They've driven away more or less everyone who's able-bodied, not yet in old age and with the capacity to flee, whether their sympathies lie with Russia or Ukraine. It used to be a thriving, vibrant city and to see it ruined in this way is very sad. There's more to say and not all of VVP's analysis regarding Donbas is incorrect, but the point is that you have to accept things as they are and not how you want.
Eastern Ukraine and even more so the middle part of the country has now become much less Russianised than it was in Soviet times, or even 30 years ago in the early days of independence (the west was never Russianised). Russia can regret that if it wants, and not everything that led to this path reflects well on Ukraine IMO, but you have to accept things as you are and not as you want them to be.
Russia trying to revisit the breakup of the Soviet Union now and add territories such as this is as ridiculous as if the UK and Northern Irish loyalists decided that they never should have let an additional three Ulster counties be part of the Irish Free State in the early 1920s so we'll claim back Donegal, Cavan, and Monaghan now. You have to let it go.
More generally, while VVP's speech the other day was pretty horrifying, the most disturbing thing I've seen in recent days was a new report on one of the state channels. They were banging on about how Ukraine wasn't really an independent state but a satellite of the USA. It was claimed that everyone in a significant state office was appointed by the Americans and Ukrainian democracy was a sham. The plan, Russian TV alleges, is to move American long-range missiles into Ukrainian territory and then launch attacks on Russia.
This is a despicably false analysis, but people in Russia are going to swallow it, unfortunately, as a pretext for regime change. (I used to think the Russian public especially gullible in this regard, but after observing the UK over the past few years I'm not quite so sure any longer.) It's very distressing.
Now, VVP's analysis that Ukraine has never been an independent state and shouldn't be one now is quite often voiced in Russia. Many people think that Russia, Ukraine and Belarus are very similar eastern Slavic peoples from the Orthodox tradition who are unified by the Russian language (large numbers of of those in the other two states who aren't first-language Russian speak it fluently), so they should be united in a single state.
But ask them whether they should invade the modern Ukrainian state, make themselves a pariah on the world stage and attract inevitable crippling economic sanctions, then of course they'll say no. It's really not remotely a big deal for them, though it evidently is for the President given his recent speech.
On the other hand, it's a different answer if you ask them whether Russia should intervene to protect, from Ukrainian persecution, fellow Russians unfortunate enough to land on the wrong side of the border. The same if you ask whether a pre-emptive strike is needed to replace a government allowing its territory to be cultivated as a launchpad for an attack on Russia.
I find it extremely distressing. But that's how propaganda works, folks. They'll largely carry the domestic population with them even though that domestic population will be a big loser from the war - not on the level of the poor people in the actual war zone, obviously, but they'll suffer nonetheless. Anyway, on that depressing note, I'm logging off for the night.
