Russia - General Discussion.

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Russia had stopped all gas export some time before the explosions happened. German companies were in the process of suing Gazprom for breach of contract, to the tune of billions of Euro. The sabotage means that Gazprom cannot be sued anymore, since they can claim Force Majeure.

FSB blew up several apartment buildings in Moscow killing a large number of people to justify military action in Chechenia. Vladimir Putin & 1999 Russian Apartment-House Bombings -- Was Putin Responsible?

Perhaps Russia did not blow up the NS pipelines, but I would definitely not exclude the possibility at this point in time.
Did they now? One would think a major Chechen invasion of Dagestan was sufficient to justify military action... I don't disagree with your conclusion. But that particular piece of evidence is questionable at best.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

This is not directly related to War in Ukraine, but I do believe it is indirect results on this War. Bali governor going to ask central government to revoke Visa on Arrival (VOA) for tourists from both Ukraine and Russia.

This related to two things:
1. Tendency unruly behavior from Ukrainian and Russian tourists,
2. Tendency for tourists from both nation conducting illegal business in Bali.

Illegal business in here not yet related to illegal criminal activities, but what they're doing basically exploiting their Tourists visa and conducting rental business on transportation and lodging business between themselves. In sense they acquire legal rental from local businesses but then sub let to other Russian and Ukrainian or even tourists from other CIS or even East European.

This behavior already also being scrutinized by Thailand authorities. That's why they already begin scrubbing excess tourists from Ukrainian and Russian in last year and some of them move to Bali. This year alone there are close to 100K tourists from Ukraine and Russia which some assessments put 40:60 proportion from both of them.

They are basically exploiting rules in Indonesian and ASEAN VOA. VOA in Indonesia can attain up to 3 months stay, and they have to leave Indonesia before can enter and apply on another round of VOA. Thus what they are doing is exploiting VOA within ASEAN. They can move out from Bali to Singapore, KL (as both destinations provide plenty of flights) then after couple of days there they are back to Bali.

This technique already done by most 'digital nomads' which use this technique to move around and keep working remotely from several places around the globe. Both Russian and Ukrainian despite this war, basically build interconnected communities between them, and practically the businesses are done by both of them (which is why for most Asian, they're being seen as one communities of people).

This War already increase the number double even triple of their communities in SEA especially Phuket and Bali. What Indonesian and Thailand monetary authorities already suspect, is those communities being used to laundry money from both Ukrainian and Russian oligrachs businesses.

Shown this despite Western media talks on Russian Draft Dodgers, realities the Dodgers are coming from both Ukraine and Russian side. Before the war both of them are congregated on similar circles, and still doing the same, using money which more or less suspected coming from similar sources.

I don't know whether Indonesian central government going to limit or even revoke VOA from both Ukrainian and Russian. However I do suspect some more scrutinize just like Thailand done toward both countries tourists will be done. The suspect by monetary authorities on origin of their money is more concerning. Shown both Ukrainian and Russian oligarchs are spreading their tourists to laundering their funds, as one of their arsenal on keep their money in global trades.
 
Last edited:

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
UN commission has recently released a new report :

But on Wednesday, a three-person commission of inquiry created by the United Nations Human Rights Council last year said in a report that Russian missile attacks on energy infrastructure since October — leaving millions of people without power, heat or water — could also amount to crimes against humanity.

And Russian forces’ use of torture against civilians and prisoners of war in occupied areas may also amount to crimes against humanity, on the ground that their use was systematic, occurred in several different regions of Ukraine in sites intended for that purpose and showed a degree of planning, the panel said.

The 18-page report echoed many of the findings in the panel’s preliminary assessment last September, but was able to go into greater detail on patterns of abuse. The report drew on findings made during eight trips to Ukraine, visits to 56 towns and communities and interviews with 595 people, as well as on satellite data.

The commissioners said their attempts to establish “meaningful communication” with the Russian authorities had no success, although they noted that a Russian government department had referred some material to them.

Their findings and a list of individuals linked to abuses will provide additional ammunition to intensive Ukrainian and international investigations aimed at holding Russia to account for its actions after invading Ukraine just over a year ago.

