Pro-Ukrainian vs pro-Russian? More like Nationalist vs Republican
The one thing that invariably annoys me in the modern media discourse is how the language is manipulated to suit the speaker's needs. Take a large enough lobby, and they can frame the problem by just changing the words used to discuss it.
In the current discourse, words “pro-Ukrainian” and “Ukrainian” are used to described the Kiev-aligned troops, while Donbass militias are described as “pro-Russian” or “Russian separatists”, giving the impression of a sovereign country fighting an outside incursion.
I think this incorrectly frames the civil war: while there are a lot of volunteers and outside influence, the vast majority of fighters on both sides are local men, the government forces aren’t exactly pro-Ukrainian, and Donbass defense forces aren’t exactly pro-Russian.
To explain these statements:
1. Although there are volunteers on both sides, it is obvious at this point that around 90 percent of Donbass rebels and at least 97 percent of government forces are local.
Yes, it is also obvious that Russian citizens are donating a lot of money and food/gear to the rebel cause, and that the Russian government is supporting the rebels diplomatically and possibly even militarily (post on that coming shortly). Yes, the rebellion would likely be swiftly crushed if not for Russian help, and if the border with Russia was completely sealed off now, the rebel forces would be finished in a few months at the most.
However, the same can be said for the current government, even more so - without the mass media campaign and Western diplomatic backing, the EuroMaidan protest would never get off the ground. And if the West stopped propping up the Kiev government, it would be out of power in weeks if not days. Mainly because the pro-Western government has swiftly ruined the country to where there is NO money for continued warfare other than IMF loans, and gear for the government troops has to be collected via mass media campaigns or flown in by C-17s from Canada.
2. To reiterate that last point, a government that escalates a civil war in Ukraine and plans to sell all major assets to Western companies is NOT pro-Ukrainian, no more than the Khmer Rouge maniacs were pro-Cambodian. In the half a year since the coup, we have seen a rapid decline of Ukraine’s population, economy, standards of living, and personal freedoms.
The coup government isn’t even particularly nationalist, with most major players being simply spineless politicians or embezzling oligarchs. Although new government officials use a lot of nationalist rhetoric, and extremist nationalists from rural west Ukraine formed the driving force behind the coup (~80% of those killed attacking the police were “activists” bused in from the West… apparently democracy is a couple thousand thugs overthrowing an elected president*), currently nationalists don’t have much of a say in how the country is run - or they would probably stop it from being ruined so rapidly.
By the same token, Donbass militias aren’t exactly pro-Russian, or at least not pro-Putin. Yes, their interests coincide at the moment, but their demands are largely political and cultural - greater autonomy, meaningful political representation (for example, the communist party was banned, depriving 5 million voters of their rights**), not to be taught in schools that Waffen-SS were the good guys fighting Soviet oppressors; they don’t particularly care for Putin’s gas transport issues or NATO expansion. Their desire to join Russia largely stems from the fact that economically Ukraine seems to be a sinking ship - and the Eastern regions are being thrown to the sharks first, dismantling the Russia-affiliated Donbass industrial complex to please the EU. If Donbass militias were to win the control of the country, their rule would likely be more benevolent than the current government (well, it’s hard to be less benevolent), so they may very well be more pro-Ukrainian.
Therefore, I propose that in the future translations of Russian-language materials, and simply in Russian and foreign language posts, we consider moving away from these false identifiers of “Pro-Ukrainian” and “Pro-Russian”, and instead use the terms “government forces vs self-defense forces”, “pro-Kiev forces vs Donbass forces”, “unionist vs federalist”, “nationalist vs republican”, "Western vs Eastern". If one wishes to really take a side on the issue, the terms “coup government vs pro-democracy forces”, “punitive ATO force vs self-defense militias”, or “pro-American vs pro-Russian forces” may also come in handy.
Thank you for your time. No pasaran!
