Mardy (Posts about Ucraina)http://mardy.it/categories/ucraina.atom2024-02-02T20:11:12ZAlberto MardeganNikolaWill the internet forget russophobia?http://mardy.it/blog/2023/06/will-the-internet-forget-russophobia.html2023-06-04T10:41:02+03:002023-06-04T10:41:02+03:00Alberto Mardegan<p>I've often wondering what will happen when this horrific war in Europe will
finally be over. I won't be discussing politics here, but what is mostly
interesting to me is how (and if) all the companies who made high proclaims
about not doing business with Russia will justify their getting back into the
Russian market. They will probably count on the fact that the war will be long,
and that people will forget what these companies' stance was. After all, the
world has forget about all the companies who collaborated with the Nazi regime,
so we can expect the same to happen with this war.</p>
<p>But I don't think that's right: if you made a mistake, you should be held
accountable for it. You might be wondering what is the “mistake” I'm talking
about: that's <strong>russophobia</strong>, indeed. To put it simply, and make a concrete
example: if The Qt Company stops doing business with Russian companies and
blocks its downloads page to Russian IP addresses because of the war, <em>without
being forced by the government to do so</em>, but does not take similar measures
against other countries who wage wars which have caused way more deaths and
displacement of individuals, well, that's what I call “russophobia”. Of course,
I'm aware that there's way more than that, and that the hatred for all what is
Russian (including culture and sport competitions) is an even bigger issue, but
in this blog post I'm especially focused on the IT world, so please forgive my
semi-intentional narrow-mindness on this topic.</p>
<p>Now, I'm fully aware that we live in a mediatic bubble that directs our
decisions in a way that is almost automatic, and I'm sure that most people
working for companies who took russophobic decisions are not themselves
russophobic at all (and I'm not dismissing the possibility that even the very
same people who took these decisions might not be russophobic) and that these
decisions were taken on impulse, because “everyone else is doing the same” and
due to the media pressure that if you don't do that, you might get accused of
supporting the “wrong” side of the war.</p>
<p>But that's not an excuse, especially for “smart” people like IT engineers (and
I put the adjective between quotes <a href="http://mardy.it/blog/2022/11/the-idiotism-of-software-developers.html">for a
reason</a>), and especially after
the initial heat has passed and when, after more than one year of war, we
should have been exposed to different point of views and be able to evaluate
the situation more rationally. It has been therefore especially stunning for me
to learn that the Linux Kernel community, and hence The Linux Foundation, has
recently given room to russophobic behaviours, refusing a patch coming from the
Russian company Baikal (a CPU maker). For the record, the incriminated patch
was not related to supporting hardware produced by this company (not that this
would make the deed less serious, but at least one could have argued that there
could be some spot of logic in it):</p>
<div class="code"><pre class="code literal-block">From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
[...]
On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 01:42:24 +0300 Serge Semin wrote:
> From: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
We don't feel comfortable accepting patches from or relating
to hardware produced by your organization.
Please withhold networking contributions until further notice.
</pre></div>
<p>(<a href="https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230314103316.313e5f61@kernel.org/">here</a> the
link to the original discussion). One week later, someone denounced this as a
violation to the Code of Conduct committee (unfortunately the only link I could
find to this is coming from a <a href="https://www.opennet.ru/openforum/vsluhforumID3/129994.html#529">Russian IT
forum</a>, and any
other references seem to have been removed from DuckDuckGo and Google), only to
receive a reply that it was all fine.</p>
<p>To me this is not fine. The war will end, sooner or later, but it bothers me
that we never learn from the past and repeat the same mistakes over and over.
We apparently know a lot about propaganda, yet we fail to recognize it when it
influences our own mind and actions. My humble contribution is the creation of
a page where I list the companies who have taken russophobic actions, and, on
the opposite side, companies (like Flickr and Zorin OS) who have stood out for
positive messages and helpful actions. My hope is that some of the listed
companies will find the courage to review their actions, and either correct
their stance, or at least clarify their reasons. So, I hereby present</p>
<p style="text-align: center; font-size: 130%">
<a href="https://github.com/mardy/russophobia">Denouncing russophobia</a>
</p>
<p>where you'll find some of the good and some of the bad companies. I'm sure I'm
missing plenty of them: I just started recollecting my memories and searching
online a couple of days ago. I created this as a GitHub project, because indeed
I'm looking forward for contributions, to help me make the lists more complete.
I need to stress that the fact that a company has announced the suspension of
its business in Russia does not automatically make it russophobic: what we need
to look at is the <em>reason</em> for that decision: companies like LEGO and Nintendo,
for example, have suspended their operations citing logistic and financial
reasons; no judgement involved.</p>
<p>Let me repeat it once more, just to make sure there are no misunderstandings:
it's perfectly fine for businesses to take a stance on politics, and sometimes
it might be even praiseworthy; but if a company is international, and does not
apply the same reasoning to other armed conflicts, or seem to care only about
certain human rights violations and not others, then it's a case of double
standards which we need to be aware of, and make the company think twice about
it. And that's also the reason why you won't find any Ukrainian company among
the “bad” ones, because in their case the reaction is perfectly understandable
and they can hardly be accused of adopting double standards (well, technically
speaking, they are adopting double standards, but when you are so directly
impacted I think it does not deserve a blame): if it's your house which burns,
you should definitely scream about it, even if you previously have been silent
about your neighbour house's burning.</p>
<p><strong>I'm especially looking forward for more “good” companies</strong>, who have shown empathy
towards the people affected by the war (and maybe even collected money to help
them) while refraining from taking the judging role and forgetting about all
the injustice and suffering that other wars have caused (including on that very
same piece of land that suddenly appeared on all newspapers' front pages on
February 24th, 2022). I hope that these companies can serve as an example of
positive action, humanity, and love.</p><p>I've often wondering what will happen when this horrific war in Europe will
finally be over. I won't be discussing politics here, but what is mostly
interesting to me is how (and if) all the companies who made high proclaims
about not doing business with Russia will justify their getting back into the
Russian market. They will probably count on the fact that the war will be long,
and that people will forget what these companies' stance was. After all, the
world has forget about all the companies who collaborated with the Nazi regime,
so we can expect the same to happen with this war.</p>
<p>But I don't think that's right: if you made a mistake, you should be held
accountable for it. You might be wondering what is the “mistake” I'm talking
about: that's <strong>russophobia</strong>, indeed. To put it simply, and make a concrete
example: if The Qt Company stops doing business with Russian companies and
blocks its downloads page to Russian IP addresses because of the war, <em>without
being forced by the government to do so</em>, but does not take similar measures
against other countries who wage wars which have caused way more deaths and
displacement of individuals, well, that's what I call “russophobia”. Of course,
I'm aware that there's way more than that, and that the hatred for all what is
Russian (including culture and sport competitions) is an even bigger issue, but
in this blog post I'm especially focused on the IT world, so please forgive my
semi-intentional narrow-mindness on this topic.</p>
<p>Now, I'm fully aware that we live in a mediatic bubble that directs our
decisions in a way that is almost automatic, and I'm sure that most people
working for companies who took russophobic decisions are not themselves
russophobic at all (and I'm not dismissing the possibility that even the very
same people who took these decisions might not be russophobic) and that these
decisions were taken on impulse, because “everyone else is doing the same” and
due to the media pressure that if you don't do that, you might get accused of
supporting the “wrong” side of the war.</p>
<p>But that's not an excuse, especially for “smart” people like IT engineers (and
I put the adjective between quotes <a href="http://mardy.it/blog/2022/11/the-idiotism-of-software-developers.html">for a
reason</a>), and especially after
the initial heat has passed and when, after more than one year of war, we
should have been exposed to different point of views and be able to evaluate
the situation more rationally. It has been therefore especially stunning for me
to learn that the Linux Kernel community, and hence The Linux Foundation, has
recently given room to russophobic behaviours, refusing a patch coming from the
Russian company Baikal (a CPU maker). For the record, the incriminated patch
was not related to supporting hardware produced by this company (not that this
would make the deed less serious, but at least one could have argued that there
could be some spot of logic in it):</p>
<div class="code"><pre class="code literal-block">From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
[...]
On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 01:42:24 +0300 Serge Semin wrote:
> From: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
We don't feel comfortable accepting patches from or relating
to hardware produced by your organization.
Please withhold networking contributions until further notice.
</pre></div>
<p>(<a href="https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230314103316.313e5f61@kernel.org/">here</a> the
link to the original discussion). One week later, someone denounced this as a
violation to the Code of Conduct committee (unfortunately the only link I could
find to this is coming from a <a href="https://www.opennet.ru/openforum/vsluhforumID3/129994.html#529">Russian IT
forum</a>, and any
other references seem to have been removed from DuckDuckGo and Google), only to
receive a reply that it was all fine.</p>
<p>To me this is not fine. The war will end, sooner or later, but it bothers me
that we never learn from the past and repeat the same mistakes over and over.