Among the abuses the report enumerated was the use of torture, which the commission said was “prevalent” against certain categories of people, particularly serving or former members of Ukraine’s armed forces, as well as local officials, employees of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant and civilians with pro-Ukraine views.

A common Russian torture technique, known as a “call to Putin” or “call to Lenin,” used military phones connected to electrical cables to deliver shocks to feet, fingers and genitals. Other methods of torture, the panel said, included rape, as well as hanging detainees from the ceiling with their hands tied, strangling them with cables and suffocating them with plastic bags or gas masks.

Some victims, they said, had witnessed fellow detainees being tortured to death. In other cases, the torture of prisoners was followed by their execution.

Russian troops who conducted house-to-house searches as they took control of areas also raped women at gunpoint, with “extreme brutality” and torture, the panel reported. The commission said it documented sexual violence against “women, men and girls aged from 4 to 82.”
China’s Leader Sets State Visit to Russia - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

I hope politicians in Europe read and digest this. Support to Ukraine must be increased, substantially increased. Also, one should communicate the behavior of Russian soldiers to countries that are still on the fence regarding this war.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Hopefully this will wake up more people in e.g., Asia, Africa and South America. It's about time to get off the fence.
Will people in West doing this talk on war crimes to US done in Iraq and Afghanistan? Will similar condemnation by West will happen to Israel policy (especially Netanyahu parties aim now) to continue marginalized Palestinian?

There's a lot of injustice that can constitute as war crimes in this world during and after Cold War. Why we as non West in Asia, Africa and South America should only touted what West say as crime to be call 'wake up'??

Ohh most of us non West already wake up and never sleep. Doesn't mean staying in fences is sleep cause we don't follow what Washington and Brussels wants.

And don't call ICC is global and international law standards.

Add:
Sorry mod, don't want to be confrontatives, however calling us most non west not waking up because most of us staying in fences, and not following western agenda, is clearly another condescending western thinking.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
Will people in West doing this talk on war crimes to US done in Iraq and Afghanistan? Will similar condemnation by West will happen to Israel policy (especially Netanyahu parties aim now) to continue marginalized Palestinian?
I would fully support investigations into Iraq, Israel and Afghanistan, and prosecution if anything is found. I think all wars and all participants in a war should be fully investigated, as a matter of general procedure. Just like there is an investigation after a plane crash. Always.

Anyway this is OT.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I would fully support investigations into Iraq, Israel and Afghanistan, and prosecution if anything is found. I think all wars and all participants in a war should be fully investigated, as a matter of general procedure. Just like there is an investigation after a plane crash. Always.

Anyway this is OT.
I think the point Ananda is making is aimed directly at your argument about the third world getting off the fence. And what he's saying is that this is unlikely to accomplish that because of prior inconsistencies. I tend to agree. Additionally the nature of the charge, having to do with children being taken out of a war zone and placed in "camps" (like vacation retreats like summer camps for children) really doesn't seem like a very strong one. Would they be better off left in bombed out/burned out husks of towns left in the wake of the fighting with their parents often dead or missing? To me it seems like a contrived approach to get something, anything, on which warrants can be issued even is substantively speaking it's a questionable approach. Of course we have very little information at this time. Let's see if they release a more detailed explanation of what the fact pattern that led them to this decision is.
 

KipPotapych

Active Member
UN commission has recently released a new report :

But on Wednesday, a three-person commission of inquiry created by the United Nations Human Rights Council last year said in a report that Russian missile attacks on energy infrastructure since October — leaving millions of people without power, heat or water — could also amount to crimes against humanity.
Then the following reads like a court document. In fact, with admission of guilt and deliberate intent to cause harm and human suffering to the civilian population.

