operational details'??
Mr Vlaardingerbroek ,the head of Nato for the last 10 years has been Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, the former PM of Norway.
That is a matter of fact. Jens Stoltenberg is the boss of Nato. He calls the shots after consultation with the 32 voluntary member states. That's what the current 32 member states all believe. Perhaps you should advise them that they are all wrong in this belief ?
The entire World remembers the Russian/USSR invasions of, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan ,Chechynya,Georgia and now Ukraine. I ask again, please tell me, whch states has Nato invaded in it's 75 year history ?
The connection you somehow find between Russias history of invasions of Ukraine and the US and 6 other Caribbean states brief involvement in Grenada, restoring democracy after what whas little more than a criminal gangs overthrow of the democratically elected government of this tiny state is tenuos at best. And irelevant. It's called clutching at straws. How many remember this ?
My neighbours have photo albums of their great aunts and uncles who died at the hands of the Russians in the 1930's. I would have thought that was highly objective evidence. Or perhaps you need to correct them too.
I don't drink Scotch Mr Vlaardingerbroek, however I am sure you emptied your bottle last night.
And to correct you on one further point, it was Mr Farrah that initiated this debate.
Tom, there is a naivete coming across in your assertion that Stoltenberg calls the shots and the insinuation that the 32 members have an anything like equal say or clout. I don't have the advise the people involved of anything as they know where the real power lies.
NATO not being a nation-state cannot invade any other country. What it can do is lend support to allies and friends. Which is exactly what they are doing in Ukraine.
The Soviets always went in with their puppets too, as did/does the US.
Stalin's crimes are irrelevant to this discussion. 'Highly objective evidence' you say, but of what other than the evils of the Soviet Empire which has been dead and buried for over 30 years?
You don't drink Scotch? Maybe you should switch to it because whatever you're on at the moment is interfering with your reasoning processes.
Mr Vlaardingenbroek your argument now descends into little more than giving offense. Your logic even more strained and tenuos.
Your argument that Nato cannot invade a nation state because it is not such itself ais simply facile. Ask any of those states invaded by USSR/Russia if it mattered to them if they had been invade by another state or or a military alliance of states.
You clearly believe your personal opinions are more valid than that which history regards as well respected fact, highly relevant to this discussion.
You are not worthy of further debate.
Enjoy your scotch.
I fear a Zion Curtain has descended upon Europe.
I'll leave it to readers to decide who's making sense here, Tom. I don't think I have a great deal to fear on that point.
Ciao babe
Well done Barend you certainly got the troops riled. However my - admittedly skimmed - review of comments seems not to focus much on Putin's pronouncements and apparent use of crims from Russian jails, and disposal of his critics - names escape me but e.g. head of the mercenary Wagner group, and the poor sod who mysteriously died in prison after his plane landed in a Russia friendly state and his Mum couldn't get his body back (until the drugs dissipated?) And did anyone mention Crimea? Putin in my view is the KGB attack dog reincarnated. Threats of using Nukes etc ... he is clearly a dangerous problem to world peace.
Your reservations about Russia and Putin are well founded, Richard. The big question for me is always: What's the alternative? Often, we are faced not with a 'good/bad' set of options, but 'bad/worse'.
A photograph etched in my memory is of a place somewhere in the Donbas region of a man, possibly in his 80's. He's an ethnic Russian. It's a countryside location and it seems he is sitting on the side of the road. The only thing is he isn't sitting nor is he resting. Behind him is what seems to be a green pasture but it is not that at all but it is a mine field.
Their are two cities with monuments made to the children of their cities and a burning question from many, why did it take Putin over 8 years to come to their rescue. Tears welling in the eyes of the women.The children died needlesly by your so called righteous Ukes.
Good one eh Tom? Personally I don't see Putin as a poser. I see him as a well thought out condidered and level headed man. Zelensky is an egotistical poser enjoying his time on the world stage. There's something very wrong with him and his allies.
Good stuff Barend, Mme. Vlatarsky, David, CXH and Hazel all are good reads.
That's David Campbell, not the David who is the author of the article which I thought was shallow.
Also it is Madame Blavatsky, my apologies.
How do you know he's Russian ? He could just as well be a Ukrainian fleeing west away from Russian funded separatist militia.
He might be sitting there thinking of why the Russians had just shot down a Malaysian Airlines flight overflying Ukraine causing the death of all 298 on board.
Or thinking how many more of Putins opponents would die falling from the top of tall buildings, or be beaten to death whilst in detention, or be poisoned to death whilst in exile.
He might have been counting how many more fledgling democracies in Eastern Europe would be invaded by the USSR/Russia. How many folks ?
He might have been thinking of how many Ukrainian children the Russians would capture and take back into Russia with them.
Fantastic bloke your mate Putin, you must think he's in line for Nobel Peace Prize.
That's not Scotch you guys are drinking, it's vodka.
If you do reply please admit how many democratic states the USSR/Russia have invaded since 1949 the year Nato was formed . Go on , I dare you !
Comrades, you guys must think Putin and Russia get a prize every year from the neighbouring states for being the friendliest neighbour in Europe!
Post a Comment