We apparently know a lot about propaganda, yet we fail to recognize it when it
influences our own mind and actions. My humble contribution is the creation of
a page where I list the companies who have taken russophobic actions, and, on
the opposite side, companies (like Flickr and Zorin OS) who have stood out for
positive messages and helpful actions. My hope is that some of the listed
companies will find the courage to review their actions, and either correct
their stance, or at least clarify their reasons. So, I hereby present</p>
<p style="text-align: center; font-size: 130%">
<a href="https://github.com/mardy/russophobia">Denouncing russophobia</a>
</p>
<p>where you'll find some of the good and some of the bad companies. I'm sure I'm
missing plenty of them: I just started recollecting my memories and searching
online a couple of days ago. I created this as a GitHub project, because indeed
I'm looking forward for contributions, to help me make the lists more complete.
I need to stress that the fact that a company has announced the suspension of
its business in Russia does not automatically make it russophobic: what we need
to look at is the <em>reason</em> for that decision: companies like LEGO and Nintendo,
for example, have suspended their operations citing logistic and financial
reasons; no judgement involved.</p>
<p>Let me repeat it once more, just to make sure there are no misunderstandings:
it's perfectly fine for businesses to take a stance on politics, and sometimes
it might be even praiseworthy; but if a company is international, and does not
apply the same reasoning to other armed conflicts, or seem to care only about
certain human rights violations and not others, then it's a case of double
standards which we need to be aware of, and make the company think twice about
it. And that's also the reason why you won't find any Ukrainian company among
the “bad” ones, because in their case the reaction is perfectly understandable
and they can hardly be accused of adopting double standards (well, technically
speaking, they are adopting double standards, but when you are so directly
impacted I think it does not deserve a blame): if it's your house which burns,
you should definitely scream about it, even if you previously have been silent
about your neighbour house's burning.</p>
<p><strong>I'm especially looking forward for more “good” companies</strong>, who have shown empathy
towards the people affected by the war (and maybe even collected money to help
them) while refraining from taking the judging role and forgetting about all
the injustice and suffering that other wars have caused (including on that very
same piece of land that suddenly appeared on all newspapers' front pages on
February 24th, 2022). I hope that these companies can serve as an example of
positive action, humanity, and love.</p>Un editoriale di Marco Travagliohttp://mardy.it/blog/2023/03/un-editoriale-di-marco-travaglio.html2023-03-01T20:37:28+03:002023-03-01T20:37:28+03:00Alberto Mardegan<p>Nonostante io non legga più Il Fatto Quotidiano (per i motivi spiegati
<a href="http://mardy.it/blog/2016/10/il-fatto-quotidiano-plagio-e-propaganda.html">qui</a>, che restano tuttora
validi), continuo a imbattermi negli editoriali di Marco Travaglio, che spesso
apprezzo. Oggi invece mi sono imbattuto nell'introduzione del suo nuovo libro
<a href="https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/in-edicola/articoli/2023/02/24/un-anno-di-bugie-per-mettere-agli-italiani-lelmetto-no-pax/7075675/">“Scemi di
guerra”</a>,
e ve ne riporto un estratto che ho trovato particolarmente incisivo.</p>
<hr>
<p>Abbiamo abolito la storia. È vietato raccontare ciò che è accaduto in Ucraina
prima del 24 febbraio 2022: gli otto anni di guerra civile in Donbass dopo il
golpe bianco (anzi, nero) di Euromaidan nel 2014 e le migliaia di morti e feriti
causati dai continui attacchi delle truppe di Kiev e delle milizie filo-naziste
al seguito contro le popolazioni russofone e russofile che, col sostegno di
Mosca, chiedevano l’indipendenza o almeno l’autonomia. Il tutto in barba ai due
accordi di Minsk. La versione ufficiale, l’unica autorizzata, è che prima del
2022 non è successo niente: una mattina Putin s’è svegliato più pazzo del
solito e ha invaso l’Ucraina. Se la gente scoprisse la verità, capirebbe che il
mantra atlantista “Putin aggressore e Zelensky aggredito” vale solo dal 2022:
prima, per otto anni, gli aggressori erano i governi di Kiev (l’ultimo, quello
di Zelensky) e gli aggrediti i popoli del Donbass. Fra le vittime, c’è il
giornalista italiano Andrea Rocchelli, ucciso dall’esercito ucraino… Abbiamo
abolito la geografia. Proibito mostrare la cartina dell’allargamento della Nato
a Est negli ultimi 25 anni (da 16 a 30 membri)… Eppure, che la Nato si sia
allargata a Est, accerchiando e assediando la Russia, minacciandone la
sicurezza con installazioni di missili nucleari sempre più vicine al confine,
in barba alle promesse fatte a Gorbaciov nel 1990, fino all’ultima provocazione
di annunciare l’imminente ingresso nell’Alleanza dei vicini di casa della
Russia – Georgia e Ucraina – è un fatto storico indiscutibile…</p>
<p>L’altra cartina proibita è quella dei Paesi che non condannano o non sanzionano
la Russia, o se ne restano neutrali: quasi tutta l’Asia, l’Africa e l’America
Latina, cioè l’87% della popolazione mondiale. Ma al nostro piccolo mondo
antico occidentale piace far credere che Putin è isolato e noi lo stiamo
circondando. Sul fatto che Cina, India, Brasile e altri paesucoli stiano con
lui o non stiano con noi, meglio sorvolare: altrimenti lo capiscono tutti che
le sanzioni non funzionano… Solo abolendo la storia si può credere al
presidente Sergio Mattarella quando ripete che “l’Ucraina è la prima guerra nel
cuore dell’Europa nel dopoguerra”. E Belgrado bombardata anche dall’Italia nel
1999 dov’è, in Oceania? E chi era il vicepremier del governo D’Alema che
bombardava Belgrado? Un certo Mattarella… Abbiamo abolito il rispetto per le
altre culture. In una folle ondata di russofobia, abbiamo visto ostracizzare
direttori d’orchestra, cantanti liriche, pianiste di fama mondiale, fotografi,
atleti (anche paraolimpici), persino gatti e querce, soltanto perché russi. E
poi censurare corsi su Dostoevskij, cancellare dai teatri i balletti di
Cajkovskij, addirittura estromettere la delegazione russa dalle celebrazioni
per la liberazione di Auschwitz. Come se il lager l’avessero liberato gli
americani o gli ucraini e non l’Armata Rossa… i trombettieri della Nato
propagandano la bufala dell’“euroatlantismo” e gli scemi di guerra se la
bevono, senz’accorgersi che mai come oggi gli interessi dell’Europa sono
opposti a quelli dell’America. </p><p>Nonostante io non legga più Il Fatto Quotidiano (per i motivi spiegati
<a href="http://mardy.it/blog/2016/10/il-fatto-quotidiano-plagio-e-propaganda.html">qui</a>, che restano tuttora
validi), continuo a imbattermi negli editoriali di Marco Travaglio, che spesso
apprezzo. Oggi invece mi sono imbattuto nell'introduzione del suo nuovo libro
<a href="https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/in-edicola/articoli/2023/02/24/un-anno-di-bugie-per-mettere-agli-italiani-lelmetto-no-pax/7075675/">“Scemi di
guerra”</a>,
e ve ne riporto un estratto che ho trovato particolarmente incisivo.</p>
<hr>
<p>Abbiamo abolito la storia. È vietato raccontare ciò che è accaduto in Ucraina
prima del 24 febbraio 2022: gli otto anni di guerra civile in Donbass dopo il
golpe bianco (anzi, nero) di Euromaidan nel 2014 e le migliaia di morti e feriti
causati dai continui attacchi delle truppe di Kiev e delle milizie filo-naziste
al seguito contro le popolazioni russofone e russofile che, col sostegno di
Mosca, chiedevano l’indipendenza o almeno l’autonomia. Il tutto in barba ai due
accordi di Minsk. La versione ufficiale, l’unica autorizzata, è che prima del
2022 non è successo niente: una mattina Putin s’è svegliato più pazzo del
solito e ha invaso l’Ucraina. Se la gente scoprisse la verità, capirebbe che il
mantra atlantista “Putin aggressore e Zelensky aggredito” vale solo dal 2022:
prima, per otto anni, gli aggressori erano i governi di Kiev (l’ultimo, quello
di Zelensky) e gli aggrediti i popoli del Donbass. Fra le vittime, c’è il
giornalista italiano Andrea Rocchelli, ucciso dall’esercito ucraino… Abbiamo
abolito la geografia. Proibito mostrare la cartina dell’allargamento della Nato
a Est negli ultimi 25 anni (da 16 a 30 membri)… Eppure, che la Nato si sia
allargata a Est, accerchiando e assediando la Russia, minacciandone la
sicurezza con installazioni di missili nucleari sempre più vicine al confine,
in barba alle promesse fatte a Gorbaciov nel 1990, fino all’ultima provocazione
di annunciare l’imminente ingresso nell’Alleanza dei vicini di casa della
Russia – Georgia e Ucraina – è un fatto storico indiscutibile…</p>
<p>L’altra cartina proibita è quella dei Paesi che non condannano o non sanzionano
la Russia, o se ne restano neutrali: quasi tutta l’Asia, l’Africa e l’America
Latina, cioè l’87% della popolazione mondiale. Ma al nostro piccolo mondo
antico occidentale piace far credere che Putin è isolato e noi lo stiamo
circondando. Sul fatto che Cina, India, Brasile e altri paesucoli stiano con
lui o non stiano con noi, meglio sorvolare: altrimenti lo capiscono tutti che
le sanzioni non funzionano… Solo abolendo la storia si può credere al
presidente Sergio Mattarella quando ripete che “l’Ucraina è la prima guerra nel
cuore dell’Europa nel dopoguerra”. E Belgrado bombardata anche dall’Italia nel
1999 dov’è, in Oceania? E chi era il vicepremier del governo D’Alema che
bombardava Belgrado? Un certo Mattarella… Abbiamo abolito il rispetto per le
altre culture. In una folle ondata di russofobia, abbiamo visto ostracizzare
direttori d’orchestra, cantanti liriche, pianiste di fama mondiale, fotografi,
atleti (anche paraolimpici), persino gatti e querce, soltanto perché russi. E
poi censurare corsi su Dostoevskij, cancellare dai teatri i balletti di
Cajkovskij, addirittura estromettere la delegazione russa dalle celebrazioni
per la liberazione di Auschwitz. Come se il lager l’avessero liberato gli
americani o gli ucraini e non l’Armata Rossa… i trombettieri della Nato
