The half-truths about Ukraine

On several occasions we stated that various allegations of Russia around Ukraine They were based on facts. When declassified documents from both the US and German governments are reviewed, it seems clear that, albeit verbally, there was an offer to the Soviet Union not to extend NATO into Eastern Europe (let’s not talk about Russia’s borders).

Also facts are not only the fascist origin of the Azov Battalion (the mainstay of Mariupol’s defense), but also that it vindicates Stepan Bandera (Ukrainian leader who, during World War II, collaborated with the Nazi occupation) and that he committed violations of human rights against the civilian population (according to a 2016 UN report).

It is also true that the Russian position ignores all information that contradicts its own narrative. For example, that the Ukrainian radical right (of which the Azov Battalion is a part) only won 2.5% of the vote in the 2019 parliamentary elections. That the mercenary organization (with links to the Kremlin) known as the Group Wagner was founded by a fascist (Dmitry Utkin), or that Putin himself repatriated the remains and writings of a Russian fascist (Ivan Ilyin).

Usually, the defenders of the Russian position question the independence and veracity of the sources that provide said information (as, I presume, will happen with what I have just said). So, to avoid debates around sources, let’s cite only Russian Government sources. On February 12, the Russia Today (RT) agency quoted Putin as saying that the United States “provides deliberately false information to the media about alleged Russian plans to ‘invade’ Ukraine”: given that two weeks later Russia invaded Ukraine , we can conclude that the one who provided false information about his intentions was Putin.

On February 24 (the day the invasion began), RT quotes sources from the Russian Ministry of Defense according to which “the Russian military does not carry out attacks against Ukrainian cities and there is no threat to the civilian population.” That is, on the eve of the Russian Armed Forces attempting to encircle kyiv and raid Kharkov (Ukraine’s two main cities), and shortly before their bombardments almost completely destroyed the city of Mariupol.

Finally, on March 7, always according to RT, Putin clarified that “the Russian military operation in Ukraine does not involve soldiers of compulsory military service or reservists.” But on March 9, the Russian Defense Ministry itself acknowledged that there were conscripts among the soldiers sent to Ukraine, after some of them identified themselves as such after being captured by the Ukrainian army.

As we can see, the old adage according to which the first casualty of war is the truth is not only correct, but also usually applies to all parties involved. In the case of Russia, this includes the claim that the annexation of Crimea had merit under international law. Despite the fact that various resolutions of the UN Security Council (adopted with the favorable vote of both the Soviet Union and Russia) establish the principle (derived from the third and fourth paragraphs of Article 2 of the UN Charter) that the acquisition of territories by force is inadmissible. That annexation also violated the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, according to which Russia undertook to “respect the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine within the existing borders”, as well as that “none of its weapons be used against Ukraine, except in self-defense”. or in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations” (under which, self-defense only proceeds “in the event of an armed attack against a member of the United Nations”).

Source: Elcomercio

Ronald Payne

I, Ronald Payne, am a journalist and author who dedicated his life to telling the stories that need to be said. I have over 7 years of experience as a reporter and editor, covering everything from politics to business to crime.