• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ukraine says votes in occupied regions on joining Russia are ‘doomed to fail’

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
93,583
Reaction score
81,660
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent


9.21.22
Ukrainian officials dismissed plans by Russian-occupied parts of the country to hold referenda on whether to join the Russian Federation, saying the move is “doomed to fail,” while analysts see the votes as an escalation by Moscow as Kyiv’s counteroffensive continues. Russia’s proxy leaders and officials installed in occupied parts of the country made a series of announcements Tuesday, calling for immediate votes on joining Russia. The referenda, which are are due take place over the coming weekend, will be held in two self-proclaimed “republics” in Donetsk and Luhansk in the eastern Donbas region as well as occupied parts of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions. The votes — whose results are widely expected to be rigged and to favor becoming a part of Russia — are widely seen as a way for Russia to annex more parts of Ukraine and to be able to justify the “defense” of what it could then claim was “Russian territory,” even though most of the international community would not recognize the legitimacy of the votes, or the results. Needless to say, Russia’s latest attempts to annex more parts of Ukraine, and to try to lend legitimacy to such an act by staging referenda to do so, has been met with international condemnation, starting from Kyiv. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy dismissed the “noisy news” and announcements regarding referenda, saying Ukraine had heard it all before. “Today there is quite noisy news coming from Russia. And there are many questions about it. But what actually happened? What was heard that we have not heard before,” he said in his nightly address.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba called any referenda a “sham” that would not stop Ukraine from its aim of liberating its territories. Reiterating Kuleba’s position, Yuriy Sak, an advisor to Ukraine’s Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov, told CNBC that such “fake” votes are “doomed to fail” for several reasons. “This is the desperate, face-saving attempt which they’re trying to use to compensate for the humiliation that they have suffered on the battlefield as a result of the Ukrainian army’s counter offensive, both in Kharkiv region and in Kherson,” he told CNBC Tuesday. “The second point is that, regardless of what they do, this will not stop the Ukrainian army and this will not be recognized by any members of the international community.” “The third, very important point is that local populations in the temporarily-occupied territories — and we’re seeing it now as we are de-occupying these territories — they are not supportive of the occupants. They’re not supportive of the aggressor. So these fake referendums are doomed to fail, from whatever angle or aspect you look at it,” he said.

Putin is attempting to order via fiat - the theft of Ukrainian lands - that which his military cannot accomplish on the battlefields.
 




Putin is attempting to order via fiat - the theft of Ukrainian lands - that which his military cannot accomplish on the battlefields.
Alas, it is tragic how many Russians have been duped into supporting Putin's actions, and buying Putin's lies. In my daydreams I envision stealth bombers overflying Russian population centers, and dropping leaflets outlining the timeline, explaining exactly what he has been doing, exactly which treaties he is in violation of, exactly how catastrophically he has failed, and explaining that if you send your sons to fight in Ukraine, then you are sending them to their death.

Resistance to Putin from the West makes his domestic support stronger. Only resistance to Putin that comes from within can bring him down.

Russians need to hear the truth.
 
Resistance to Putin from the West makes his domestic support stronger. Only resistance to Putin that comes from within can bring him down.

Russians need to hear the truth.

Putin's destruction of independent Russian media and intolerance for internal protest has been successful it seems.

In polls (Levada-Center) 75% of the Russian population support the invasion of Ukraine.

Hell, we have one Russian member here on a VPN that supports the invasion despite his VPN access to international media.
 
Putin is attempting to order via fiat - the theft of Ukrainian lands - that which his military cannot accomplish on the battlefields.



The Russians will not keep what they cannot accomplish on the battlefields. That goes for Ukraine as well.
 
Alas, it is tragic how many Russians have been duped into supporting Putin's actions, and buying Putin's lies. In my daydreams I envision stealth bombers overflying Russian population centers, and dropping leaflets outlining the timeline, explaining exactly what he has been doing, exactly which treaties he is in violation of, exactly how catastrophically he has failed, and explaining that if you send your sons to fight in Ukraine, then you are sending them to their death.