propagandano la bufala dell’“euroatlantismo” e gli scemi di guerra se la
bevono, senz’accorgersi che mai come oggi gli interessi dell’Europa sono
opposti a quelli dell’America. </p>A peace plan for Ukrainehttp://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html2023-01-21T22:33:56+03:002023-01-21T22:33:56+03:00Alberto Mardegan<p>Among the peace plans proposed by various European and U.S. politicians, to be
frank, I haven't read a single one which I would consider even remotely
feasible. My impression is that such plans have been redacted more for a need
to fool one's voters and present onself as a peace operator (whereas one
factually supports sending of weapons and tightening of sanctions) than for a
genuine peace effort, since every politician that had spent even just a few
minutes to document oneself on the situation around Ukraine would perfectly
know that these peace plans are not just unacceptable by the Russians, but
plainly unpresentable.</p>
<p>A believable peace plan must first and foremost take into account the reasons
that pushed Russia to invade Ukraine and, above all, those who push the Russian
people to support the war. It's certainly legitimate, and even reasonable, to
doubt the official reasons: on the contrary, it's very likely that the reasons
who push Russia to continue this “special operation” are, at least in part,
others, economical in nature and to the benefit of a few especially powerful
individuals (arm producers above all). We can put our heart at rest, and
accept the fact that we'll never get to know the real reasons; but, on the
other hand, it's not even so important to know them, after all.</p>
<p>What we really need to know is the mood of the Russian population, and
especially the reasons why president Putin's popularity has risen after the
invasion of Ukraine. The mainstream information we get in the West is not
helpful at all in this, because it's since 2014 that it omits reporting
important facts about the war in Donbass. Well, nowadays the Russian people are
constantly fed images of civilians dying in Donetsk and in other cities of the
Donbass, right in the center of the cities, where there are no military
targets. We can call it propaganda, sure, but the facts are real and are just
an aggravated continuation of what has been happening for the past 8 years, all
well documented by the OSCE mission and by the Office of the High Commissioner
of the Human Rights of the United Nations<sup id="fnref:1"><a class="footnote-ref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fn:1">1</a></sup>.</p>
<p>Besides, the massive transfer of weapons and the episodes of discrimination
against Russian artists, athletes, personalities of the culture and
entertainment, sometimes against the very Russian language, these are all
widely publicized by local mass media and get the Russians convinced that their
country is fighting an existential war against a horde of fascists, and,
militarily, against the whole of NATO.</p>
<p>If the West had really the will to restore peace it should work to destroy this
representation of itself and disarm the Russian propaganda by removing the
facts on which it's built. Specifically, I'm persuaded that many of the
following points would be well received by the Western population and would
demotivate the Russian people (including many of the soldiers stationed at the
front) in fighting this fratricidal war:</p>
<ol>
<li>Removal of every discrimination against Russian culture and its
representatives and performers.</li>
<li>Promise that Ukraine won't be let into NATO or in other military alliances
that would go beyond the commitment to reciprocal defense (that is, no to
joint military drills or foreign bases in the territory of Ukraine, yes to a
promise of military intervention in case of attack).</li>
<li>Pausing the shipment of weapons until Ukraine removes the title of hero of
Ukraine to Stepan Bandera and other members of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia">nazist organisation
UPA</a>.</li>
<li>Pausing the shipment of weapons until Ukraine stops bombing civilian
settlements devoid of military installations.</li>
</ol>
<p>It should be noted that none of these points require collaboration or
agreements between states (even joining NATO can only happen after the
unanymous vote of all current members, as Turkey reminds us), so they all could
be immediately implemented by any willing state. The bigger the number of
Western countries pushing forward these policies, the more uncertainty will
grow among the Russian population, and will ultimately transform into
incomprehension and dissatisfaction, since this would destroy the ideological
reasons that make the Russians support the conflict.</p>
<p>If we are to speak of a peace plan, agreed among NATO, Ukraine and Russia, then
it could be developed along these lines:</p>
<ol>
<li>Ukraine condemns the nazist ideology (therefore Bandera and friends),
accepts to open an international commission of inquiry (including Russia as
well) over the massacres of Maidan square and Odessa.</li>
<li>Ukraine grants the status of second official language to the Russian
language, similarly to how Swedish language is treated in Finland<sup id="fnref:2"><a class="footnote-ref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fn:2">2</a></sup>.</li>
<li>Ukraine enacts laws to guarantee a limited autonomy to the 5 regions
currently under Russian control (including Crimea) and amnesty for all those
rebels that are not found guilty of war crimes (in other words, a sort of
Minsk accords extended to all the occupied regions).</li>
<li>Ukraine promises not to host military forces or equipment from other
countries in its territory, and to not participate in joint military drills,
without the consent of the Russian federation. It can, however, join
defensive military alliances.</li>
<li>Ukraine promises to never enact sanctions against Russia, nor to require
visa from Russian citizens in order to cross its borders.</li>
<li>The Russian army withdraws and gets temporarily replaced by the army of a
third country, not member of NATO, chosen by Ukraine.</li>
<li>New referendums, under the supervision of international observers (including
Ukrainians and Russians) in the 5 contested regions. Times will be
established by Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine commit to recognize and implement
their results.</li>
<li>The peace mission introduced in point 6 gets wrapped up.</li>
</ol>
<p>It's of fundamental importance understanding that territorial questions are
only a secondary matter, and that what is most pressing for the Russian people
is to have good relations with the neighbouring countries: not having to worry
about coups, colour revolutions stirred up by the West or about other attempts
to use Ukraine as a weapon against Russia. If, for example, there were a
Russian region that desired to separate itself from the federation and join
Belarus, I'm convinced that this could happen in a peaceful way without serious
repercussions, since the relationships between the two countries are good and
Belarus is not perceived as a threat. This was also the situation with Ukraine
before 2014<sup id="fnref:3"><a class="footnote-ref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fn:3">3</a></sup>, and it's the situation to which we should strive to return to.</p>
<div class="footnote">
<hr>
<ol>
<li id="fn:1">
<p>See for example the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraineMay-August2018_EN.pdf">report for the period May-August
2018</a>,
page 5, point 22. More reports can be found <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents-listing?field_content_category_target_id[180]=180&field_content_category_target_id[182]=182&field_geolocation_target_id[1136]=1136&field_entity_target_id[1349]=1349&field_published_date_value[min]=&field_published_date_value[max]=&sort_bef_combine=field_published_date_value_DESC&page=0">in this list</a>. <a class="footnote-backref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fnref:1" title="Jump back to footnote 1 in the text">↩</a></p>
</li>
<li id="fn:2">
<p>Note that Swedish in Finland is the native language for just 5% of the
population, whereas in Ukraine Russian is the native language of about 30% of
the population. <a class="footnote-backref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fnref:2" title="Jump back to footnote 2 in the text">↩</a></p>
</li>
<li id="fn:3">
<p>Not exactly, since there had already been attempts at colour revolutions
resulting in anti-Russian governments. But I hope you'll pass this
oversimplification of mine here. <a class="footnote-backref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fnref:3" title="Jump back to footnote 3 in the text">↩</a></p>
</li>
</ol>
</div><p>Among the peace plans proposed by various European and U.S. politicians, to be
frank, I haven't read a single one which I would consider even remotely
feasible. My impression is that such plans have been redacted more for a need
to fool one's voters and present onself as a peace operator (whereas one
factually supports sending of weapons and tightening of sanctions) than for a
genuine peace effort, since every politician that had spent even just a few
minutes to document oneself on the situation around Ukraine would perfectly
know that these peace plans are not just unacceptable by the Russians, but
plainly unpresentable.</p>
<p>A believable peace plan must first and foremost take into account the reasons
that pushed Russia to invade Ukraine and, above all, those who push the Russian
people to support the war. It's certainly legitimate, and even reasonable, to
doubt the official reasons: on the contrary, it's very likely that the reasons
who push Russia to continue this “special operation” are, at least in part,
others, economical in nature and to the benefit of a few especially powerful
individuals (arm producers above all). We can put our heart at rest, and
accept the fact that we'll never get to know the real reasons; but, on the
other hand, it's not even so important to know them, after all.</p>
<p>What we really need to know is the mood of the Russian population, and
especially the reasons why president Putin's popularity has risen after the