References:
Русский перевод данной статьи (тоже мой) - http://tatzhit.livejournal.com/1126.html
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_killed_during_Euromaidan
** https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BC%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%8B#.D0.97.D0.B0.D0.BF.D1.80.D0.B5.D1.82_.D0.9A.D0.9F.D0.A3
In the current discourse, words “pro-Ukrainian” and “Ukrainian” are used to described the Kiev-aligned troops, while Donbass militias are described as “pro-Russian” or “Russian separatists”, giving the impression of a sovereign country fighting an outside incursion.
I think this incorrectly frames the civil war: while there are a lot of volunteers and outside influence, the vast majority of fighters on both sides are local men, the government forces aren’t exactly pro-Ukrainian, and Donbass defense forces aren’t exactly pro-Russian.
To explain these statements:
1. Although there are volunteers on both sides, it is obvious at this point that around 90 percent of Donbass rebels and at least 97 percent of government forces are local.
Yes, it is also obvious that Russian citizens are donating a lot of money and food/gear to the rebel cause, and that the Russian government is supporting the rebels diplomatically and possibly even militarily (post on that coming shortly). Yes, the rebellion would likely be swiftly crushed if not for Russian help, and if the border with Russia was completely sealed off now, the rebel forces would be finished in a few months at the most.
However, the same can be said for the current government, even more so - without the mass media campaign and Western diplomatic backing, the EuroMaidan protest would never get off the ground. And if the West stopped propping up the Kiev government, it would be out of power in weeks if not days. Mainly because the pro-Western government has swiftly ruined the country to where there is NO money for continued warfare other than IMF loans, and gear for the government troops has to be collected via mass media campaigns or flown in by C-17s from Canada.
2. To reiterate that last point, a government that escalates a civil war in Ukraine and plans to sell all major assets to Western companies is NOT pro-Ukrainian, no more than the Khmer Rouge maniacs were pro-Cambodian. In the half a year since the coup, we have seen a rapid decline of Ukraine’s population, economy, standards of living, and personal freedoms.
The coup government isn’t even particularly nationalist, with most major players being simply spineless politicians or embezzling oligarchs. Although new government officials use a lot of nationalist rhetoric, and extremist nationalists from rural west Ukraine formed the driving force behind the coup (~80% of those killed attacking the police were “activists” bused in from the West… apparently democracy is a couple thousand thugs overthrowing an elected president*), currently nationalists don’t have much of a say in how the country is run - or they would probably stop it from being ruined so rapidly.
By the same token, Donbass militias aren’t exactly pro-Russian, or at least not pro-Putin. Yes, their interests coincide at the moment, but their demands are largely political and cultural - greater autonomy, meaningful political representation (for example, the communist party was banned, depriving 5 million voters of their rights**), not to be taught in schools that Waffen-SS were the good guys fighting Soviet oppressors; they don’t particularly care for Putin’s gas transport issues or NATO expansion. Their desire to join Russia largely stems from the fact that economically Ukraine seems to be a sinking ship - and the Eastern regions are being thrown to the sharks first, dismantling the Russia-affiliated Donbass industrial complex to please the EU. If Donbass militias were to win the control of the country, their rule would likely be more benevolent than the current government (well, it’s hard to be less benevolent), so they may very well be more pro-Ukrainian.
Therefore, I propose that in the future translations of Russian-language materials, and simply in Russian and foreign language posts, we consider moving away from these false identifiers of “Pro-Ukrainian” and “Pro-Russian”, and instead use the terms “government forces vs self-defense forces”, “pro-Kiev forces vs Donbass forces”, “unionist vs federalist”, “nationalist vs republican”, "Western vs Eastern". If one wishes to really take a side on the issue, the terms “coup government vs pro-democracy forces”, “punitive ATO force vs self-defense militias”, or “pro-American vs pro-Russian forces” may also come in handy.
Thank you for your time. No pasaran!
References:
Русский перевод данной статьи (тоже мой) - http://tatzhit.livejournal.com/1126.html
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_killed_during_Euromaidan
** https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BC%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%8B#.D0.97.D0.B0.D0.BF.D1.80.D0.B5.D1.82_.D0.9A.D0.9F.D0.A3