NATO airstrikes on Yugoslavia's power grid left millions of people without electricity or water service today, bringing the war over Kosovo more directly into the lives of civilians across the country[…]

Officials at the Pentagon and at NATO headquarters in Belgium said allied jets deliberately attacked the power grid, aiming to shut it down more completely and for longer periods than at any time previously in the two-month-old air campaign. U.S. officials estimated the attacks had shut off power to about 80 percent of Serbia[…]

But by increasing the hardship of ordinary citizens, alliance leaders also appeared to be seeking to encourage public disaffection with the government of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic[…]

The attacks also slashed water reserves by damaging pumps and cutting electricity to the few pumps that were still operative. Belgrade's water utility said that reserves of drinking water had been reduced to 8 percent[…]

but senior allied military officials acknowledged that they also want to damage the quality of everyday life so that suffering citizens will start questioning the intransigence of their political leadership.[…]


From Washington Post, May 24, 1999: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/balkans/stories/belgrade052599.htm

Use google to search for wipe outs of the electrical grid in Iraq during the Desert Storm and again in 2010. Among other examples. The strange thing is that they (edit: Russians) waited 8-9 months to start inflicting the damage to the power grid.
 
Last edited:

KipPotapych

Active Member
I should add:


The US has imposed sanctions on senior officials in the International Criminal Court (ICC), including chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo accused the court of "illegitimate attempts to subject Americans to its jurisdiction".

The Hague-based ICC is currently investigating whether US forces committed war crimes in Afghanistan[…]


And (pardon for quoting myself) part of my post in the other thread a few days ago:

While on the subject of ICC (in the Reuters article), I think this NYT article is worth mentioning: Pentagon Blocks Sharing Evidenceof Possible Russian War Crimes with Hague Court

It’s a short article, but this paragraph pretty much sums it up:

American military leaders oppose helping the court investigate Russians because they fear setting a precedent that might help pave the way for it to prosecute Americans.

It appears, there is a big elephant in the room.
 

Delta204

Active Member
.....Additionally the nature of the charge, having to do with children being taken out of a war zone and placed in "camps" (like vacation retreats like summer camps for children) really doesn't seem like a very strong one. Would they be better off left in bombed out/burned out husks of towns left in the wake of the fighting with their parents often dead or missing? To me it seems like a contrived approach to get something, anything, on which warrants can be issued even is substantively speaking it's a questionable approach. Of course we have very little information at this time. Let's see if they release a more detailed explanation of what the fact pattern that led them to this decision is.
I think this issue here is much more serious than what you've suggested. How Moscow grabs Ukrainian kids and makes them Russians | AP News
Whether or not they have parents, raising the children of war in another country or culture can be a marker of genocide, an attempt to erase the very identity of an enemy nation. Prosecutors say it also can be tied directly to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has explicitly supported the adoptions.
Demographics has long been a concern in Russia, this war will have only made it worse. It's not unreasonable to think that Putin views these Ukrainian children as a way to mitigate or dampen the blow.... and if this is in fact the case it would be a war crime.
 

KipPotapych

Active Member
Also, the point that will be missed by many (likely most of the) media outlets is

The defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof lies with the Prosecutor.

and

Confirmation of charges hearings: After hearing the Prosecution, the Defence, and the Legal representative of victims, the judges decide (usually within 60 days) if there is enough evidence for the case to go to trial.

If the suspect is not arrested or does not appear, legal submissions can be made, but hearings cannot begin.


From the ICC website: How the Court works

Basically that means that we will never know if there is enough evidence for this to even go to trial because there will never be any hearings because the suspects will likely never appear or be arrested for trial.

Neither Russia nor China recognize the ICC, but I wonder if this will have any affect on the upcoming Xi visit to Russia in a few days. Likely none, but who knows.
 
Last edited:

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I think this issue here is much more serious than what you've suggested. How Moscow grabs Ukrainian kids and makes them Russians | AP News


Demographics has long been a concern in Russia, this war will have only made it worse. It's not unreasonable to think that Putin views these Ukrainian children as a way to mitigate or dampen the blow.... and if this is in fact the case it would be a war crime.
It's an interesting article but it raises many questions. The article talks about a body of evidence including "dozens of interviews with parents, children and officials in both Ukraine and Russia; emails and letters; Russian documents and Russian state media" but this body of evidence isn't presented here. I wonder if there's a way to access this. It's not that I don't trust the Associated Press. But I don't trust the Associated Press.

