Kiev government powerless as east Ukraine slips out of its control
Source: Guardian
Ukraine's beleaguered government appeared to have lost control of law and order in the east of the country on Tuesday, after police again failed to stop a pro-Russian crowd from seizing a key administrative building.
Some 3,000 activists some in masks and military fatigues stormed the regional government HQ in the eastern city of Luhansk. Police supposed to guard the building let the crowd inside. A pro-Russian militia had occupied the security service office in Luhansk, a town of 465,000, just 20 miles (32km) from the Russian border.
>
But in recent days Kiev's tentative grip on local law enforcement in the east appears to have slipped completely. In Luhansk riot police stood passively in a courtyard, kettled in by separatists armed with bats and hammers. "The regional leadership does not control its police force," Stanislav Rechynsky, an aide to the interior minister in Kiev, told Reuters. "The local police did nothing."
In a statement on Tuesday, Ukraine's interim president, Oleksandr Turchynov, said: "The vast majority of law enforcement officials in the east are not able to fulfil their obligation to protect our citizens."
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/29/kiev-losing-control-east-ukraine
Why Ukraine is dialing back its military offensive in anarchic east
A recent poll found that most people in eastern Ukraine oppose the seizure of government buildings, but half of respondents think President Turchynov is 'illegally occupying his post.'
>
Experts warn that the two eastern regions of Luhansk and Donetsk are in danger of slipping entirely out of Kiev's control. In much of eastern Ukraine local police have refused to obey orders from the central government or abandoned their posts, and a military operation aimed at reclaiming government buildings appear to have stalled.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-ukraine-dialing-back-military-offensive-anarchic-east-195455850.html
truth2power
(8,219 posts)Sorry about Ms. Nuland's luck.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)or is your thinking limited to smilies?
Bodhi BloodWave
(2,346 posts)As for being /the/ legitimate government the answer would currently be nope, though the answer can change depending on the will of the people.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Good debunk that won't make any headway, since the Fauxsers know best.
Of course Rand Paul always looks good to some, too.
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)a pause or what? Sure happened fast. My friend in Turkey can't believe it.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)...as it appears... then the situation has certainly blown up in the Administration's face.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)and had to flee to Russia? And an appointed govt installed in its place? That is the definition of a coup... and the US has its fingerprints on this one. Really, no matter how incompetent and corrupt Ukraine's ousted leaders were... at least they had a legitimacy earned by winning an election.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)a temporary administration only until May 25th elections. How is that a coup? The military didn't remove him.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)of the fascist/neonazi kind.
It was not a "free" parliament.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)controlled their votes. Within hours. Uh huh.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Duh.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Care to comment on the "protesters" kidnapping journalists and killing politicians?
Yeah, you've been pretty silent on that topic.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)just like the "registration of jews" story circulated last week and which was proven to be false.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Far out, man.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)You know, I think you're right. I think that's exactly what they did.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Obnoxious_One
(97 posts)I hear the Nazi's in Kiev stormed the local radio station and started punching the newscasters not in compliance after their takeover.
pampango
(24,692 posts)which they had been doing up until then. He abrogated the agreement that he had signed with the demonstrators just hours earlier, even though he still had full control of the military and security forces and fled.
Word has it that even Putin is fed up with him which is why you don't hear from him anymore even though Russia contends that he is still the elected leader of Ukraine. You would think they would trot him out ever once in a while just for the PR value if nothing else. He must really be in Putin's dog house.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Typically in your coup situation, you have a hard core band of loyalists who will fight tooth and nail to return "their guy" to power.
That's simply not the case with Yanukovych. The only resistance to the interim government has been by people who want to leave Ukraine altogether and join Russia. No one is clamoring to bring Victor back to office. His own party kicked him to the curb and moved on.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)That may not have been his preferred choice of action, but nonetheless it was his own choice. For all intents and purposes, he abdicated his position.
The duly elected parliament chose an interim government to govern until elections could be held in May. After all, it wouldn't make sense for the country to fall into complete anarchy.
And here's the thing about Yanukovych. No one wants him back. No one. Not even his old party. Ukraine has moved on from him. We're not talking about huge throngs of loyalists demanding his reinstatement.
Not every regime change constitutes a "coup", mind you.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)...which is, of course, where it currently stands.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Which is the only part of the country beset upon by the little green men waving the Russian tri-color with AK-47s and grenade launchers in hand.
Hmmm, I wonder why that is? Nope, it couldn't be Russia trying to capitalize on the interim status of the government, could it?
Bodhi BloodWave
(2,346 posts)Which area of Ukraine do you think would be the worst affected by the IMF 'requirements' for their loan to 'save' the Ukraine?