invasion of Ukraine. The mainstream information we get in the West is not
helpful at all in this, because it's since 2014 that it omits reporting
important facts about the war in Donbass. Well, nowadays the Russian people are
constantly fed images of civilians dying in Donetsk and in other cities of the
Donbass, right in the center of the cities, where there are no military
targets. We can call it propaganda, sure, but the facts are real and are just
an aggravated continuation of what has been happening for the past 8 years, all
well documented by the OSCE mission and by the Office of the High Commissioner
of the Human Rights of the United Nations<sup id="fnref:1"><a class="footnote-ref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fn:1">1</a></sup>.</p>
<p>Besides, the massive transfer of weapons and the episodes of discrimination
against Russian artists, athletes, personalities of the culture and
entertainment, sometimes against the very Russian language, these are all
widely publicized by local mass media and get the Russians convinced that their
country is fighting an existential war against a horde of fascists, and,
militarily, against the whole of NATO.</p>
<p>If the West had really the will to restore peace it should work to destroy this
representation of itself and disarm the Russian propaganda by removing the
facts on which it's built. Specifically, I'm persuaded that many of the
following points would be well received by the Western population and would
demotivate the Russian people (including many of the soldiers stationed at the
front) in fighting this fratricidal war:</p>
<ol>
<li>Removal of every discrimination against Russian culture and its
representatives and performers.</li>
<li>Promise that Ukraine won't be let into NATO or in other military alliances
that would go beyond the commitment to reciprocal defense (that is, no to
joint military drills or foreign bases in the territory of Ukraine, yes to a
promise of military intervention in case of attack).</li>
<li>Pausing the shipment of weapons until Ukraine removes the title of hero of
Ukraine to Stepan Bandera and other members of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia">nazist organisation
UPA</a>.</li>
<li>Pausing the shipment of weapons until Ukraine stops bombing civilian
settlements devoid of military installations.</li>
</ol>
<p>It should be noted that none of these points require collaboration or
agreements between states (even joining NATO can only happen after the
unanymous vote of all current members, as Turkey reminds us), so they all could
be immediately implemented by any willing state. The bigger the number of
Western countries pushing forward these policies, the more uncertainty will
grow among the Russian population, and will ultimately transform into
incomprehension and dissatisfaction, since this would destroy the ideological
reasons that make the Russians support the conflict.</p>
<p>If we are to speak of a peace plan, agreed among NATO, Ukraine and Russia, then
it could be developed along these lines:</p>
<ol>
<li>Ukraine condemns the nazist ideology (therefore Bandera and friends),
accepts to open an international commission of inquiry (including Russia as
well) over the massacres of Maidan square and Odessa.</li>
<li>Ukraine grants the status of second official language to the Russian
language, similarly to how Swedish language is treated in Finland<sup id="fnref:2"><a class="footnote-ref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fn:2">2</a></sup>.</li>
<li>Ukraine enacts laws to guarantee a limited autonomy to the 5 regions
currently under Russian control (including Crimea) and amnesty for all those
rebels that are not found guilty of war crimes (in other words, a sort of
Minsk accords extended to all the occupied regions).</li>
<li>Ukraine promises not to host military forces or equipment from other
countries in its territory, and to not participate in joint military drills,
without the consent of the Russian federation. It can, however, join
defensive military alliances.</li>
<li>Ukraine promises to never enact sanctions against Russia, nor to require
visa from Russian citizens in order to cross its borders.</li>
<li>The Russian army withdraws and gets temporarily replaced by the army of a
third country, not member of NATO, chosen by Ukraine.</li>
<li>New referendums, under the supervision of international observers (including
Ukrainians and Russians) in the 5 contested regions. Times will be
established by Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine commit to recognize and implement
their results.</li>
<li>The peace mission introduced in point 6 gets wrapped up.</li>
</ol>
<p>It's of fundamental importance understanding that territorial questions are
only a secondary matter, and that what is most pressing for the Russian people
is to have good relations with the neighbouring countries: not having to worry
about coups, colour revolutions stirred up by the West or about other attempts
to use Ukraine as a weapon against Russia. If, for example, there were a
Russian region that desired to separate itself from the federation and join
Belarus, I'm convinced that this could happen in a peaceful way without serious
repercussions, since the relationships between the two countries are good and
Belarus is not perceived as a threat. This was also the situation with Ukraine
before 2014<sup id="fnref:3"><a class="footnote-ref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fn:3">3</a></sup>, and it's the situation to which we should strive to return to.</p>
<div class="footnote">
<hr>
<ol>
<li id="fn:1">
<p>See for example the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraineMay-August2018_EN.pdf">report for the period May-August
2018</a>,
page 5, point 22. More reports can be found <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents-listing?field_content_category_target_id[180]=180&field_content_category_target_id[182]=182&field_geolocation_target_id[1136]=1136&field_entity_target_id[1349]=1349&field_published_date_value[min]=&field_published_date_value[max]=&sort_bef_combine=field_published_date_value_DESC&page=0">in this list</a>. <a class="footnote-backref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fnref:1" title="Jump back to footnote 1 in the text">↩</a></p>
</li>
<li id="fn:2">
<p>Note that Swedish in Finland is the native language for just 5% of the
population, whereas in Ukraine Russian is the native language of about 30% of
the population. <a class="footnote-backref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fnref:2" title="Jump back to footnote 2 in the text">↩</a></p>
</li>
<li id="fn:3">
<p>Not exactly, since there had already been attempts at colour revolutions
resulting in anti-Russian governments. But I hope you'll pass this
oversimplification of mine here. <a class="footnote-backref" href="http://mardy.it/blog/2023/01/un-piano-di-pace-per-lucraina.html#fnref:3" title="Jump back to footnote 3 in the text">↩</a></p>
</li>
</ol>
</div>The Mediahttp://mardy.it/blog/2022/09/the-media.html2022-09-15T23:29:28+03:002022-09-15T23:29:28+03:00Alberto Mardegan<p>Ah, the media. No words from me are necessary here: just read these two
articles, then read their titles again, then wonder.</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://news.mc/2022/09/12/ukrainian-refugees-attacked-by-russian/">news.mc/2022/09/12/ukrainian-refugees-attacked-by-russian/</a></li>
<li><a href="https://news.mc/2022/09/15/assailant-appears-in-court-charged-with-assault-on-ukrainian-refugees/">news.mc/2022/09/15/assailant-appears-in-court-charged-with-assault-on-ukrainian-refugees/</a></li>
</ul>
<p>Just wow.</p><p>Ah, the media. No words from me are necessary here: just read these two
articles, then read their titles again, then wonder.</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://news.mc/2022/09/12/ukrainian-refugees-attacked-by-russian/">news.mc/2022/09/12/ukrainian-refugees-attacked-by-russian/</a></li>
<li><a href="https://news.mc/2022/09/15/assailant-appears-in-court-charged-with-assault-on-ukrainian-refugees/">news.mc/2022/09/15/assailant-appears-in-court-charged-with-assault-on-ukrainian-refugees/</a></li>
</ul>
<p>Just wow.</p>Employing a nazi sympathiser - RedHat under scrutinyhttp://mardy.it/blog/2019/05/employing-a-nazi-sympathiser-redhat-under-scrutiny.html2019-05-06T22:30:44+03:002019-05-06T22:30:44+03:00Alberto Mardegan<blockquote>
<p><strong>Update</strong>: According to some rumors, RedHat has swiftly acted and the
protagonist of this story is no longer in their ranks. You still might want to
read this post, though, as it was not much about facts, but opinions. :-)
- 15.05.2019</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Politics is hard, and when you mix politics with other, more mundane aspects of
your daily life, the fight between political ideas, freedom of speech, and
other principles reach such a complexity that finding clear-cut answers becomes
quite hard.</p>
<p>Let's take for example the case, uncovered by the Ukrainian journalist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Shariy">Anatoly
Shariy</a>, of a RedHat employee who
appears to be a Nazi sympathiser, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhIQSJn6s4E&feature=youtu.be&t=651">openly posing doing the Nazi salute right in
Berlin</a>. It
will be interesting to see how (and if) RedHat will react to this information;
there are also other spaces to watch, given that the guy in question has been
giving talks in several conferences and is a very active member of the Eclipse
project.</p>
<p>Let's put aside the fact that in Germany exposing Nazi symbols is a crime, and
let's suppose that the guy did the Nazi salute in some other place where that's
not illegal; what would your reaction be, if you where the employer, or a
conference organizer, or if you had some position of authority in the open
source project that this guy is contributing to?</p>
<p>On a personal level, taking a distance from this fellow and cutting all ties
would be a rather understandable step (unless, of course, you share his views);
but on a professional/business level, would that be the appropriate decision?