Then there's this; "Even where parents are dead, Rapp said, their children must be sheltered, fostered or adopted in Ukraine rather than deported to Russia." Presumably the logic is that children shouldn't be shipped across international borders. But again Russia's position is that Mariupol' is Russian territory. So Russia is shipping Russian children to another place in Russia. If this stance were accurate, there would be no claim of genocide? If so then the disagreement goes back to territory. And this is highlighted throughout the article. It talks about children from Lugansk and Crimea. While the status of Lugansk was murky even in Russian officialdom, Crimea was annexed openly. Again the issue here is one of territorial claims.

And consider the ending of so many of these stories. After protracted negotiations and a bureaucratic mess, time and time again the article mentions children getting returned. Add some consideration for the bureaucratic mess, add some consideration for the opinions and typical propaganda inside Russia, where Ukraine is considered to be the enemy, and you have what you have. Even the position of the DPR officials are logical. If you want your kids, come pick them up. It's logical for the parents not to trust this, but it's also logical for the DPR officials to want this. One could say their position isn't very constructive, and I would agree. But again, they're an unrecognized government on the other side of a war.

This doesn't look like a genocide attempt. This looks like a sloppily executed and typical Russian propaganda filled attempt to actually help child war victims.
 
It's an interesting article but it raises many questions. The article talks about a body of evidence including "dozens of interviews with parents, children and officials in both Ukraine and Russia; emails and letters; Russian documents and Russian state media" but this body of evidence isn't presented here. I wonder if there's a way to access this. It's not that I don't trust the Associated Press. But I don't trust the Associated Press.

Then there's this; "Even where parents are dead, Rapp said, their children must be sheltered, fostered or adopted in Ukraine rather than deported to Russia." Presumably the logic is that children shouldn't be shipped across international borders. But again Russia's position is that Mariupol' is Russian territory. So Russia is shipping Russian children to another place in Russia. If this stance were accurate, there would be no claim of genocide? If so then the disagreement goes back to territory. And this is highlighted throughout the article. It talks about children from Lugansk and Crimea. While the status of Lugansk was murky even in Russian officialdom, Crimea was annexed openly. Again the issue here is one of territorial claims.

And consider the ending of so many of these stories. After protracted negotiations and a bureaucratic mess, time and time again the article mentions children getting returned. Add some consideration for the bureaucratic mess, add some consideration for the opinions and typical propaganda inside Russia, where Ukraine is considered to be the enemy, and you have what you have. Even the position of the DPR officials are logical. If you want your kids, come pick them up. It's logical for the parents not to trust this, but it's also logical for the DPR officials to want this. One could say their position isn't very constructive, and I would agree. But again, they're an unrecognized government on the other side of a war.

This doesn't look like a genocide attempt. This looks like a sloppily executed and typical Russian propaganda filled attempt to actually help child war victims.
Whatever makes you sleep better, Feanor.
In my world the sky is blue and Lugansk and Crimea belong to Ukraine. Just because someone claims a part of the planet is theres doesn't actually make it so. I might just claim the street I live is now TheRealistville. I'll make up my own rules and laws and you better obey them!! I don't think it works that way.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Whatever makes you sleep better, Feanor.
A triple scotch neat it is. Thanks.

In my world the sky is blue and Lugansk and Crimea belong to Ukraine. Just because someone claims a part of the planet is theres doesn't actually make it so. I might just claim the street I live is now TheRealistville. I'll make up my own rules and laws and you better obey them!! I don't think it works that way.
The question is not of legitimacy or even legality of Russian annexation claims but whether substantively speaking accusations of genocide have merit here. I believe they do not, and that the grounds for the warrants are substantively weak, and quite likely politically motivated. If this distinction is not interesting or significant to you, feel free to disregard.
 

