"Zelensky defends corruption" Topic

Russia is undergoing large-scale purges of corrupt officials. They are going to jail, shooting themselves, or throwing themselves out of windows. Meanwhile, in Ukraine:

link

link

If you discovered corruption in the highest echelons of power, you are a Russian spy))) I think that if someone could be found to pay, another Maidan could take place… Where is Nuland and her cookies?

Oh! It all went downhill:

link

Axios: Zelensky neuters corruption watchdogs, sparking protests

link

Those who remember more than two years ago will remember Ukraine's reputation as a major cyber-crime base and the high corruption levels- before and after 2014.

That still doesn't excuse Russia's invasion and the war crimes committed thereafter, Cuprum. Nazis, corruption- what next as justification for Russia' invasion? Witchcraft? Heresy? Treason, perhaps?

As for Russia cleaning out corrupt officials? Is it because they are corrupt or because they pose a problem that Czar Vladimir III Vladimirovich Putin wants "solved"? Solved in the same way he solved the problems of Boris Nemtsov, Vladmir Kara-Murza, Boris Berezovsky, Anna Politkovskaya, Anastasia Baburova, etc?

Putin laid out the reasons for the invasion in the "Putin Ultimatum" right before the war. Everything else is insignificant details compared to these reasons…

link
link

When criminals and corrupt officials solve problems among themselves in their usual ways – I don't care. All these people are descendants of the criminal revolution of 1991. And they have corresponding methods of solving problems. But now the fight against corruption for Putin is a way to win the war. And this is great, because winning this war and destroying corruption are important for Russia and the Russian people. What was in the past is already in the past. And if Putin fails – well then we will continue the fight against him. But – after victory.

But that's not the point. The point is that Zelensky lost the war largely due to corruption and the theft of Western money and aid. At a time when his country and his people are bleeding in the fight. You backed the wrong horse))) Although, perhaps, your politicians are in on it? I wouldn't be surprised.

Putin laid out the reasons for the invasion in the "Putin Ultimatum" right before the war.

I haven't backed any horse, mate. To me it's just another gang fight, albeit on a far greater scale and with inexcusable civilian casualties. As usual ordinary people are copping a hiding while the men with huge egos and ambitions, and inversely proportional morals, are sitting back and listening to their sycophants tell them how wonderful/righteous/special they are.

I wouldn't call them reasons either, mate, but excuses- excepting the Ukrainian shelling of the pro-Russian provinces. But then again, could Ukraine have sorted that problem out peacefully if the Russians hadn't supported, encouraged and reinforced the pro-Russian faction?

I hope you're right and Putin is actually clearing out corruption. But I'm a cynical old bustard and I'm more inclined to think he's getting rid of potential rivals, rather than pouring lime onto the midden.

Putin is clearing out corruption? Will he be resigning or taking a window?

Dal Gaian – very sensible. Your POV makes a lot of sense.

DBDD

"Russia is undergoing large-scale purges of corrupt officials. They are going to jail, shooting themselves, or throwing themselves out of windows." Well… only the ones who get on the wrong side of your head mobster. Also, don't forget the ones who mysteriously blow up their plane on the way to Leningrad!

Dal Gavan +1

DG +2!

The higher the rank, the higher the window.
St Vladimir Putin, by reason oh His exalted Holiness, deserves the highest window in the Soviet Union! Errr,,, excuse me. Russia.

With a nod to Hamilton Jordan – Being called corrupt by Putin is like being called ugly by a frog.

Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya, are all hotbeds of corruption that Putin has been kind enough to take under his wing an root out the evil.

Baltic States next.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek

Dal Gavan, to be honest, I don't see any rivals for Putin… They've been gone for a long time. There was the mythical Navalny, but he was so pathetic that he could hardly count on anything serious here… But Zelensky is still only actively engaged in the destruction of any opposition in Ukraine.
The Russians, perhaps, would not have supported the pro-Russian rebels in Donbass if the West had not interfered in the events on Maidan… But since the West allowed itself to do this, why should Russia adhere to some kind of political rules?

Tortorella, Putin will not leave. At least not now. He is popular.

Bunkermeister, Romania has not yet occupied Moldova, although it is trying… What's wrong with Ukraine? Did they want to get rid of Russian speakers? Now they are actively trying to do this))) Everything is fine in Georgia and there is no war. The Russians are still dividing the warring nations. Chechnya has been part of Russia since the 19th century. I understand that you would like to see a jihadist enclave there, but Russia does not need such a neighbor)))

Hey… We have already discussed Putin many times. What do you think about Zelensky's corruption and the people's protests against him?