If your answer is positive, without hesitation, then this post is for you.</p>
<h3>Showing a nice image</h3>
<p>People have been fired or removed from their posts for much less than this,
that is true. Two cases which come to mind are <a href="https://firedfortruth.com/">James
Damore</a>, fired from Google for advancing the idea
that the low women representation in the IT industry might be due to some
biological traits, and <a href="https://brendaneich.com/">Brendan Eich</a>, who ceded to
pressure and <a href="https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignation/">resigned from its post of CEO of
Mozilla</a>
after the news of his past donations to an anti-gay movement went public. I'm
sure there are plenty of other similar cases out there, but these are the ones
I happened to notice at the time. And I don't like how these cases ended.</p>
<p>While the two cases are extremely different from each other, the common
denominator is that -- in my opinion -- the companies (or the person itself, in
Eich's case) took a decision based exclusively at the perceived PR outcome, and
not on a matter of principle. And what is worse, is that this way of handling
disagreement is a great threat to freedom of speech and freedom of expression.</p>
<p>The world is full of racists, misoginists, homophobes, antisemitics, and, in
general, of people embracing ideologies which we despise. But I'm convinced
that the only way to fight these ideologies is opening a personal, one to one,
dialogue with the individual in question; getting to know their background, the
reasons why they came to believe in such things, and trying to find a way --
ideally, by providing yourself as a virtuous example -- to instill a doubt into
their convictions, and eventually to demolish them.</p>
<p>The firing of someone who has expressed some non-welcome ideas acts as a threat
to everyone else sharing the same views, and will lead to the result that the
problem will be swept under the carpet: fire one, and you'll never know about
the other dozens.</p>
<h3>The benefits a good fight</h3>
<p>I can imagine some of you screaming in disagreement: “But if you don't get rid
of them, the whole working environment becomes poisonous: employees will no
longer feel at ease (not to mention customers!)”. True, but we can take other
actions, other than just fire the employee: we can actually talk. First of all,
we can get him to openly state his position. It's possible (and I think this
nicely applies to Damore's case) that we misunderstood what he really meant, or
maybe he didn't express himself properly, or (even better) he has already
changed his mind. But if that's not the case, I believe there can be a good
opportunity to actually improve the situation: get people to talk.</p>
<p>I'm probably being naive here, but if I were the employer I would ask all the
employees to report, anonymously, whether they feel comfortable continuing
working with this guy. Then, organize one to one (private) meetings between
this person and all his colleagues, of at least five minutes in length, and
maybe repeat the whole round of conversations one more time, a couple of weeks
later. And finally, get once again everyone's anonymous feedback, and draw the
conclusions.</p>
<p>The reason why I wrote that <em>I'm naive</em> is because I think we'd see a clear
improvement in the answers, and we'd probably contributed, if not in
freeing one person from a poisonous ideology, at least in instilling some
doubt.</p>
<h3>Back to reality</h3>
<p>Even if they read my post, I'm quite positive that RedHat will fire this guy:
being in the same open source community as Google and Mozilla, the push to
react in a similar way as their peers is just too strong (and that's why I
condemn how the previous cases have unfolded: they traced a road which has now
become too hard to avoid).</p>
<p>(In the specific case I confess I woudn't regret it, and -- despite all what
I've written above -- I believe that firing this employee would be the proper
retribuition: not for being a nazi, but because this guy had a school teacher
in Ukraine fired, after he publicly accused her of showing an old soviet song
to her pupils; a song that was not even about communism, and which is not at
all forbidden in Ukraine!)</p><blockquote>
<p><strong>Update</strong>: According to some rumors, RedHat has swiftly acted and the
protagonist of this story is no longer in their ranks. You still might want to
read this post, though, as it was not much about facts, but opinions. :-)
- 15.05.2019</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Politics is hard, and when you mix politics with other, more mundane aspects of
your daily life, the fight between political ideas, freedom of speech, and
other principles reach such a complexity that finding clear-cut answers becomes
quite hard.</p>
<p>Let's take for example the case, uncovered by the Ukrainian journalist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Shariy">Anatoly
Shariy</a>, of a RedHat employee who
appears to be a Nazi sympathiser, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhIQSJn6s4E&feature=youtu.be&t=651">openly posing doing the Nazi salute right in
Berlin</a>. It
will be interesting to see how (and if) RedHat will react to this information;
there are also other spaces to watch, given that the guy in question has been
giving talks in several conferences and is a very active member of the Eclipse
project.</p>
<p>Let's put aside the fact that in Germany exposing Nazi symbols is a crime, and
let's suppose that the guy did the Nazi salute in some other place where that's
not illegal; what would your reaction be, if you where the employer, or a
conference organizer, or if you had some position of authority in the open
source project that this guy is contributing to?</p>
<p>On a personal level, taking a distance from this fellow and cutting all ties
would be a rather understandable step (unless, of course, you share his views);
but on a professional/business level, would that be the appropriate decision?