Resistance to Putin from the West makes his domestic support stronger. Only resistance to Putin that comes from within can bring him down.

Russians need to hear the truth.



BBC, DW and other media cannot accomplish that?
 
No one in their right mind trusts any sort of election or ballot measure held by Russia under Putin.



It's all pointless in my opinion. What Ukraine or Russia winds up with will be decided on the battlefields
 
It's all pointless in my opinion. What Ukraine or Russia winds up with will be decided on the battlefields

Putin here is attempting to unilaterally declare a victory that he has been unable to achieve on the battlefields.

In reality, the necessity of holding such sham referendums is an exemplar of his current military impotence.
 
Putin here is attempting to unilaterally declare a victory that he has been unable to achieve on the battlefields.
In reality, the necessity of holding such sham referendums is an exemplar of his current military impotence.


One has to calls it as one sees it. The referendums do sound to me as more desperate than planned; essentially a result of the reverses on the battlefield.

Anyways, the die had already been cast in February. Only success in the battlefield can decide who owns what. If Ukraine prevails then what it gains is hers, referenda or no referenda.
 
One has to calls it as one sees it. The referendums do sound to me as more desperate than planned; essentially a result of the reverses on the battlefield.

Anyways, the die had already been cast in February. Only success in the battlefield can decide who owns what. If Ukraine prevails then what it gains is hers, referenda or no referenda.

Referenda or no referenda, the territories occupied by the Russian military are Ukrainian by international law.

Putin greatly miscalculated in February, and here in September he is doubling down on his many miscalculations regarding Ukraine.

And his mobilization orders cross the Rubicon in Russia.
 
The referendas are not valid for many reasons:

1) Elections under hostile occupation are not valid, you can't expect a democratic outcome under gunpoint
2) So many people have fled the occupied territories that those left hardly represents the will of the local populace.
3) These referendas were announced a few days before they are supposed to happen. Basically there is no time for the democratic process, like campaigning. In that case you can assume that then side arranging the vote will win by default, since their side is the only one prepared.
 
One has to calls it as one sees it. The referendums do sound to me as more desperate than planned; essentially a result of the reverses on the battlefield.

Anyways, the die had already been cast in February. Only success in the battlefield can decide who owns what. If Ukraine prevails then what it gains is hers, referenda or no referenda.

I don't know what motivated the Kremlin to hold referendums now as opposed to later. However, I think the decision to have them is a good one. Ultimately, who runs the Donbass area should be up to citizens of the Donbass. Had Ukraine been willing honor the Minsk agreements, all of this could probably have been avoided, but they didn't, so we got what we got. Another thing- Ukraine "prevailing" on the battlefield can be the same as the U.S. "prevailing" in Afghanistan. If you don't have the "hearts and minds" of the people, it'll just be an occupation. This is why a referendum is so important, as it's asking the people who actually live there directly what they want.
 
I don't know what motivated the Kremlin to hold referendums now as opposed to later.

The Kremlin lost ~2,500 sq/mi in Kharkiv oblast in a week. Lysychansk in Luhansk oblast is now threatened.

And regarding the illegal referenda.....

“Any annexation of a state’s territory by another state resulting from a threat or use of force is a violation of the U.N. Charter and of international law.” -- United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on 9/22/22.
 
The referendas are not valid for many reasons:

1) Elections under hostile occupation are not valid, you can't expect a democratic outcome under gunpoint



hmmmmmm that nullifies the various elections held in Iraq under occupation?

And "hostile" to whom? The referenda specially, or as a factual matter seeks to address whether the local population considers the occupation hostile or not.




2) So many people have fled the occupied territories that those left hardly represents the will of the local populace.



Those who have left cannot at the same time be addressed as the "local populace"


3) These referendas were announced a few days before they are supposed to happen. Basically there is no time for the democratic process, like campaigning. In that case you can assume that then side arranging the vote will win by default, since their side is the only one prepared.