Oh yeah… He is your favorite corrupt official… He is fighting against the terrible Putin. So he has the right to steal from his warring army as much as he wants and whenever he wants? This is not only the money of the Ukrainian people – it is your money…
By the way, if Zelensky is the same thief as Yanukovych, then why was all this necessary? I will say – to destroy Russian influence in Ukraine and take it under your control. Well, and to move your missile launch sites closer to Moscow and Russian military bases.

Russian elite 'living in fear' as Putin's violence harms his own

"Russia's elite are reportedly living in fear as Putin carries out purges reminiscent of Stalin's during the 1930s.

Apparent suicides, long prison sentences and mysterious plane crashes have left the country's rich and powerful terrified of crossing the dictator.

The grueling war in Ukraine has upended the delicate balance of power in the country, with the Kremlin raiding the wealth formerly held by the country's oligarchs in a desperate attempt to shore up the coffers…"

link

Armand

The fact that the elite lives in fear is great))) Because they were all riddled with corruption and must pay for it.

But I look forward to Zelensky shooting down the growing protests. And there will be another "Revolution of Dignity"… All this already happened in 1917. The armed people will sweep away the dictator.

Putin may not have any visible rivals, mate, but all men who hold high power have rivals, whether they know of them or not. The rivals may not seem to be a viable threat to Putin, but he's smart enough to know that they probably think they can over-throw him and, if they try, anything can happen.

As for the Maidan, as far as I know any assistance the Euro-Ukraine movement was limited to moral support and funding by some Ukrainian ex-patriots. It's a very weak- at best- and questionable casas bellum, mate. Do you know, or have you read/seen any evidence that NATO/EU provided more assistance than that, Cuprum?

It's notable that the vast majority of former Soviet subject states didn't ask to join NATO until after Putin took power in 2000. Admitting them to NATO may have broken the 1997 agreement, but why did they think they needed the protection of joining NATO? What had happened in Chechnya, perhaps?

PS didn't Viktor Yanukovych's move to make the Donbas independent pre-date the Maidan and the Euro-Ukraine push?

Regarding the 1997 treaty: Russia accepted NATO's expansion s part of the agreement though Yeltsin did not like it. See the AI summary link

As for Russia's invasion of Ukraine: It does not matter what excuses Putin claims to justify the invasion. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a violation of the treaty Russia signed regarding Ukraine's sovereignty.

Thanks for the link, williamb. But it makes the question murkier than before, for me. To tell the truth, I'm getting an impression that the wording is typical bureaucraptic waffle and can be interpreted as each reader wants. I don't trust any NATO, European and US summaries, either- they'll all interpret it- and, at times, possibly even misquote it- as best benefits them. But I am very cynical, especially when it comes to governments' justifications for anything.

The crux is (apart from the deliberate targetting of civilians- which happens, despite Russian denials), as you wrote:

It does not matter what excuses Putin claims to justify the invasion. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a violation of the treaty Russia signed regarding Ukraine's sovereignty.

Williamb – Dal Gavan + 2

Only Soviet Russia and her shameful fourth-rate allies didn't accept that…

Regarding Zelensky's possible corruption… there is practically no leader who isn't accused of or hasn't practiced some form of corruption, either directly or through his family… but that doesn't compare to the bloody, destructive, and repulsive tyranny of autocrats who perpetuate themselves in power through fear and crime.

I'll state the obvious again… if the Soviets are SO remarkable, if living under their rule is SO beneficial, if the people are SO happy, and their future SO promising… why did all those who were under their regime/ruling flee at full speed to the West/NATO and want NOTHING to do with any Russian? In fact, they arm and prepare, showing a certain desperation to not fall into their hands again…

It's ridiculous to continue arguing about who the bad guys are in this movie…

Armand

Dal Gavan, is it not interference in the internal affairs of a state when officials of other countries speak at anti-government rallies? That is, if during protests with calls for a legitimately elected government, somewhere in the USA or France, official representatives of Russia or China speak to the protesters with words of support, will this not be a casus belli? I cannot even take your words seriously…
In 2001, Putin also repeatedly spoke about his desire to join NATO, including with representatives of the alliance. But the West wanted to see Russia as an enemy, not an ally…
Yanukovych was the president of Ukraine… I have never heard anything like this before. Where did you find this? The whole reason for the conflict in Ukraine was that Yanukovych was faced with the question of which economic organization to join – the "Customs Union" created by Russia, or an association with the European Union. He postponed the decision on this issue on the eve of signing the association with the European Union, which caused internal protests in the western part of Ukraine. Then the West began a campaign to overthrow the government it didn't like…
Russia does not carry out deliberate attacks on civilians, which is confirmed by the lowest military-to-civilian death ratio in modern wars. There is simply nothing to talk about here – the numbers speak for themselves.

williamb, the sovereignty treaty contains a clause stating that Ukraine refuses to join any alliances… Ukraine openly refused its obligations, which means the treaty is no longer valid.
The Russia-NATO treaty of 1997 does not say a word about NATO expansion:
link

Tango, I have long known your delusions. It is strange that the autocrat Zelensky evokes such warm feelings in you)))

It is strange that Putin evokes ANY feelings except loathing and disgust from any rational person.