If your answer is positive, without hesitation, then this post is for you.</p>
<h3>Showing a nice image</h3>
<p>People have been fired or removed from their posts for much less than this,
that is true. Two cases which come to mind are <a href="https://firedfortruth.com/">James
Damore</a>, fired from Google for advancing the idea
that the low women representation in the IT industry might be due to some
biological traits, and <a href="https://brendaneich.com/">Brendan Eich</a>, who ceded to
pressure and <a href="https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignation/">resigned from its post of CEO of
Mozilla</a>
after the news of his past donations to an anti-gay movement went public. I'm
sure there are plenty of other similar cases out there, but these are the ones
I happened to notice at the time. And I don't like how these cases ended.</p>
<p>While the two cases are extremely different from each other, the common
denominator is that -- in my opinion -- the companies (or the person itself, in
Eich's case) took a decision based exclusively at the perceived PR outcome, and
not on a matter of principle. And what is worse, is that this way of handling
disagreement is a great threat to freedom of speech and freedom of expression.</p>
<p>The world is full of racists, misoginists, homophobes, antisemitics, and, in
general, of people embracing ideologies which we despise. But I'm convinced
that the only way to fight these ideologies is opening a personal, one to one,
dialogue with the individual in question; getting to know their background, the
reasons why they came to believe in such things, and trying to find a way --
ideally, by providing yourself as a virtuous example -- to instill a doubt into
their convictions, and eventually to demolish them.</p>
<p>The firing of someone who has expressed some non-welcome ideas acts as a threat
to everyone else sharing the same views, and will lead to the result that the
problem will be swept under the carpet: fire one, and you'll never know about
the other dozens.</p>
<h3>The benefits a good fight</h3>
<p>I can imagine some of you screaming in disagreement: “But if you don't get rid
of them, the whole working environment becomes poisonous: employees will no
longer feel at ease (not to mention customers!)”. True, but we can take other
actions, other than just fire the employee: we can actually talk. First of all,
we can get him to openly state his position. It's possible (and I think this
nicely applies to Damore's case) that we misunderstood what he really meant, or
maybe he didn't express himself properly, or (even better) he has already
changed his mind. But if that's not the case, I believe there can be a good
opportunity to actually improve the situation: get people to talk.</p>
<p>I'm probably being naive here, but if I were the employer I would ask all the
employees to report, anonymously, whether they feel comfortable continuing
working with this guy. Then, organize one to one (private) meetings between
this person and all his colleagues, of at least five minutes in length, and
maybe repeat the whole round of conversations one more time, a couple of weeks
later. And finally, get once again everyone's anonymous feedback, and draw the
conclusions.</p>
<p>The reason why I wrote that <em>I'm naive</em> is because I think we'd see a clear
improvement in the answers, and we'd probably contributed, if not in
freeing one person from a poisonous ideology, at least in instilling some
doubt.</p>
<h3>Back to reality</h3>
<p>Even if they read my post, I'm quite positive that RedHat will fire this guy:
being in the same open source community as Google and Mozilla, the push to
react in a similar way as their peers is just too strong (and that's why I
condemn how the previous cases have unfolded: they traced a road which has now
become too hard to avoid).</p>
<p>(In the specific case I confess I woudn't regret it, and -- despite all what
I've written above -- I believe that firing this employee would be the proper
retribuition: not for being a nazi, but because this guy had a school teacher
in Ukraine fired, after he publicly accused her of showing an old soviet song
to her pupils; a song that was not even about communism, and which is not at
all forbidden in Ukraine!)</p>Cammino quindi penso - 2019-03-12 - Al Bano, un pericolo pubblicohttp://mardy.it/blog/2019/03/cammino-quindi-penso-2019-03-12-al-bano-un-pericolo-pubblico.html2019-03-12T18:35:36+03:002019-03-12T18:35:36+03:00Alberto Mardegan<div class="youtube-video align-center">
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/doj8LDtPtLY?rel=0&wmode=transparent" frameborder="0" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</div><p>Il cantante Al Bano è entrato, suo malgrado, nella lista nera dei nemici dell'Ucraina.</p>
<p>Vedi <a class="reference external" href="https://video.repubblica.it/cronaca/al-bano-nella-lista-nera-dellucraina-lartista-terrorista-io-ammiro-putin-che-male-ce/329171/329769">l'intervista su Repubblica</a>.</p><div class="youtube-video align-center">
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/doj8LDtPtLY?rel=0&wmode=transparent" frameborder="0" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</div><p>Il cantante Al Bano è entrato, suo malgrado, nella lista nera dei nemici dell'Ucraina.</p>
<p>Vedi <a class="reference external" href="https://video.repubblica.it/cronaca/al-bano-nella-lista-nera-dellucraina-lartista-terrorista-io-ammiro-putin-che-male-ce/329171/329769">l'intervista su Repubblica</a>.</p>Il troll russo - Gli accordi di Minsk, questi sconosciutihttp://mardy.it/blog/2018/08/il-troll-russo-gli-accordi-di-minsk.html2018-08-06T14:46:00+03:002018-08-06T14:46:00+03:00Alberto Mardegan<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NORLFZKYJpY" width="459"></iframe></div>
<br>
<br>
Facciamo un po' di chiarezza sugli accordi di Minsk per capire come, quando i politici accusano la Russia di non rispettarli, si stia facendo soltanto un operazione di propaganda anti-russa.<br>
<br>
I link usati nel video:<br>
<br>
Documento:<br>
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_II">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_II</a><br>
<a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11408266/Minsk-agreement-on-Ukraine-crisis-text-in-full.html">https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11408266/Minsk-agreement-on-Ukraine-crisis-text-in-full.html</a><br>
<br>
Vittime civili:<br>
<a href="http://blog.mardy.it/2018/04/lo-que-tu-non-audi-de-ucraina.html">http://blog.mardy.it/2018/04/lo-que-tu-non-audi-de-ucraina.html</a><br>
<br>
Amnistia:<br>
<a href="https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/amnesty-law-applying-ukrainian-soldiers-donbas-comes-force-september-7.html">https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/amnesty-law-applying-ukrainian-soldiers-donbas-comes-force-september-7.html</a><br>
<br>
Villaggi occupati:<br>
<a href="https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukrainian-army-reported-advanced-near-occupied-horlivka.html">https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukrainian-army-reported-advanced-near-occupied-horlivka.html</a><br>
<a href="https://112.international/conflict-in-eastern-ukraine/osce-dissatisfied-with-ukrainian-army-promotion-in-gray-zone-in-donbas-26139.html">https://112.international/conflict-in-eastern-ukraine/osce-dissatisfied-with-ukrainian-army-promotion-in-gray-zone-in-donbas-26139.html</a><br>
<a href="https://en.hromadske.ua/posts/inside-the-frontline-village-declared-ukrainian-twice">https://en.hromadske.ua/posts/inside-the-frontline-village-declared-ukrainian-twice</a></div><div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NORLFZKYJpY" width="459"></iframe></div>
<br>
<br>
Facciamo un po' di chiarezza sugli accordi di Minsk per capire come, quando i politici accusano la Russia di non rispettarli, si stia facendo soltanto un operazione di propaganda anti-russa.<br>
<br>
I link usati nel video:<br>
<br>
Documento:<br>
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_II">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_II</a><br>
<a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11408266/Minsk-agreement-on-Ukraine-crisis-text-in-full.html">https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11408266/Minsk-agreement-on-Ukraine-crisis-text-in-full.html</a><br>
<br>
Vittime civili:<br>
<a href="http://blog.mardy.it/2018/04/lo-que-tu-non-audi-de-ucraina.html">http://blog.mardy.it/2018/04/lo-que-tu-non-audi-de-ucraina.html</a><br>
<br>
Amnistia:<br>
<a href="https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/amnesty-law-applying-ukrainian-soldiers-donbas-comes-force-september-7.html">https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/amnesty-law-applying-ukrainian-soldiers-donbas-comes-force-september-7.html</a><br>
<br>
Villaggi occupati:<br>
<a href="https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukrainian-army-reported-advanced-near-occupied-horlivka.html">https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukrainian-army-reported-advanced-near-occupied-horlivka.html</a><br>
<a href="https://112.international/conflict-in-eastern-ukraine/osce-dissatisfied-with-ukrainian-army-promotion-in-gray-zone-in-donbas-26139.html">https://112.international/conflict-in-eastern-ukraine/osce-dissatisfied-with-ukrainian-army-promotion-in-gray-zone-in-donbas-26139.html</a><br>
<a href="https://en.hromadske.ua/posts/inside-the-frontline-village-declared-ukrainian-twice">https://en.hromadske.ua/posts/inside-the-frontline-village-declared-ukrainian-twice</a></div>What you don't hear about Ukrainehttp://mardy.it/blog/2018/04/what-you-dont-hear-about-ukraine.html2018-04-05T20:38:00+03:002018-04-05T20:38:00+03:00Alberto Mardegan<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<p>The conflict started in 2014 in Ukraine is not very prominent in the media nowadays, because — especially after the signing of the Minsk agreements in February 2015 — it's been a <i>frozen</i> conflict: frontlines are nearly immutable, waiting for the warring sides to implement the points defined in the Minsk document (by the way, would you be able to tell who must do what?). Unfortunately, the fact that the conflict is frozen does not mean that there's no fighting ongoing, and that people are not dying: indeed, soldiers from both factions continue to shoot, with many different types of weapons, and civilians continue to suffer and die.<br>
I bet most of my readers already know this. What you might not know, is whether the civilian casualties are evenly distributed over the conflict area, or whether there are differences between the areas controlled by the pro-Russian rebels and those controlled by the Ukrainian government. In other words, whether the majority of civilian casualties are caused by the rebels or by the regular army.<br>
Lacking this information (well, that you might lack this information is only a supposition of mine — if you don't, then please write me in the comments, where did you get this information from), it's natural to assume that, statistically, there would be similar numbers of civilian casualties in each side of the frontline. Or you might hold the opinion that one side is more to blame than the other, according to your prejudices.</p>
<p>To get the exact number of casualties one must read the reports from some international organisations, which are certainly more credible than reports published by either warring side. This does not mean that international organisations are impartial (their composition generally sees a predominance of Western members), but nevertheless they remain the only source of data which we can rely on.<br>
The United Nations Human Rights Council publishes its reports every three months, and in these reports there's always a chapter focusing on the civilian victims, with precise numbers. Unfortunately, during the year 2016 these reports never specified in side of the frontline were the incidents occurring; this makes it impossible for us to tell which faction was responsible for the deaths.</p>
<p>For this reason, I armed myself with patience and I started a tedious work of reading of all the reports from the <a href="http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm">OSCE mission in Ukraine</a>, and from each of them I extracted the numbers of civilian casualties (both injures and deaths), grouping them by their cause (shelling, mine or other accidents), as well as other numbers which I thought could be statistically interesting, such as for example the number of houses which were damaged by the shellings. Here's a summary of those numbers I consider most interesting:</p>
<center>
<style type="text/css">
th {
padding:0 15px 0 15px;
}
td {
text-align: center
}
</style>
<table>
<tr><th></th><th>Areas controlled by<br>the government</th><th>Areas controlledby the rebels
</th></tr><tr><td>Deaths by shelling </td><td>5</td><td>23
</td></tr><tr><td>Injuries by shelling </td><td>40</td><td>77
</td></tr><tr><td>Damaged houses </td><td>171</td><td>358
</td></tr></table>
</center>
<p>You can find the complete table, from which I extracted the numbers above, here: <a href="http://www.mardy.it/archivos/OSCE-smm-Ukraine-2016.ods">OSCE Reports 2016</a>. I do expect some criticism; therefore, please let me explain how to read the sheet:</p>
<ul>
<li>Every line in the sheet corresponds to a day of the year 2016.
