Was there a threat for ethnic Russians in February 2013 in Ukraine (Crimean question)?

​

Ukrainian and Western politicians always say that the Ukrainian crisis allegedly began in the spring of 2014, when the Crimea joined Russia and fights in Donbas started.

However, now these politicians don’t like to be reminded that before the spring of 2014 there was the Euromaidan in Ukraine and at some point, the pro-Western protesters began to burn and kill during this Euromaidan.

Spoiler

By the way, earlier this month I have written in an article that now nobody in Ukraine cannot explain why they had begun to burn and kill (please see here).

And my present article deals with another subject: Was there a threat for ethnic Russians in February 2013 in Ukraine (Crimean question)?

And I would like to give you some examples to this subject below.

In January 2014, police officer Oleksandr Kyselevskyi was stabbed to death by a Maindanist in the city of Kherson. His murderer was arrested on the day of the crime but the next month - immediately after new rulers had come to power in Ukraine - he was amnestied and released.

But this murder cannot be explained by a self-defense at all, since no one of protesters was ever killed in Kherson during Euromaidan.

In February 2014, the protesters attacked an office of the Party of Regions in Kiev. This office was burned down and one of its employees, Volodymyr Zakharov, a programmer, died in the fire.



On the night of February 21, 2014, in Cherkasy Oblast a large group of Ukrainian nationalists stopped buses in which residents of the Crimea returned home from Kiev. The residents of the Crimea, where the ethnic Russians are a majority, were severely beaten and their buses were burned down.

After the President Yanukovych had unconstitutionally been removed from power on February 22, 2014, new rulers at once declared an amnesty for so-called political prisoners including murderers. For example, Dmytro Pavlychenko was released who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for murder of a judge.

And after this “Victory of Euromaidan” – although Euromaidan had initially been declared as a movement for human rights – the Ukrainian Parliament at the same day voted for a repeal of the Law on Regional Languages though this Law had guaranteed some language rights for national minorities including ethnic Russians.

Three months later, the first post-Maidan Ukrainian President Poroshenko in his interview for Le Figaro called this decision of the Parliament a mistake (please see here), but later this law was finally repealed.

The facts, which I have presented in this article, confirm that there had been a real threat for ethnic Russians in February 2013 in Ukraine.

Therefore, the Russian Government’s decision to accept the Crimea into the Russian Federation can be justified.

Of course, one can say that the Russian Government had to wait, observe the development of situation and draw attention of Western politicians to violent actions in Ukraine.

But subsequent events showed that the Western politicians were absolutely indifferent, e.g. to mass death of opponents of new Ukrainian rulers on May 2, 2014, when 42 of these opponents had died in a fire in the Trade Unions House. I personally cannot remember that a U.S. President or a German Chancellor ever demanded from any Ukrainian officials to investigate this mass death.


Source

The question “Why did the pro-Western protesters begin to burn and kill during Euromaidan?” has been discussed in the following thread - http://www.politicalforum.com/index...rainians-been-fighting-for-since-2013.610644/

​

​

 

Some 40 people were chased into a building by 'pro-Ukraine marchers' and burned alive.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27275383

To be fair, both sides were engaging in armed violence against the other. The primary issue seems to have been that the police stayed out of it and let it happen when it was ethnic Russian protesters or 'separatists' being attacked.

 

Ukraine Dominates Global Headlines Despite Legacy of Corruption

UKRAINE IS AS CORRUPT AS BIDEN AND RUSSIA
'Ukraine ranks 116th out of 180 countries in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index. The ranking is a marked improvement over 2021, when Ukraine placed 122, giving it the dubious distinction of being the second-most corrupt nation in Europe. Russia, at #136, fared worse. Last week, the head of the country's Supreme Court was detained for allegedly taking bribes.'

The Biden/Obama CIA ran the 'so-called Maidan revolution in Kyiv that ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych.'

'Ukraine's endemic corruption continues, even as America and her Western allies have poured nearly $200 billion in military and humanitarian aid in just 15 months. The amount is more money spent on a single country than any other nation in history. In last week's G7 meeting in Hiroshima, Ukraine's President Zelenskyy addressed the G-7 leaders for even more aid and support. With the recent fall of Bakhmut, the conflict is far from over. Reconstruction costs could amount to nearly $1 trillion, all of which will again come from the West..'

'Why should Ukraine dominate our public discourse? Of the 196 countries in the United Nations, why is Washington so interminably connected with a country ranked 56 in GDP that is of little consequence to America? The nation is not in the E.U.; it does not have technical expertise that America covets, and its geography is not crucial to America's global interests, like that of the State of Israel.'

'Two words come to mind: Joe Biden'

'Biden was the Obama administration's point man in Ukraine.' Hunter cashed in with Burisma, 'owned by a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch, Mykola Zlochevsky, whose assets, to the tune of $23 million, had been seized in London by British authorities just a few weeks before Hunter assumed his role. Ukraine was buying influence all the way to the White House.'

'American taxpayers, forced by the Biden White House to continue to fund Ukraine as Washington enters a standoff over raising America's $31 trillion debt, should not be on the hook to subsidize such criminal Ukrainian conduct.'