I take pleasure in offering below the link to a panel show recorded earlier today. The hosts: TRT Turkish public television. My fellow panelists: Dana Lewis, Canadian News correspondent based in London and Sergei Markov, former State Duma member, professor of political science and international relations in Moscow where he is a well known public figure.
More Turkish public television: panel discussion on the present status of the crisis at the Ukrainian border
Published by gilbertdoctorow
Gilbert Doctorow is an independent political analyst based in Brussels. He chose this third career of 'public intellectual' after finishing up a 25 year career as corporate executive and outside consultant to multinational corporations doing business in Russia and Eastern Europe which culminated in the position of Managing Director, Russia during the years 1995-2000. He has publishied his memoirs of his 25 years of doing business in and around the Soviet Union/Russia, 1975 - 2000. Memoirs of a Russianist, Volume I: From the Ground Up was published on 10 November 2020. Volume II: Russia in the Roaring 1990s was released in February 2021. A Russian language edition in a single 780 page volume was published by Liki Rossii in St Petersburg in November 2021: Россия в бурные 1990е: Дневники, воспоминания, документы. View all posts by gilbertdoctorow
12 thoughts on “More Turkish public television: panel discussion on the present status of the crisis at the Ukrainian border”
That Canadian correspondent Dana Lewis did not impress me very much – indeed, his ignorance annoyed me especially his assumption that what he calls Ukraine Nationalism (I would call it Galician Nationalism) somehow represents the whole country. The fact is of course that like Canada and indeed like my own country (I live in Northern Ireland) there are deep historical and cultural divides within this artificial configuration called Ukraine created by Stalin. There is of course in the west the Galician (called ‘Ukraine’) language and orthodox religion which developed within the Austria-Hungarian empire & Poland; then there is that part of the country that developed within Russian Empire where Russian is the dominant language and the Russian Orthodox is the dominant religion. But there is also the area of Zakarpatye which historically is part of Hungary and still has a very large number of Hungarians with their own culture and language, and who are incidentally discriminated against by the Galicians. As any Canadian should know, government needs to reflect and respect such language and cultural differences and that can only be achieved (as it was in Canada) though a form of federation. This is what Minsk 2 is calling for
Zelensky in so many words says that federalization will be ‘the death of Ukraine’.
I say, if that is so then so be it – and good riddance to it.
Yale’s no. 1 russophobe in residence curiously wrote in 2010:
By conferring the highest state honor of “Hero of Ukraine” upon Stepan Bandera (1909-1959) on January 22, Viktor Yushchenko provoked protests from the chief rabbi of Ukraine, the president of Poland, and many of his own citizens. It is no wonder. Bandera aimed to make of Ukraine a one-party fascist dictatorship without national minorities.
Of course ‘federalization’ would be the death of Ukraine as Bandera’s disciples of today would have it, and of course this suits the US/UK/UA triumvirate just fine. Much easier to manage.
I agreed, Dana Lewis seems not remember exploits of Victoria Nuland on Ucrainians coup.
I would immensely appreciate if anyone tells me why it seems that no one uses the ‘cui bono’ argument in discussing who will or will not start the war.
After all, it seems clear that the biggest winner in the event of another war over Donbass would be the Biden administration, which would kill Nord Stream 2, gain an LNG market, forcibly consolidate Europe’s political and civil societies into an entirely anti-Russian bloc, and create a distraction from domestic troubles.
It seems equally clear that the second-biggest loser (after Ukraine) in the event of a war would be Russia: in addition to losing its chance to split NATO, and taking an economic hit, Russia would also lose the ‘hearts and minds’ of still more East Ukrainians, and see its chances of re-establishing normal relations with Ukraine diminish even further. Seeing as many Russians have relatives in east Ukraine (and vice versa), the last bit isn’t as trivial as it seems.
Therefore, one would think that the best rejoinder to the Western ‘warmonger Putin’ meme is to point out that Russia stands to lose from a conflict in Ukraine regardless of the military outcome; but somehow this argument is never made.
Gilbert, or anybody else, please tell me why this angle is so rarely mentioned in discussions over Ukraine tensions even by the Russians themselves. Thanks in advance.
Of course the Biden administration would crow like a rooster either way. It’s a win win situation for them.
Case 1) There is a war (regardless of who starts it): Sanctions from Hell on Russia (as they put it)
Case 2) There is no war: A US MIC wet dream and Biden is able to claim (rightly or wrongly, no matter) that he stood down Putin. Certainly that’s how the MSM will play it in Zombification of a Nation: Act XXVII
Case in point: The 5 Day War (Georgia)
Who was blamed right off the bat for starting the war and for months and months afterwards? Russia
Who was ultimately found responsible after a year’s investigation by the EU? Georgia
Was there ever any consequence to the findings? Yes – they were brushed under the carpet.
What would be the consequence of Ukraine attacking the Donbass again and sparking another war?
If the EU dared to yet again contradict Washington’s official narrative, it would simply repeat its favorite phrase in such times: “F_ck the EU”. and that’s that.
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
I have NO idea why Russia just simply declares that ‘should Ukraine attack the Donbass, Russia will be forced to intervene under R2P (right to protect)’.
It would be a terrific opening gambit to lay bare the US’ us of it as justification for well……just about every military action it engages in.
I suppose they think it would confer some innate legitimacy to it…rules based international order and all the self-serving stuffing that accompanies that turkey.
Putin to Zelensky re: Ukraine’s reluctance to abide by Minsk II: “нравится — не нравится, терпи, моя красавица.”
After all the usual ballyhoo from the western ‘meaning of the phrase’, I asked a native Russian speaker.
She immediately recognized it as something a hairdresser might say to their client when weaving or coloring hair and it hurts a bit. Best translation into English I can suggest is “Like it or not, be patient my dear.” (except cleverer, in that it rhymes in Russian).
But not according to CNN. “Crude, insulting, condescending, even sexist and misogynistic” according to their Kyiv correspondent, accompanied by the most menacing picture of ‘the brute’ Putin short of a Newsweek cover, of course conveniently ignoring that Minsk II was unanimously incorporated into UNSC Res. 2202, including the US.
Be it right, be it left, America has become thoroughly zombified. How to deal with such as they is beyond me.
Thanks, Gilbert, for these videos and your many posts. Where else could we learn that Ukraine has as many or more troops massed than Russia, in this case to threaten and bombard the two breakaway provinces. Also our Kiev embassy is the largest in Europe with 900 staff.
What nonsense. How is Erdogan relieving tensions, by supplying lethal drones to Ukraine? He’s yanking his Turkish taffy on that note.
PS: Largest US built military base in Europe: Camp Bondsteel. Largest US Embassy: Ukraine. What was planned to be (but not to be): Largest US naval base in Europe: Sevastopol
(Camp Bondsteel is the largest and the most expensive foreign military base built by the US in Europe since the Vietnam War.)
Are we getting the flavor of things yet?
Just like US non-compliance with the very UNSC Res 2202 it itself signed, it built this base in de facto non-compliance with UNSC Res 1244, it itself also signed.
So, what are Washington’s signatures really good for? Autograph collectors?
Comments are closed.