</li><li>For each line, there's a link to the OSCE report for that day; feel free to use it to check whether my data extraction was correct.
</li><li>Most numbers are debatable: except for the number of the deceased, all other numbers can be subject to interpretation: for example, should we count as injured someone who was only lightly hurt? Or should we count as damaged a house whose windows broke just because of a loud noise? While I've tried to use my <i>common sense</i>, I have to admit that there might be different readings.
</li><li>I only counted civilian victims: clearly, there were victims also among soldiers and militants, but (I'm sorry if I appear cynic) I don't think that the killing of a soldier in a war zone is a criminal act.
</li><li>In many cases, the OSCE fails to report the exact number of damaged houses, and instead just uses the word <i>several</i>; in those cases, and lacking better information, I arbitrarily decided to count two houses.
</li><li>I show you the full sheet just for the sake of completeness; but my suggestion is to ignore the details, and instead focus on the numbers of civialian deaths and injures only.
</li><li>In the "<i>Initiated shooting</i>" column I counted those times when the OSCE was clearly and unequivocally reporting which side of the conflict was responsible for starting the hostilities.
</li><li>If you find mistakes, please write me in the comments.
</li></ul>
<p>I believe that these numbers clearly show how the distribution of victims is not uniform: most of the civilian victims are caused by the shelling operated by the Ukrainian government on the land held by the pro-Russian rebels, and the proportion between the two is so uneven that it removes the possibility of explaining it as an accidental phenomen. As a matter of facts, even if you don't want to believe my numbers above, you can find similar data in the reports by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (<a href="http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/ENACARegion/Pages/UAIndex.aspx">OHCHR</a>). I sum up the data which you can find in their documents:</p>
<center>
<table>
<tr><th rowspan="2">Period</th><th colspan="2">Civilian casualties: total (and deaths)
</th></tr><tr><th>Areas controlled by<br>the government<br></th><th>Areas controlledby the rebels
</th></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport17th_EN.pdf">16/11/2016 - 15/02/2017</a></td><td>13 (3)</td><td>40 (4)
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport18th_EN.pdf">16/02/2017 - 15/05/2017</a></td><td><i>unknown</i></td><td><i>unknown</i>
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport19th_EN.pdf">16/05/2017 - 15/08/2017</a></td><td>27 (1)</td><td>62 (8)
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport20th_EN.pdf">16/08/2017 - 15/11/2017</a></td><td>2 (0)</td><td>18 (1)
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraineNov2017-Feb2018_EN.pdf">16/11/2017 - 15/02/2018</a></td><td>12 (1)</td><td>35 (2)
</td></tr></table>
<p style="width: 80%"><i>I counted only the victims by shelling, when such information was available: the reason for this is that responsibility is mush simpler to establish in this case, while in the case of mine or firearm victims there might be some cases where the responsibility falls over the party controlling the territory</i></p>
</center>
<p>As you can see, the vast majority of casualties happens in the territory occupied by the rebels. Could we therefore conclude that these people were hit by the shellings of the Ukrainian army? I believe so: regardless of Ukrainian propaganda, which states that the pro-Russian rebels are bombing their own territory, the OSCE reports which I examined paint a very clear picture: shellings occurring in the territory controlled by the separatists comes from governamental areas, and vice versa (as a matter of facts, <a href="https://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/262091">in one case</a> we have evidence that the Ukrainian government shelled Shchastya, which is under its control). And even the <a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraineNov2017-Feb2018_EN.pdf">OHCHR report from November 2017 - February 2018</a> clearly states that shelling occurring in one side of the front is caused by those forces occupying the other side (paragraph 19).</p>
<h4>Conclusions</h4>
<p>I don't believe that the world can be divided between good and evil people, or that truth is always black or white. The goal of this article is not to prove that pro-Russian rebels are good, while soldiers obeying to the Ukrainian government are perverse: war is always bad, because civilian casualties are unavoidable. But I do believe that numbers have a meaning which can't be ignored, and that these numbers should be framed in the context of the information you receive from the media. Were these data a surprise to you? If the answer is positive, then you should start doubting the quality of the information you consume. When one reads a piece of news about war or other daily news, one always gets only a partial truth; my advice is to always read the news coming from both sides, and then we could have some hope of seeing a more complete picture. It's not by accident that, in a juridical proceeding, the jury always hears also the defendant's version, even if the evidence mounting against him is overwhelming.</p>
<p>And to come back to this sad war: if you are not shocked by these numbers, try to imagine if a similar situation occurred in your own country. Try to make an effort in picturing this fictional story: there is a pro-Russian insurgency in a city in the East of your country: they no longer recognize the central government, and demand independence. Russia also intervenes, and covertly helps the rebels. And suppose that your government was unable to eliminate only the rebels, because it only possesses imprecise weapons; how would you react, if your government shelled the city, resulting in civilian casualties with the same proportion as that reported in this article (that is, your government actions were causing much more deaths than the rebels')?<br>
Could you tolerate these deaths, if in the rebel city there was about 80% of the population supporting the rebellion? And what if it was only 5%? Once you answer these questions, the next one is this: what is the percentage of people in Donbass who support the pro-Russian rebels? And if you answered that these deaths are not tolerable in your country, why are you (or your country's government) tolerating them when they happen in Ukraine?</p>
</div><div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<p>The conflict started in 2014 in Ukraine is not very prominent in the media nowadays, because — especially after the signing of the Minsk agreements in February 2015 — it's been a <i>frozen</i> conflict: frontlines are nearly immutable, waiting for the warring sides to implement the points defined in the Minsk document (by the way, would you be able to tell who must do what?). Unfortunately, the fact that the conflict is frozen does not mean that there's no fighting ongoing, and that people are not dying: indeed, soldiers from both factions continue to shoot, with many different types of weapons, and civilians continue to suffer and die.<br>
I bet most of my readers already know this. What you might not know, is whether the civilian casualties are evenly distributed over the conflict area, or whether there are differences between the areas controlled by the pro-Russian rebels and those controlled by the Ukrainian government. In other words, whether the majority of civilian casualties are caused by the rebels or by the regular army.<br>
Lacking this information (well, that you might lack this information is only a supposition of mine — if you don't, then please write me in the comments, where did you get this information from), it's natural to assume that, statistically, there would be similar numbers of civilian casualties in each side of the frontline. Or you might hold the opinion that one side is more to blame than the other, according to your prejudices.</p>
<p>To get the exact number of casualties one must read the reports from some international organisations, which are certainly more credible than reports published by either warring side. This does not mean that international organisations are impartial (their composition generally sees a predominance of Western members), but nevertheless they remain the only source of data which we can rely on.<br>
The United Nations Human Rights Council publishes its reports every three months, and in these reports there's always a chapter focusing on the civilian victims, with precise numbers. Unfortunately, during the year 2016 these reports never specified in side of the frontline were the incidents occurring; this makes it impossible for us to tell which faction was responsible for the deaths.</p>
<p>For this reason, I armed myself with patience and I started a tedious work of reading of all the reports from the <a href="http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm">OSCE mission in Ukraine</a>, and from each of them I extracted the numbers of civilian casualties (both injures and deaths), grouping them by their cause (shelling, mine or other accidents), as well as other numbers which I thought could be statistically interesting, such as for example the number of houses which were damaged by the shellings. Here's a summary of those numbers I consider most interesting:</p>
<center>
<style type="text/css">
th {
padding:0 15px 0 15px;
}
td {
text-align: center
}
</style>
<table>
<tr><th></th><th>Areas controlled by<br>the government</th><th>Areas controlledby the rebels
</th></tr><tr><td>Deaths by shelling </td><td>5</td><td>23
</td></tr><tr><td>Injuries by shelling </td><td>40</td><td>77
</td></tr><tr><td>Damaged houses </td><td>171</td><td>358
</td></tr></table>
</center>
<p>You can find the complete table, from which I extracted the numbers above, here: <a href="http://www.mardy.it/archivos/OSCE-smm-Ukraine-2016.ods">OSCE Reports 2016</a>. I do expect some criticism; therefore, please let me explain how to read the sheet:</p>
<ul>
<li>Every line in the sheet corresponds to a day of the year 2016.