Capt. Ironpants

Active Member
I think the point Ananda is making is aimed directly at your argument about the third world getting off the fence. And what he's saying is that this is unlikely to accomplish that because of prior inconsistencies. I tend to agree. Additionally the nature of the charge, having to do with children being taken out of a war zone and placed in "camps" (like vacation retreats like summer camps for children) really doesn't seem like a very strong one. Would they be better off left in bombed out/burned out husks of towns left in the wake of the fighting with their parents often dead or missing? To me it seems like a contrived approach to get something, anything, on which warrants can be issued even is substantively speaking it's a questionable approach. Of course we have very little information at this time. Let's see if they hi a more detailed explanation of what the fact pattern that led them to this decision is.
Details can be found here:


You need to click the link to the PDF of the full report ("latest findings" in UN blue). For covenience, I give the link here, too:


The section on the children is "D. Forced Transfers and Deportation of Children" paras 95-102 near the end of the report.

A word about this report. It was issued by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine, appointed by the UN Human Rights Council. The Human Rights Council is an UNGA body (as opposed to UN Secretariat, or "regular UN"). There is also the UN Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), formerly known as The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNCHR -- which understandably was often confused with the better-known UNHCR, the refugee agency), and the High Commissioner is appointed by the UNSG, and he/she and his/her paid professional staff are under the Secretariat. However, OHCHR is effectively in the service of the HRC. It's all quite messy and confusing and mixed up. Anyway, the problematic HRC was restructured in 2006, and this is when UNCHR became OHCHR, but remains rather problematic.

There was once a golden time for UNCHR but a brief one, when it was under High Commissioner José Ayala Lasso, who established professional field offices. His tenure (1994-1997) coincided with Rwanda, the tail end of the conflicts in former Yugoslavia, certain events in East Timor, etc., and his field staff were excellent experienced professionals whose reports could absolutely be relied upon to be accurate, honest, neutral and well-documented -- and matched up with reports of other reliable investigators in the field (professional "regular UN" Mission Staff Human Rights Officers under DPKO, plus OSCE (which was then ECMM/EUMM), reputable independent human rights NGOs, etc.). Mr. Lasso had a background in field work himself. After Dayton/Erdut, many of these profesional UNCHR field officers joined the ICTY (Hague) field staff and grew more disillusioned (more on that later*).

The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine consists of three people with impressive resumes:


This report does not read like the ones generated by professional UN human rights field officers, though, and the bias is glaring. It is obvious their aim was to find crimes committed by Russians while overlooking or glossing over any human rights abuses committed by the Ukrainian side. The Russian crimes are never labelled "alleged" while the relatively minor Ukrainian infractions mentioned are labelled "alleged". I have no doubt the Russians have committed terrible human rights abuses, nor do I doubt they outdo Ukrainian abuses. At the same time, I hardly believe the Ukrainians are perfect angels and we know there have been human rights violations committed by their side. It's a war, folks. Anyone who has spent years in the middle of Other People's Wars as a sworn neutral observer or humanitarian/human rights professional knows that the attacking side/side with the upper hand commits the most human rights abuses simply because that is the natural dynamic and because they can. This can change even within the space of days when the other side gains the upper hand. The baddest bad guys switch places. In wars with an ethnic dimension, this is magnified.

Just one point about the report section on the children: In para 95, the report states "Ukrainian and Russian officials have declared that hundreds of thousands of children have been transferred from Ukraine to the Russian Federation since 24 February 2022" with no substantiation offered. Why report this estimate of "hundreds of thousands" at all without corroborating evidence or at least using "alledged" rather than "declared"? This sentence would have never passed muster if submitted by professional field staff (nor would it occur to professional field staff to write this sentence, certainly in this way.)

My first question, upon reading the report, was whether Russia has been allowing ICRC access to the children and to POWs, so I looked that up. ICRC is famously tight-lipped as they must be in order to carry out their mission. Reading between the lines, it appears the Russians have not been as cooperative as they should be about allowing access to all POWs held by Russia. This is flat-out stupid on the Russians' part, in my opinion. This is basic Geneva Conventions stuff.