Sounds like monkey business. But that is what it is
 
I don't know what motivated the Kremlin to hold referendums now as opposed to later.



It's a politically powerful move in many ways. Both inside Russia and inside Ukraine.

1. Inside Russia the narrative changes from limited operations outside Russia to defense of Russia proper. Any Joe can wrap his head around that. And that is an easier sell for mobilization.

2. It's effect may be even more powerful in portions of Ukraine occupied by Russia. It reassures the local pro Russian population that they are no more pawns of indeterminate status. They are Russians entitled to protection from all Russia.




However, I think the decision to have them is a good one. Ultimately, who runs the Donbass area should be up to citizens of the Donbass. Had Ukraine been willing honor the Minsk agreements, all of this could probably have been avoided, but they didn't, so we got what we got.


I believe the likes of UK and US never wanted Minsk to succeed. Germany and France, yes; the other two, no. The two notorious Saxons wanted a Ukraine cleansed of all Russian influence and Russians.

That is the tragedy as you pointed out.



Another thing- Ukraine "prevailing" on the battlefield can be the same as the U.S. "prevailing" in Afghanistan. If you don't have the "hearts and minds" of the people, it'll just be an occupation. This is why a referendum is so important, as it's asking the people who actually live there directly what they want.


Funny thing is the west does not want the wish of the local population to be a factor at all. If they did they would have taken Minsk seriously.
 
It's a politically powerful move in many ways. Both inside Russia and inside Ukraine.

1. Inside Russia the narrative changes from limited operations outside Russia to defense of Russia proper. Any Joe can wrap his head around that. And that is an easier sell for mobilization.

2. It's effect may be even more powerful in portions of Ukraine occupied by Russia. It reassures the local pro Russian population that they are no more pawns of indeterminate status. They are Russians entitled to protection from all Russia.







I believe the likes of UK and US never wanted Minsk to succeed. Germany and France, yes; the other two, no. The two notorious Saxons wanted a Ukraine cleansed of all Russian influence and Russians.

That is the tragedy as you pointed out.






Funny thing is the west does not want the wish of the local population to be a factor at all. If they did they would have taken Minsk seriously.

Agreed on all counts :)
 
And "hostile" to whom? The referenda specially, or as a factual matter seeks to address whether the local population considers the occupation hostile or not.

No it does not. The referenda are a sham. Their only purpose is to allow the Kremlin to falsely state that Ukraine is waging war against Russia on Russian territory.

Those who have left cannot at the same time be addressed as the "local populace"

You cannot say that those who left their homes due to the invasion (war refugees) did so voluntarily, or that they have no plans on returning to their homes and community.

Sounds like monkey business. But that is what it is

Indeed. A sham in every sense of the word. You can bet the Kremlin did not invite any international organizations to monitor this charade.

These Kremlin referenda violate the principle of national-sovereignty, the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, and international law.

In addition, the Constitution of Ukraine states that only a national referendum regarding a change of status is considered valid.

What Moscow is doing in Ukraine is tearing down the global diplomatic/security architecture that has been in place since the end of WWII.
 
And "hostile" to whom? The referenda specially, or as a factual matter seeks to address whether the local population considers the occupation hostile or not.

No it does not. The referenda are a sham. Their only purpose is to allow the Kremlin to falsely state that Ukraine is waging war against Russia on Russian territory.

According to who, the corporate western mainstream media?
 
According to who, the corporate western mainstream media?

There is no other purpose for these phony referenda other than bolstering the false Putin narrative.

Shazam! Ukrainian land is now Russian land!



Yesterday Russian FM Lavrov didn't hang around for even a NY minute after his UN diatribe. Russia was rightfully taking a beating. Even Guterres delivered a well-deserved slap....

“Any annexation of a state’s territory by another state resulting from a threat or use of force is a violation of the U.N. Charter and of international law.” -- United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on 9/22/22.
 
Well, this is exciting. The BBC has an update on the Russian referendum.