</li><li>For each line, there's a link to the OSCE report for that day; feel free to use it to check whether my data extraction was correct.
</li><li>Most numbers are debatable: except for the number of the deceased, all other numbers can be subject to interpretation: for example, should we count as injured someone who was only lightly hurt? Or should we count as damaged a house whose windows broke just because of a loud noise? While I've tried to use my <i>common sense</i>, I have to admit that there might be different readings.
</li><li>I only counted civilian victims: clearly, there were victims also among soldiers and militants, but (I'm sorry if I appear cynic) I don't think that the killing of a soldier in a war zone is a criminal act.
</li><li>In many cases, the OSCE fails to report the exact number of damaged houses, and instead just uses the word <i>several</i>; in those cases, and lacking better information, I arbitrarily decided to count two houses.
</li><li>I show you the full sheet just for the sake of completeness; but my suggestion is to ignore the details, and instead focus on the numbers of civialian deaths and injures only.
</li><li>In the "<i>Initiated shooting</i>" column I counted those times when the OSCE was clearly and unequivocally reporting which side of the conflict was responsible for starting the hostilities.
</li><li>If you find mistakes, please write me in the comments.
</li></ul>
<p>I believe that these numbers clearly show how the distribution of victims is not uniform: most of the civilian victims are caused by the shelling operated by the Ukrainian government on the land held by the pro-Russian rebels, and the proportion between the two is so uneven that it removes the possibility of explaining it as an accidental phenomen. As a matter of facts, even if you don't want to believe my numbers above, you can find similar data in the reports by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (<a href="http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/ENACARegion/Pages/UAIndex.aspx">OHCHR</a>). I sum up the data which you can find in their documents:</p>
<center>
<table>
<tr><th rowspan="2">Period</th><th colspan="2">Civilian casualties: total (and deaths)
</th></tr><tr><th>Areas controlled by<br>the government<br></th><th>Areas controlledby the rebels
</th></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport17th_EN.pdf">16/11/2016 - 15/02/2017</a></td><td>13 (3)</td><td>40 (4)
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport18th_EN.pdf">16/02/2017 - 15/05/2017</a></td><td><i>unknown</i></td><td><i>unknown</i>
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport19th_EN.pdf">16/05/2017 - 15/08/2017</a></td><td>27 (1)</td><td>62 (8)
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport20th_EN.pdf">16/08/2017 - 15/11/2017</a></td><td>2 (0)</td><td>18 (1)
</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraineNov2017-Feb2018_EN.pdf">16/11/2017 - 15/02/2018</a></td><td>12 (1)</td><td>35 (2)
</td></tr></table>
<p style="width: 80%"><i>I counted only the victims by shelling, when such information was available: the reason for this is that responsibility is mush simpler to establish in this case, while in the case of mine or firearm victims there might be some cases where the responsibility falls over the party controlling the territory</i></p>
</center>
<p>As you can see, the vast majority of casualties happens in the territory occupied by the rebels. Could we therefore conclude that these people were hit by the shellings of the Ukrainian army? I believe so: regardless of Ukrainian propaganda, which states that the pro-Russian rebels are bombing their own territory, the OSCE reports which I examined paint a very clear picture: shellings occurring in the territory controlled by the separatists comes from governamental areas, and vice versa (as a matter of facts, <a href="https://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/262091">in one case</a> we have evidence that the Ukrainian government shelled Shchastya, which is under its control). And even the <a href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraineNov2017-Feb2018_EN.pdf">OHCHR report from November 2017 - February 2018</a> clearly states that shelling occurring in one side of the front is caused by those forces occupying the other side (paragraph 19).</p>
<h4>Conclusions</h4>
<p>I don't believe that the world can be divided between good and evil people, or that truth is always black or white. The goal of this article is not to prove that pro-Russian rebels are good, while soldiers obeying to the Ukrainian government are perverse: war is always bad, because civilian casualties are unavoidable. But I do believe that numbers have a meaning which can't be ignored, and that these numbers should be framed in the context of the information you receive from the media. Were these data a surprise to you? If the answer is positive, then you should start doubting the quality of the information you consume. When one reads a piece of news about war or other daily news, one always gets only a partial truth; my advice is to always read the news coming from both sides, and then we could have some hope of seeing a more complete picture. It's not by accident that, in a juridical proceeding, the jury always hears also the defendant's version, even if the evidence mounting against him is overwhelming.</p>
<p>And to come back to this sad war: if you are not shocked by these numbers, try to imagine if a similar situation occurred in your own country. Try to make an effort in picturing this fictional story: there is a pro-Russian insurgency in a city in the East of your country: they no longer recognize the central government, and demand independence. Russia also intervenes, and covertly helps the rebels. And suppose that your government was unable to eliminate only the rebels, because it only possesses imprecise weapons; how would you react, if your government shelled the city, resulting in civilian casualties with the same proportion as that reported in this article (that is, your government actions were causing much more deaths than the rebels')?<br>
Could you tolerate these deaths, if in the rebel city there was about 80% of the population supporting the rebellion? And what if it was only 5%? Once you answer these questions, the next one is this: what is the percentage of people in Donbass who support the pro-Russian rebels? And if you answered that these deaths are not tolerable in your country, why are you (or your country's government) tolerating them when they happen in Ukraine?</p>
</div>Cammino quindi penso - 2017-11-18 - Ucraina, lo scoop sui cecchini del Maidanhttp://mardy.it/blog/2017/11/cammino-quindi-penso-2017-11-18-ucraina.html2017-11-18T13:23:00+03:002017-11-18T13:23:00+03:00Alberto Mardegan<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nl9DN-WDu_4" width="459"></iframe><br><br>
<br><br>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #111111; font-family: Roboto, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">Cosa mi ha colpito del serizio di Matrix sull'Ucraina?<br>
<br>
L'esclusivo servizio di matrix potete guardarlo integralmente <a href="https://rutube.ru/video/4c3f04e43c95dfde769df182e2765711" target="_blank">qui</a>.</span><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nl9DN-WDu_4" width="459"></iframe><br><br>
<br><br>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #111111; font-family: Roboto, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">Cosa mi ha colpito del serizio di Matrix sull'Ucraina?<br>
<br>
L'esclusivo servizio di matrix potete guardarlo integralmente <a href="https://rutube.ru/video/4c3f04e43c95dfde769df182e2765711" target="_blank">qui</a>.</span>Ukrainian journalist Ruslan Kotsaba at the EU parliament (28-2-2017)http://mardy.it/blog/2017/03/ukrainian-journalist-ruslan-kotsaba-at.html2017-03-16T20:06:00+03:002017-03-16T20:06:00+03:00Alberto Mardegan<div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hE3hYSBaH04" width="480"></iframe></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i>English:</i></div>Ruslan Kotsaba spent more than one year in prison for refusing to fight pro-russian rebels in eastern Ukraine (<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/10/ukraine-draft-dodgers-jail-kiev-struggle-new-fighters" target="_blank">article from The Guardian</a>).<br><br>
In this hearing at the European Parliament, he tells his views on the situation in Ukraine, telling facts that EU parliament members - misinformed by Western media - have never heard before.<br><br>
<br><br>
<i>Italiano:</i><br><br>
Ruslan Kotsaba ha trascorso più di un anno in prigione per essersi rifiutato di combattere i ribelli filorussi nell'est dell'Ucraina (<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/10/ukraine-draft-dodgers-jail-kiev-struggle-new-fighters" target="_blank">articolo dal The Guardian</a>).<br><br>
In questa udienza al parlamento europeo, esprime il suo punto di vista sulla situazione in Ucraina, rivelando verità che gli europarlamentari - disinformati dai mezzi di informazione occidantali - mai hanno sentito prima.<div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hE3hYSBaH04" width="480"></iframe></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;"><i>English:</i></div>Ruslan Kotsaba spent more than one year in prison for refusing to fight pro-russian rebels in eastern Ukraine (<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/10/ukraine-draft-dodgers-jail-kiev-struggle-new-fighters" target="_blank">article from The Guardian</a>).<br><br>
In this hearing at the European Parliament, he tells his views on the situation in Ukraine, telling facts that EU parliament members - misinformed by Western media - have never heard before.<br><br>
<br><br>
<i>Italiano:</i><br><br>
Ruslan Kotsaba ha trascorso più di un anno in prigione per essersi rifiutato di combattere i ribelli filorussi nell'est dell'Ucraina (<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/10/ukraine-draft-dodgers-jail-kiev-struggle-new-fighters" target="_blank">articolo dal The Guardian</a>).<br><br>
In questa udienza al parlamento europeo, esprime il suo punto di vista sulla situazione in Ucraina, rivelando verità che gli europarlamentari - disinformati dai mezzi di informazione occidantali - mai hanno sentito prima.