The west where the coupster government is located or the (south)east where most the industry is?
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)I'm sure there are Ukrainians who might legitimately be hesitant about what the EU or IMF might bring.
But on a person by person basis, the historical pretext of centuries of Russian meddling and domination of Ukrainian affairs is a much more prevelant concern to Ukrainians on the street, east and west alike.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)The United States didn't do that. The EU didn't do it. Yanukovich's own party turned on him. For Putin, it wasn't supposed to happen that way.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)government to be recognized as legitimate, within and outside of Ukraine. They don't want Ukrainian military following Kiev's orders, police following Kiev's orders...Russia wants a destabilized, frightened, angry population in the regions they have influence over.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)...because doing so is an admission of guilt.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)But, you know, either way.
Six one way, half dozen another.
Iterate
(3,020 posts)Prosecutor General: Yanukovych took $32 billion to Russia, financing separatism in Ukraine (UPDATED)
April 29, 2014, 1:52 p.m. | Ukraine by Ivan Verstyuk
...
Today the Russian Federation is officially harboring criminals, such as Yanukovych, (former Prosecutor General Viktor) Pshonka, (ex-Interior Minister Vitaliy) Zakharchenko, and does not recognize them as guilty, said Makhnitsky.
Russias Prosecutor General Yuriy Chayka publicly stated that Russia will not extradite them because they are considered legitimate Ukrainian government officials.
In mid-April, the U.S. State Department announced that the U.S. had sent a group of FBI agents and financial and legal officials to Kyiv to facilitate the return of Ukrainian assets from abroad. An asset recovery team from Great Britain is also participating in the project. Londond hosts a two-day meeting this week devoted to recovering Ukrainian assets. The U.S., UK and Ukrainian representatives are participating.
Makhnitsky said the country has already identified some $3 billion of stolen assets and expects to find billions more. He said the former regime acted as an organized crime gang that left the country's treasury bare.
...
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/prosecutor-general-yanukovych-took-32-billion-to-russia-financing-separatism-in-ukraine-345544.html
That's a year's budget for Ukraine. I'd grant the coup argument if its proponents would just admit it is happening on the Yanukovych/Russian side, with elected officials shot, detained, threatened, and disappeared.
Also, it's not yet "eastern Ukraine" that's slipping away, just a 50 mile triangle.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)One of these guys (video):
Svoboda Parliment members who work on the "freedom of speech" comittee (seriously). Showing a TV manager how to conduct bussiness.
I have asked this question many times and have yet to get an answer:
Why has Kyiv not removed the neo-nazi's from their executive positions including:
State Head of Internal Security and Military (conveniently changed his party recently to "Fatherland", but he was one of the FOUNDERS of Svoboda, right!)
Assistant Head of Internal Security and Military (Right Sector Leader)
Attorney General (Svoboda leader)
There are others, but these are particularly damaging and it could go a long way to tempering things by removing them. But they continue to use neo-nazi groups as heads and in state security positions. What does that say about the administration?
Here is right sector threatening politicians just before the overthrow:
&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Iterate
(3,020 posts)the recovery of which is being impeded by Russia. Austria, Lichtenstein and Switzerland are cooperating in the the recovery of previous thefts. Regardless of his party, Makhnitsky has at least been effective in getting cooperation from international law enforcement fraud specialists.
If nationalism, civil rights, protection for minorities, and social health are your primary concerns (as are mine), then I assume you would oppose the social and political structures which fostered them in the first place. Being treated like a vassal state does tend to boost opposition from the edges.
Fortunately there are 28 nations nearby which have substantial and successful experience in dealing with nationalism, social health, and the protection of rights. In fact, no other 28 nations have done better.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)Corruption there was endemic. It was not limited to Yanukovich. Many maidan activists are not happy with the current government for this exact reason.
It is going to be a long road to getting their corruption under control. And I don't see this government bringing that about. They have been extremely hard of hearing and seem to lack interest in diplomacy, while at the same time there is a real problem that they have freely embraced neo-nazi's.
The President and PM are both extreme right wingers. The "moderate" components of the coallation are akin to our tea party. The President is an evangelical. Both are homophobic. While I understand the distrust of Russia, it just blows me away that so many "liberals" are embracing this group.