It's a great system. A Russian soldier comes to your door, and you just tell him that you don't want to join Russia. It saves you the hassle of going to the polls. If you tell him "no," it might even save you the hassle of doing anything else ever again. How do you guys think the referendum will turn out?
 
No it does not. The referenda are a sham. Their only purpose is to allow the Kremlin to falsely state that Ukraine is waging war against Russia on Russian territory.


Why would the Russian public support the war if the lands fought for are not gonna be Russian? Russians believe the lands in question are ancestral Russian lands, and are likely more amenable to support a war for their acquisition.


You cannot say that those who left their homes due to the invasion (war refugees) did so voluntarily, or that they have no plans on returning to their homes and community.


I did not say those who bolted did so voluntarily, or that they have no intention of returning. But the fact remains that they are not presently there, and cannot be considered "local populace"


Indeed. A sham in every sense of the word. You can bet the Kremlin did not invite any international organizations to monitor this charade.


That wont be smart


These Kremlin referenda violate the principle of national-sovereignty, the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, and international law.

That may very well be the case


In addition, the Constitution of Ukraine states that only a national referendum regarding a change of status is considered valid.


Would Ukraine today be independent if the status of this ex Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic needed a national referendum to allow change of her status?


What Moscow is doing in Ukraine is tearing down the global diplomatic/security architecture that has been in place since the end of WWII.

Very possible.
 
The referenda are a sham. Their only purpose is to allow the Kremlin to falsely state that Ukraine is waging war against Russia on Russian territory.

According to who, the corporate western mainstream media?

There is no other purpose for these phony referenda other than bolstering the false Putin narrative.

Shazam! Ukrainian land is now Russian land!



Yesterday Russian FM Lavrov didn't hang around for even a NY minute after his UN diatribe. Russia was rightfully taking a beating. Even Guterres delivered a well-deserved slap....

“Any annexation of a state’s territory by another state resulting from a threat or use of force is a violation of the U.N. Charter and of international law.” -- United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on 9/22/22.

Let's not forget that 8 years ago, the Ukrainian Donetsk and Lugansk republics held referendums to gain more independence from Ukraine. The vote to gain that increased independence won out in both cases. Ukraine, rather than trying to find an accomodation that could work, resorted to force, sending in the military. After Russia stepped in diplomatically, they agreed to the first Minsk agreement. Which Ukraine promptly broke. After Ukrainian forces were doing badly, they agreed to a second Minsk agreement. Which they also broke.

So it's clear who used force first and it's equally clear that many Donbass citizens were willing to fight and even die to maintain their independence from Ukraine. Now that Russia is giving them a choice to join them, people like Guterres step in to say that it's not right because force is being used? A lot of force was used to remove Nazis from various countries as well. For some reason, I doubt that Guterres would have the same views as he has of Russia trying to de nazify (or de neo nazify) Ukraine's Donbass region.
 
Let's not forget that 8 years ago, the Ukrainian Donetsk and Lugansk republics held referendums to gain more independence from Ukraine. The vote to gain that increased independence won out in both cases. Ukraine, rather than trying to find an accomodation that could work, resorted to force, sending in the military. After Russia stepped in diplomatically, they agreed to the first Minsk agreement. Which Ukraine promptly broke. After Ukrainian forces were doing badly, they agreed to a second Minsk agreement. Which they also broke.

So it's clear who used force first and it's equally clear that many Donbass citizens were willing to fight and even die to maintain their independence from Ukraine. Now that Russia is giving them a choice to join them, people like Guterres step in to say that it's not right because force is being used? A lot of force was used to remove Nazis from various countries as well. For some reason, I doubt that Guterres would have the same views as he has of Russia trying to de nazify (or de neo nazify) Ukraine's Donbass region.
Do they teach you all this distortion of actual history in Savushkina Street, or do you get it straight from the Kremlin?
 
You guys can fap to whatever you want, but the war will continue.
 
Back
Top Bottom