Hello! This is Alexandra Prokopenko with your weekly guide to the Russian economy — brought to you by The Bell. I am joined this time by analyst Alexander Kolyandr. We focus this week on how the Ukraine war is gradually becoming key to both Russia’s economy and its politics and

Russia’s war in Ukraine is already in its 17th month. In that time, President Vladimir Putin has clearly demonstrated that he is not bothered by losses — whether they be financial, material, or human. His war will go on as long as he needs. And, judging by how the authorities have woven the so-called “special military operation” into Russian life, that will be a long time.

  • Pili@lemmygrad.ml
    12·
    1 year ago

    I will copy paste this comment from Hexbear that explains how we reached that situation, because I believe it will be useful here for context:

    The following three parts are absolutely crucial toward understanding the ongoing war in Ukraine from a materialist and historical standpoint:

    One, the Maidan Coup happened in 2013 because the former president Yanukovych wanted to postpone signing the EU association trade agreement, which was an economic warfare against both Ukraine and Russia. First, it required that Ukraine take on IMF loans that required them to cut social spending and education. Second, it would allow European goods to flood Russian market due to the existing tariff-free agreement between Ukraine and Russia, without allowing Russia to do so in reverse. Putin did NOT oppose to Ukraine signing the deal, he offered a tripartite meeting to discuss this tariff issue, but the EU refused. Yanukovych did not want to lose the trade revenue with Russia, so he said he needed more time to talk this out with Russia - but it was already too late, merely postponing was enough to trigger the ultranationalists/fascists to launch a coup.

    Second, the Donbass separatists rebelled because immediately after the coup, one of the first things the coup regime did was to initiate a ban on Russian language to lash out against ethnic Russians. Russia was forced into the conflict, because there would have been a massacre if the civil war was to allow the military to crush the resistance in Donbass.

    Third, the Minsk agreements showed that Russia was absolutely willing to return Donbass (but not Crimea for obvious reasons) to Ukraine, although Ukraine has to give the Donbass local governments more autonomy to protect their local cultures (so that someone from Kyiv can’t just simply impose a national ban on language or culture without considering the local populations). They waited 8 years for Ukraine to start implementing the protocol, but instead what they saw was NATO openly arming Ukraine for 8 years - this showed that Ukraine wanted to take back Donbass and Crimea by military force, and the only reason for that is quite simply that they wanted to ethnically cleanse the Russian culture without having to adhere to the Minsk agreements. Both Merkel and Hollande, guarantors of Minsk II, have admitted publicly in 2022 that Minsk was simply to buy time for Ukraine to militarize, proving Russia’s intuition correct.

    The war in Ukraine was inevitable. Russia still did the last ditch effort in 2021 to call for a security meeting with NATO, but to no avail. Under the new Biden presidency, Zelensky had been emboldened to talk about Ukraine joining NATO and rearming with nuclear weapons, prompting the invasion from Russia in February 2022. The rest is history.

    • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml
      15·
      1 year ago

      Maidan Coup happened in 2013 because the former president Yanukovych wanted to postpone signing the EU association trade agreement

      In defiance of the Ukrainian Parliament and the majority will of ukrainian people. and it wasn’t a coup. a coup is “a sudden, violent, and unlawful seizure of power from a government.” Yanukovych was removed after losing the confidence of both the people and his party through legal processes already afforded to the Ukrainian legislatured. Enough of his party defected to the opposition to the point where he no longer commanded a majority.

      Which was an economic warfare against both Ukraine and Russia

      Not economic warefare, a trade agreement which the Ukrainian parliament voted for. Russia had the option of cancelling it’s own trade deal with Ukraine if it did not approve of Ukraines trade deal with Europe. The choice of who Ukraine creates trade deals with entirely rests with Ukraine.

      The Maiden protests also were about a lot more that just a trade deal with europe. The protesters also took issue with the endemic corruption and the growing oligopoly like the one in Russia.

      Second, the Donbass separatists rebelled because immediately after the coup, one of the first things the coup regime did was to initiate a ban on Russian language to lash out against ethnic Russians.

      The Russian language was not, nor has it ever been, banned. The Ukrainian parliament attempted to repeal a law that granted minority languages such as Russian regional status but it was vetoed by the then president of Ukraine. It’s wasn’t until 2018 that the law was deemed to be unconstitutional but even then, the Russian language was not banned

      Third, the Minsk agreements showed that Russia was absolutely willing to return Donbass (but not Crimea for obvious reasons) to Ukraine

      The Minsk agreements were signed under duress AFTER Russia invaded their neighbor, seizing Crimea and kicking off a civil war in Donbas. The war in Donbas is entirely down to Russia.

      but not Crimea for obvious reasons

      I see no reason why it shouldnt have been, Crimea is part of Ukraine and has been since the dissolution of the USSR.

      Both Merkel and Hollande, guarantors of Minsk II, have admitted publicly in 2022 that Minsk was simply to buy time for Ukraine to militarize

      If i kept being invaded by a neighboring country i would want to militarize too