Multipart comment (Part 1/2)
=============================

>Please don't take HN threads further into nationalistic flamewar, regardless of nation.

My apologies, dang, but we're discussing an actual war here, and you're out of your depth.

I'm telling this to you as a Ukrainian, and as a moderator of /r/ukraina, a community of 100,000 people.

I urge you to read what follows, learn, and for once, stop siding with bigotry.

I'm writing this for you personally, for your education. Others will learn too.

----

These questions aren't about "nationalistic" "flame" wars.

I'm from Ukraine, where there's a real war going on, and I'm eligible for the draft. As of May, 2024, I'm required to register even as someone living in the US.

We're discussing this very war. Real war. In which I have a chance to die, unlike you, so I hope you can at least listen.

The person I asked these three questions is from Russia, and is asking what's wrong with them, personally.

Their answers, should they provide them, would help illustrate the issue, either by pointing out how people who answer that way their contributed to current situation, or observing that most Russians would have answered differently.

These aren't "provoking" questions — including the phrasing. The phrasing comes from Russia.

----

See, Russia has annexed Crimea in 2014 using the slogan "Crimea is ours"[1], to the extent that it became a catch phrase, a neologism.

The first question is a litmus test that exhibits a problem with many so-called "good", liberal Russians who absolutely oppose Putin, while agreeing with Putin's expansionist politics.

This includes the martyred (now dead, killed in prison after repeated assassination attempts) opposition leader Navalny, whose wife is claiming the title of Russia's president in absentia.

Navalny famously quipped that "Crimea isn't a sandwich to be passed back and forth"[2], indicating that no matter what, what Russia takes won't ever be given back.

This question is how one can easily dismantle Myth #1: that liberal Russians who oppose Putin are necessarily anti-war. The question conclusively demonstrates that many are anti-losing, not anti-war per se.

2014 annexation met virtually no opposition from Russians. There are notable exceptions, like Valeriya Novodvorskaya.

If this name tells nothing to you, please look her up — and note, in that case, that you're in no position to be moderating a conversation about Russian aggression, as your assumptions are coming from a place of ignorance — and are insulting to both Russians and Ukrainians.

Unlike you, Valeriya Novodvorskaya didn't see question #1 as something to "flame" about. There was no question to her, as a self-respecting Russian citizen: she said, without doubt or fear, that annexing land of another, sovereign nation by force is unacceptable; and Russia's only sane and saving grace is unilaterally ceding it back to Ukraine.

Crimea is internationally recognized as Ukraine's territory. That's an impersonal, clear and dry answer. This is not a provocative or ambiguous question to anyone who thinks that having international laws is important. The fact that you think there's an issue with the question (but not the answer — which the OP didn't provide in any case) is, in itself, problematic.

As is the stance of over 80% of Russians who see no issue with armed annexation[3] — which, by the way, Russia openly lied about, saying that Russia has no idea where the so-called "little green men"[4] — as the invaders in unmarked uniforms were known — came from. The fact that it violated Geneva convention on the account of unmarked uniforms alone didn't bother 4 out of 5 Russians, many of whom, 10 years later, are asking the same question — what's my role in this?.

Let's go further. Question #2, whose is Chechnya. The phrasing is chosen to mirror the first question.

Again, from the point of view of international law, this is not provocative in any way. Chechnya is Russian territory.

It wasn't that clear cut in early 1990s, when Chechnya declared independence. It's Russian territory because Chechen independence movement, led by Dzhokhar Dudayev, was fiercely crushed in two Chechen wars. The first one was lef by Boris Yeltsin — and it was a was which Russia has lost, losing any control over what became known as Ichkeria Republic. While it didn't get much recognition, Russia's control over that territory only existed on paper.

But as devastating the loss was to Russia, the war was, effectively, over. The fighting has stopped. The obvious path forward was recognition of the independent Republic, and peace.

That's not what happened. Putin has infamously faked apartment bombings[4] (as in, all evidence points to FSB, the succesor agency to KGB from which Putin comes, planting the bombs) to get a pretext to start an absolutely brutal Second Chechen War.

Many people died. Grozny was leveled. But Putin got a collaborator on the inside — imam Kadyrov who turned on his people, and in doing so, became Chechnya's vassal king. After his assassination, his son, Kadyrov Junior, inherited the throne, and rules Chechnya with an iron fist, entertaining himself with activities such as exterminating gay people in Chechnya (by killing, torturing, and all but hunting them for sport).

Hunting us for sport, that is. People like me[6]. I felt safe in Kyiv last year. You get used to air raid sirens. That means air defense is working. Where Russia took hold, people like me live in constant fear of death. Not everyone had the means to get out.

That gives me a reason to support my country in this fight, but so far, we haven't talked about what this has to do with bigotry or responsibility for the war.

After all, Russia won, and according to international law, that land has been Russian since 1991, and civil wars like that are Russia's internal affairs.

Well here's how it factors into Russia's invasion of Ukraine. See, the invasion started in 2014, and not just in Crimea, which was annexed outright, but also in Donbas, where Russia instigated and supported armed rebellions against Ukraine's government, covertly aided by Russian armed forces[7].

Russia lied blatantly about that, too. When Russian regular soldiers were taken as POWs in Ukraine, Russia said they were simply there "on vacation", having crossed the border "by accident"[8].

Russia lies because the war was posed to be a separarist movement. Two fledgling "republics" were formed, LNR and DNR (Luhansk/Donetsk people's republic). In 2022, Russia dropped the pretenses, and annexed them too. But for 8 years — through the sham Minsk ceasefire agreements — Russia maintained that they were merely supporting a righteous independence movement, which Ukrainian government had no right to fight.

Fighting LNR/DNR was the excuse Russia used to label Ukrainian government a "Nazi regime".

And that's where Question #2 shines. Millions of Russians justify the 2022 invasion of Ukraine by the "need" to back what they called LNR/DNR separatists, because the separatists have the right to self-determination.

In the same breath, they are 100% behind crushing the "terrorists" in Chechnya (as Putin said, quote, "whacking them in the shitters").

Those people — the people who vehemently support separatists who want to join Russia (self-determination!), while equally vehemently supporting brutally crushing those who want to break away from Russia (territorial integrity!) are bigots.

Not all Russians, of course.

But about 80% of Russians oppose Chechnya's independence[9], and 80% support Russian intervention in Ukraine to "protect" LNR/DNR "independence"[10]. These variables aren't independent.

(cont-d below)