The question as to whether ICRC has been allowed full access to the children is a bit murkier. It appears they have been able to access at least some children's camps and that Russia is cooperating (at least somewhat) with ICRC tracing requests. I get the impression ICRC is not wholly satisfied with Russian cooperation concerning the children, but that impression could well be wrong. It is clear, at least at time of writing, that the tracing request process was open and ongoing. The number processed so far, however, appeared low to me, one of the factors forming my impression.

Feel free to poke around the ICRC site and draw your own conclusions:


Access to POWs . Note it is unusual for ICRC to disclose dissatisfaction with access to POWs and prudently only do so after they feel all other avenues have been exhausted:


ICRC distributed school supplies for displaced children in Russia who remain with their displaced parent(s):


I have a number of questions about the children but this is already too long, so I will save them for later.

*Decided to save this for another post if I find time to write it. Again, this post already too long.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
Then the following reads like a court document. In fact, with admission of guilt and deliberate intent to cause harm and human suffering to the civilian population.

NATO airstrikes on Yugoslavia's power grid left millions of people without electricity or water service today, bringing the war over Kosovo more directly into the lives of civilians across the country[…]

Officials at the Pentagon and at NATO headquarters in Belgium said allied jets deliberately attacked the power grid, aiming to shut it down more completely and for longer periods than at any time previously in the two-month-old air campaign. U.S. officials estimated the attacks had shut off power to about 80 percent of Serbia[…]

But by increasing the hardship of ordinary citizens, alliance leaders also appeared to be seeking to encourage public disaffection with the government of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic[…]

The attacks also slashed water reserves by damaging pumps and cutting electricity to the few pumps that were still operative. Belgrade's water utility said that reserves of drinking water had been reduced to 8 percent[…]

but senior allied military officials acknowledged that they also want to damage the quality of everyday life so that suffering citizens will start questioning the intransigence of their political leadership.[…]


From Washington Post, May 24, 1999: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/balkans/stories/belgrade052599.htm

Use google to search for wipe outs of the electrical grid in Iraq during the Desert Storm and again in 2010. Among other examples.
1. As stated already I fully support investigations into all wars.
2. Your post looks like whataboutism to me. Whataboutism - Wikipedia
The strange thing is that they (edit: Russians) waited 8-9 months to start inflicting the damage to the power grid.
Not strange -- Russia wanted to integrate Ukraine into the Russian empire. Then there is a clear drawback with destroying infrastructure, since they would have had to spend a lot fixing it afterwards, after it became part of "Russia". Only when they realized how deeply in the manure they were, they changed tactics and started bombing key infrastructure like the power grid etc.

Russia has been bombing healthcare facilities throughout the war. This seems to be very systematic behavior from the Russian side, not just single incidents. One key learning a Swedish volunteer soldier communicated back to Sweden, was that the Swedish armed forces should remove all red crosses since this would indicate a high-value target for the Russians, and attract fire. Russia used the same tactics of attacking healthcare facilities in Syria.

 
Last edited:

KipPotapych

Active Member
1. As stated already I fully support investigations into all wars.
2. Your post looks like whataboutism to me. Whataboutism - Wikipedia
The point was that it wasn’t Russians who wrote the book on warfare and wiping out the enemy’s energy grid, in particular. In numerous previous posts, you referred to the strikes on the Ukrainian energy infrastructure as terrorist attacks, while in reality this has been done practically in every war in the past, likely close to, 100 years. Given, of course, at least one side of the conflict was capable of doing so. In other words, this is a very common and desired practice. In case of Ukraine, which is a huge country and had (perhaps poorly or, rather, not well developed but) an established military industrial complex, these strikes are especially warranted and often preferred to the destruction of assembly and repair facilities, for example.

The particular WP article was presented and quoted in order to show that there was expressed intent for the purpose of the strikes to cause human suffering to the civilian population of Serbia in order to induce some political rumbling within the country in hopes for a regime change, which was not likely going to work. Furthermore, the knowledge that this strategy does not deliver the desired results, in regards to the public dissatisfaction with the parties in charge of their state at the time, but instead increases the hostile moods towards the attacking side, is not new and has been around for decades (I will refrain from citing academic evidence for this because this goes beyond the scope of this thread). Yet, in the example of Serbia, it was done and set yet another precedent for this being a sound and normal strategy in major war efforts; moreover, the intent was to cause human misery without delivering a substantial military advantage.