Iterate
(3,020 posts)newthinking
(3,982 posts)you are not that familiar with Ukraine.
here is an article by Foreign Policy Magazine:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/18/yes_there_are_bad_guys_in_the_ukrainian_government
New Ukraine President
In August 2007, Turchynov replied to the accusation that his stance on same-sex marriage is typically conservative, "I do not agree. If a man has normal views, then you label him a conservative, but those who use drugs or promote sodomy, you label them a progressive person. All of these are perversions".
http://web.archive.org/web/20080820220202/http://www.lgf.org.uk/news/research-2/overview-of-lesbian-and-gay-rights-in-eastern-europe/
Oleksandr Turchynov is an elder in a conservative Evangelical Church. We know how Evangelical Churches view gays.
Ukrainian PM
Ukraine Opposition Surprises Supporters by Denouncing Gay Marriage (Fatherland leader and now Prime Minister)
http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/ukraine-opposition-surprises-supporters-by-denouncing-gay-marriage-198940821.html
Svoboda is heavily anti-gay
Member of parliament Ihor Miroshnychenko asked the head of the Kiev City State Administration Oleksandr Popov on 7 March 2013 to ban an LGBT march that was held the next day because he believed it would "contribute to promoting sexual orientation" and he further stated in his request "homosexuality provokes sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS".[98] The 8 March rally was in fact not an LGBT march but organized by feminist organizations.[99]
Need we even mention the further right parties?
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)of mainstream American and European news sources, I guess that's your business.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)There's a whole lot of lying going on from both sides. However, if we follow the money, Ukraine had a choice of accepting IMF terms (no doubt including severe austerity and privatization measures) or risk dragging the region into conflict, if not all out war. Either way, the US corporate empire profits. Funny how that works out.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Do you consult the magic bones? Or perhaps your morning Alpha-bits?
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)You know, people who actually LIVE there.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Having numerous relatives living there (I'm second generation Ukie).
That being said, actually reading the news provides a full picture of the situation. And there has been some good reporting of what's going on there from some (not all) sources.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)Commondreams.org
OpEdNews
AntiWar
CounterPunch
Dissidentvoice
The Nation
The New Statesman
to name a few.
The tired attempts to slander liberals who have done their research won't work here. Most here are more informed. They see it is only a few
VERY Prolific posters who try and troll every Ukraine OP that they don't like.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)And working up a story because you think there might be some juicy spin to it--and the notion of CIA toppling governments is definitely juicy--even if there are no facts to support your angle ultimately does a disservice to your news organization.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)to his citizens...and then reneged on it because Putin wanted Ukraine for his upcoming Eurasian Union trade organization. The US and EU supported Ukraine joining the EU. So protesters protested, and it was fairly peaceful for weeks, and then Yanukovich passed laws to suppress the protests, and it got more violent until the snipers began shooting, and that's where it all fell apart and Russia began trying to reclaim parts of Ukraine. The US isn't skilled enough to topple the Ukrainian government for our benefit AND make profits--we can't even control fucking Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan, for christ's sake.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Xithras
(16,191 posts)The Ukrainian constitution laid out specific guidelines for an impeachment, which included a minimum vote count, a review of the impeachment by the national court, and even named the person who was supposed to replace the president if it occurred. The Ukrainian parliament ignored all of the guidelines, declared him impeached even though they didn't have the constitutionally required number of votes, skipped the legal review, and appointed a new interim president arbitrarily instead of giving the job to the person the constitution said it was supposed to go to (the sitting prime minister at the time of the impeachment).
In other words, it wasn't a legal impeachment under Ukrainian law. The fact that the post-impeachment government later changed the constitution to make their actions "legal" doesn't change the fact that it was illegal when it was done.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)....the situation needs to be addressed in some form or another, and pretty quickly.
Xithras
(16,191 posts)Under Ukrainian law, when Yushchenko left the country, the Prime Minister should have been named as acting President until he returned. If he did not return, he should have been charged with a crime and impeachment proceedings started against him. The Prime Minister would have remained as acting President until the impeachment proceedings were legally completed.
The only "exceptional" thing about the situation was the fact that the Ukrainian parliament chose to completely ignore their own constitutional impeachment process in favor of a quick and dirty solution that simply wasn't legal.
If Barack Obama were to commit a crime and flee the country, Congress would not get to arbitrarily throw him out of office on a majority vote and stick another person of their choosing into the White House. We have a procedure by which Presidents are stripped of power, and by which their replacements are put into place (in this example, it would be Joe Biden). Ukraine had its own constitutionally defined processes in place, and the Ukrainian parliament chose to ignore them.