Bum!…

Armand

Yanukovych was the president of Ukraine… I have never heard anything like this before.

I'm not surprised, mate, because I had a brain fart and put in Yanukovych when I should have put in Akmentov (spelling?). Apologies.

I didn't know Euro pollies had spoken at the rallies. BFD, mate, if they did. Foreign diplomats trying to influence elections or verbally supporting protestors is not usually seen as a casus bellum. It usually would result in diplomatic, trade and financial sanctions, eg closing the offending persons' embassy and send everyone home, or tearing up trade agreements. Though in some authoritarian states, they could be arrested and gaoled.

However, that argument- that Euro pollies encouraging protestors against the Ukrainian government provided a casus bellum for Russia to Ukraine- is deeply flawed on many levels. It was Ukraine's prerogative to act against the diplomats involved in the protests, not Russia's- even if it did upset Russian plans for making Ukraine a puppet state. Using that as a casus bellum for Russia's invasion of Ukraine is, to put it nicely, "quaint". With that sort of thinking on your part I'm glad you don't take me seriously.

Let's leave it there, because we won't agree. I see the West as sharing some responsibility and see Russia as acting like a rogue state. You see Russia as completely innocent, forced into war because of "provocations". Agreement isn't possible.

Ten years from now, when we're all crawling out from nuclear rubble, a war started by a paranoid temper tantrum by Putin, we'll all be able to laugh at this.
Trust me on this.

Dal Gavan, Russia did not declare war on Ukraine because of the coup in 2014. Russia only supported the forces loyal to the Yanukovych government and the Constitution of Ukraine, against which the nationalists who seized power began to wage armed aggression and simply physically destroy dissidents.
Why did you decide that Ukraine had to become a puppet state of Russia? Russia was more than happy with Ukraine's neutral status. Look at Kazakhstan – there is a similar situation in many ways. The same large groups of local Russian population – entire Russian-speaking regions. Extensive economic ties and the same open border. There were even Russian troops that were brought into the country several years ago to suppress anti-government protests by nationalists and then immediately left the country. And yet there are no conflicts and no one can call Kazakhstan a puppet state. It's just that the West hasn't yet decided to turn this country into an anti-Russian bridgehead…

Dal Gavan, for your information. The following people visited the Maidan during the anti-government protests in 2014:
- representatives of the embassies of the USA, France, Spain, Germany, Denmark and other EU countries, including the ambassadors themselves;
- German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle;
- former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili;
- MEP and member of the Polish "Civic Platform" Jacek Protasiewicz;
- Dutch Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans;
- Czech Senator Jaromir Stetina;
- Speaker of the Seimas of Lithuania Loreta Graužiniene;
- Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevičius;
- US Senators Chris Murphy and John McCain;
- US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland;
- EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton;
- leader of the Polish conservative-clerical party "Law and Justice", former Prime Minister of Poland Jaroslaw Kaczynski.
What is this if not direct interference by the West in the internal affairs of Ukraine?

John the OFM, if Putin starts a nuclear war, it will only be in response to direct NATO aggression. For example, to the blockade of Russian shipping in the Baltic Sea…

"There were even Russian troops that were brought into the country several years ago to suppress anti-government protests by nationalists and then immediately left the country. And yet there are no conflicts and no one can call Kazakhstan a puppet state…"

Is it clear?….

Armand

Russian troops returned home:

link

If Putin had been more decisive, he would have done the same in 2014 in Ukraine. And hundreds of thousands of people would have stayed alive and the world would not be on the brink of a nuclear crisis. The West is sowing chaos, war and death…

Let's leave it there, because we won't agree. I see the West as sharing some responsibility and see Russia as acting like a rogue state. You see Russia as completely innocent, forced into war because of "provocations". Agreement isn't possible.

Nothing has changed.

Cuprum2 where in the original 1994 treaty does it state that Ukraine may not join any alliances? see link

Where in the subsequent Budapest Memorandum does it state that Ukraine may not join any alliances? see link

Where does it state in the 1997 Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, PPartnership that Ukraine may not join any alliances? see link

Wikipedia summary link

Link to actual document PDF link

Read article 36 "This Treaty shall not affect the rights and obligations of the High Contracting Parties arising
from other international treaties to which they are parties." That states the opposite of your claim that Ukraine was not allowed to join any alliances.

Ukraine did not renew the treaty due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and other violations of the 1997 treaty