I see these claims of “I fully support investigations of all war crimes” and similar… I don’t want to say not genuine because you and many others likely really believe that they fully support doing so, but definitely one-sided, righteous, and a little too late also comes to mind and I have not seen this amount of support during the previous western campaigns and definitely haven’t seen any international tribunals set up to investigate the “white knights” and certainly no one is rotting in jail for any of the atrocities committed by the said parties.

Furthermore, there is a great (even though malicious) reason, like I mentioned in the other post, for the military circles in the United States to be strongly pushing against the release of “evidence” of war crimes committed by Russia in the past 13 months.

Not strange -- Russia wanted to integrate Ukraine into the Russian empire. Then there is a clear drawback with destroying infrastructure, since they would have had to spend a lot fixing it afterwards, after it became part of "Russia". Only when they realized how deeply in the manure they were, they changed tactics and started bombing key infrastructure like the power grid etc.
“Russia wanted to integrate Ukraine into the Russian Empire” and the expense of rebuilding the energy infrastructure are not very (or at all) convincing. Long before these strikes began in October, the entire cities were largely destroyed. In particular, cities that were and are planned (by the Russian state) to be an integral part of “the Russian Empire”.

Russia has been bombing healthcare facilities throughout the war. This seems to be very systematic behavior from the Russian side, not just single incidents. One key learning a Swedish volunteer soldier communicated back to Sweden, was that the Swedish armed forces should remove all red crosses since this would indicate a high-value target for the Russians, and attract fire. Russia used the same tactics of attacking healthcare facilities in Syria.

I am not going to comment on the “Swedish volunteer” suggestions, for obvious reasons.

These biased reports do not necessarily depict of the actual situation. That includes the recent report by the HR Council cited above.

Capt. Ironpants did a great job outlining some of the issues and clear bias. They seem to know quite a bit about the organizational structure and requirements for such reports, definitely way more than I do. However, I have read almost every report produced by the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine since the start of hostilities in 2014 and can state that I see a clear difference between every one of those and the ones cited above. For instance, the HR council report highlights that

The Commission has documented a small number of violations committed by Ukrainian armed forces, including likely indiscriminate attacks and two incidents that qualify as war crimes.

This is clearly laughable. And I already outlined what the statement about the energy grid attacks looks like.

The reports you sighted mention all these bombings of hospitals, attacks on healthcare workers, ambulances, health care facilities, etc. Note that all this attacks and shelling were done by the Russian military forces. In general, this war is portrayed, since the beginning, so that only one side, the Russian side, is levelling the cities, only Russian rockets fall on civilian infrastructure killing civilians (except for the most obvious ones: A U.S.-Made Missile Went Astray in Ukraine, Injuring Civilians), violating basic human rights, torture, etc. The Ukrainian authorities provide evidence and stories. Any attempt to counter or suggest otherwise is met with great hostility from the Ukrainian government and outright rejected as Russian propaganda and narrative. The recorded facts about their troops setting up command posts and firing positions in or next to schools, hospitals, residential buildings, other civilian infrastructure (all being war crimes) are all dismissed as untruth and the reporting parties attacked and presented as Russian supporters/agents.

For example, you probably remember this report by Amnesty international: Ukraine: Ukrainian fighting tactics endanger civilians And the unprecedented apology they had issued after the outrage and backlash from the Ukrainian authorities: Statement on publication of press release on Ukrainian fighting tactics The head of the Amnesty International office resigned as a part of the outrage: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/08/07/amnesty-international-ukraine-pokalchuk-resignation/ This is all unprecedented and unheard of.