Whether or not you agree with the outcome of the decision (in this case, the removal of Yushchenko), the fact that they didn't oust him legally gives the current interim government real credibility problems. To a lot of Ukrainians and Russians, the Kiev government is no more legitimate than the secession government in Donetsk.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)when it appears the entire administration dissolved and disappeared nearly overnight. You need someone in charge--this was an unprecedented situation. My understanding was that Yanukovich and Co. were afraid of being criminally charged for ordering the snipers to fire on the crowd, but it's also possible that Putin hustled Yanukovich out of office and the country. After all, the day before Yanukovich fled, he signed a peace agreement with other countries and the protestors (the Polish foreign minister even warned the protestors that they would have to sign it or die) but Lavrov or whoever was there from Russia didn't like the agreement and openly refused to sign it.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)Seriously.
It's a freaking Parliament. You don't simply give up the power you still have and vote in an opposition President and PM. What a crock. They would have at the very least spent several days trying to form a coallation block. There was not even the appearance of democracy when that happened.
There had been a campaign of intimidation, threatening opposition politicians and their families, burning opposition buildings.
Are we going to say this didn't happen?
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)nor nutritious.
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Ukraine as we knew it is dead.
The supporters of Russian imperialism must be delighted.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)and will beg the East to take it back. EU wouldn't want Western Ukraine -- it will make Greece sound like a minor liability and Merkel ain't spending no Euros on Ukraine.
The Svoboda people can be given asylum to the US and will be useful on the Bundy ranch in Nevada.
The best thing for Obama to do is call out the rogue PNAC operation in the CIA/State and hang them out to dry while withdrawing from this mess with no more sanctions or harsh criticisms. Obama can still save face and avert a crisis by blaming it on leftover neocons in the CIA.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)I feel terrible for the majority of people in Ukraine who have to deal with these right wing thugs taking over.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)They are kidnapping criminals cut from the same cloth as the Right Sector, Russian NeoNazis, and Cliven Bundy's militia in Nevada.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)And the masses are the ones who suffer the most.
What "Democracy" they had was shot through with holes from the time right Sector (and Svoboda to some extent) bullied the movement forward, threatened the opposition with extreme violence, and overthrew the government.
This was all predictable.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Russia's overt involvement is the catalyst in this case.
This went from an internal Ukrainian matter to international because of Russian involvement.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)Even in the east, the vast majority of Ukrainians do not wish to separate from Ukraine. They may want more regional authority, but they do not want to be absorbed into Russia like what happened in Crimea.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/regional-polls-show-few-ukrainians-russians-want-a-united-single-state/
The time was nigh for a full Ukrainian civil war when Yanukovych fled the country and was replaced. Had Yanukovych enjoyed any public support, there'd be massive amounts of Ukrainians demanding he be returned to power, and willing to take up arms to do so. There weren't. No one wants Yanukovych back. His own party has moved on from him.
What we see in the east is a separatist rebellion, one that is very vocal and forceful, but one ultimately constituting a small minority of the desires of the people in that region.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)On Sunday afternoon, Lieutenant Vitali Artyukh, the deputy commander of an elite police squadron in eastern Ukraine, was standing guard with a detachment of his men at the state television headquarters in the city of Donetsk. Through the windshield of his police car, he saw a crowd of several hundred people moving up the street toward the gates of the building. It was led by a small group of masked men armed with clubs and metal shields, but mostly they were regular locals, many of them elderly, a few carrying Russian flags. Artyukhs team, made up of about a dozen men armed with assault rifles, stood aside as the crowd surged through the gate and into the building. Within a few hours, the local news stations frequency channel 27 was showing the Russian state network Rossiya.
Thus passed another average day in Donetsk. Over the past two weeks, pro-Russian separatists have used this tactic to capture dozens of government buildings in eastern Ukraine, and if local security forces showed some resistance initially, they have now stopped putting up any kind of fight. Their reasoning is simple: they lose either way. If Russia makes good on its threats to invade eastern Ukraine, the police there could face a war tribunal for using force against civilians. If Russia doesnt invade, the Kiev authorities could still turn them into scapegoats. The last time the police got orders to fire on civilians in Ukraine, during the revolution in February, a dozen officers wound up facing charges for mass murder.
We know the score, Artyukh tells TIME outside the captured TV station. If the orders come down to resist these people, it would be impossible to comply, he says. It would be a bloodbath, and no one wants to take that on his conscience.
http://time.com/81475/ukrainian-policemen-stand-by-as-pro-russian-separatists-seize-control/
Supersedeas
(20,630 posts)Igel
(35,320 posts)It's just cowed.
The "peaceful activists" are under the de facto protection of Putin. Whenever an act is taken to stop them Putin scares everybody shitless with his army, as his supporters crow. (They're avid imperialists, as long as the US/West is on the losing side; at some point they'll realize it's a zero sum game and the "balance" they seek won't exist or be stable.)
Things got quiet as far as take overs and some areas started to return to Kiev's control, and then tanks went up to a Lugansk border crossing and stopped there, engines running, for a few hours. Kiev stopped the operations.
The next day the "peaceful activists" started seizing a string of objectives. If they are confronted, they know that their patron will support them. They've called in supporters from Khar'kov, from Kiev, from Odessa, from Crimea, from all over (making their worries about the Right Sector doing the same thing seem reasonable to them--they've done it and assume the Right Sector has done the same thing already, or earlier).
At some point the local authorities start getting the idea. It doesn't matter what they want. They see what happens to traitors. If you're militia and your building's taken over, you will be humiliated, shamed, and possibly beaten. You will get no income. You may be threatened. The "peaceful activists" main supporter is more willing to engage in war, intimidation, ethnic violence than those appointed by the democratically elected Rada.
It fits the narrative: The West is weak, effeminate, corrupt, lacks will, while the Russian is strong, virile, and has the will to power. When Putin says the West has no right to impose sanctions, it makes sense: The weak have no right to impose their will on the strong, it's contrary to nature. (Such was the thinking behind the government that supported "Progress Publishing House," a noted Soviet publisher. With the same interesting use of the word "progress."
The Magistrate
(95,247 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)tossed into a river with their abdomens cut open, a few Ukrainian soldiers sitting in their underwear with tape over their eyes and bloody heads, makes you rethink active defiance of the Putin mobs, no matter which country you're loyal to.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,182 posts)And the armed militants in Eastern Ukraine (or as RT calls them, "protesters" have effectively created a human shield type of situation. Ethnic Russians are a minority even in eastern Ukraine, but a sizable one, and one which the armed militants (who I believe are a mix of local ethnic Russians, former Berkut and Russian military agents) can easily exploit. So you'll see unarmed civilians blocking the roads and access to where the militants are holding the government buildings by force. And the Ukrainian military has shown notable restraint in their response because of this. It's not that the officers are disobeying orders from Kiev; I don't think the Ukrainian government ever wanted to see a free-wheeling, civilians be damned, Beslan style assault from its military.
Why? Well, first of all, this government was born out of the ashes of a situation where the previous president has been alleged of shooting unarmed protesters. And there's always a human tendency not to want to look like blatant hypocrites in situations.
But even if they didn't care about being labeled hypocrites--and who knows, maybe they don't--the even bigger disincentive not to go out guns-a-blazing in the situation lies across the eastern border of the country, where thousand of Russian regular troops are amassed. And any story of a civilian bloodbath by Ukrainian troops, no matter how distorted, would give Russia the reason it needs to roll its regular army into Ukraine to protect "their people." And lay claim to Novorossiya in the process.
So what might be considered a "weak" response by the Ukrainian government at this time might not be as weak as one might think. The Ukrainian government, not wanting to provoke a war with Russia, might just be letting the militants lie for the time being with the thought being they might lose most of the support that they may currently have. As it stands right now, the "people's mayor" and "self-defense forces" aren't doing a whole lot of good for their image, as stories of kidnapped journalists and murdered politicians grow. The Ukrainian government might just be giving them the rope to hang themselves with.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)He "regained control" in a region where an ethnically distinct majority wanted independence.
The Chechen conflict entered a new phase on 1 October 1999, when Russia's new Prime Minister Vladimir Putin declared the authority of Chechen President Aslan Maskhadov and his parliament illegitimate. At this time, Putin announced that Russian troops would initiate a land invasion but progress only as far as the Terek River, which cuts the northern third of Chechnya off from the rest of the republic.
On 12 October 1999, the Russian forces crossed the Terek and began a two-pronged advance on the capital Grozny to the south. Hoping to avoid the significant casualties which plagued the first Chechen War, the Russians advanced slowly and in force, making extensive use of artillery and air power in an attempt to soften Chechen defences. Many thousands of civilians fled the Russian advance, leaving Chechnya for neighbouring Russian republics. Their numbers were later estimated to reach 200,000 to 350,000, out of the approximately 800,000 residents of the Chechen Republic.
The siege and fighting left the capital devastated like no other European city since World War II; in 2003 the United Nations called Grozny the most destroyed city on Earth.
The start of the war bolstered the domestic popularity of Vladimir Putin as the campaign was started one month after he had become Russian prime minister. The conflict greatly contributed to the deep changes in the Russian politics and society. The wars in Chechnya were a major factor in the growth of intolerance, xenophobia and racist violence in Russia, directed in a great part against the people from Caucasus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War#The_First_Chechen_War