You clearly have not read any of the couple of dozens reports presented by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights since 2014. I’d imagine if you did, I’d be able to find similar posts by you before 2022. For your convenience, here are a few excerpts from one random such a report that Google fed me first:

The practice of placing military objectives near civilian objects and facilities necessary for the survival of the civilian population continued on both sides of the contact line, increasing the risk of shelling of such objects and facilities. Hospitals and schools were affected by shelling, as well as other types of infrastructure[…]

OHCHR documented cases of summary executions, enforced disappearances, incommunicado detention, arbitrary deprivation of liberty, torture/ill-treatment and conflict- related sexual violence,5 most of which occurred before but could only be documented during the reporting period […]

OHCHR was nevertheless able to document, on both sides of the contact line, the persisting practice of torture, ill-treatment and sexual violence involving conflict-related detainees, often to extract confessions. OHCHR also documented a new development linked to the arrest and detention of citizens by law enforcement under terrorism charges for conducting business and paying ‘taxes’ in territory controlled by armed groups.

The persistent lack of accountability for human rights violations and abuses contributed to the prevailing sense and state of impunity. For instance, little progress was achieved in bringing to justice those responsible for the killings of protesters at Maidan in 2014 and for the 2 May 2014 violence in Odesa.

Ukrainian authorities continued to fail to effectively investigate human rights violations perpetrated by members of the Ukrainian military or security forces. In cases against members of armed groups, however, prosecutions have begun to address specific human rights violations (such as unlawful detention, torture and ill-treatment) rather than relying on more general charges of terrorism[…]


Kind of amazing that these atrocities have basically stopped instead of increasing on the Ukrainian side, in spite of hundreds (thousands?) of “Russian infiltrators” civilians being executed left and right in the first couple of months of the war and other crimes reported by other organizations as well, but also including the UNHCHR as well.
 

KipPotapych

Active Member
Any war is horrible. The staggering size of this conflict is even more so. There is always an aggressor and a defending side. However, there should always be some balance in assessing and reporting of what is actually going, but the balanced view is rather hard to find, in this war in particular.
 

Capt. Ironpants

Active Member
1. As stated already I fully support investigations into all wars.
2. Your post looks like whataboutism to me. Whataboutism - Wikipedia

Not strange -- Russia wanted to integrate Ukraine into the Russian empire. Then there is a clear drawback with destroying infrastructure, since they would have had to spend a lot fixing it afterwards, after it became part of "Russia". Only when they realized how deeply in the manure they were, they changed tactics and started bombing key infrastructure like the power grid etc.

Russia has been bombing healthcare facilities throughout the war. This seems to be very systematic behavior from the Russian side, not just single incidents. One key learning a Swedish volunteer soldier communicated back to Sweden, was that the Swedish armed forces should remove all red crosses since this would indicate a high-value target for the Russians, and attract fire. Russia used the same tactics of attacking healthcare facilities in Syria.

I share your concern for civilians suffering from the horrors and privation of war, and commend you for it. However, I do not consider this "whataboutism". We Amerlcans (and other Westerners) cannot arrogantly condemn other countries for doing exactly the same thing we routinely and deliberately do in war (such as taking out the power grid) without losing credibility and undermining the very principles we purport to uphold. If you want to claim you are enforcing a "rules-based international order", you will get no respect for those rules if you resort to "rules for thee but not for me".

This is coming from someone who spent months freezing in a war zone even after the war was over -- the victorious attackers could have easily restored power but chose not to. Why? To finish off the left-behind elderly and handicapped unable to flee during the massive ethnic cleansing. They even went around looting firewood and smashing the woodstoves of little old grannies and blind people. I used to pile every bit of clothing I owned on top of me in a heap trying to stay warm enough to sleep at night, as I could only use one little stick of firewood per night after the brazen firewood thefts. No worries, we were able to save most of the grannies and handicapped, but it was not easy by any means.

Were the heartless goons who did this ever brought to justice? No. And they did far worse -- as in summarily executing handicapped children in a school for the handicapped and lots and lots of other "gross human rights abuses" (doesn't that phrase sound lame, considering the extreme cruelties?) I won't even describe some of the other horrors they committed. This was all documented by eye witnesses from a number of NATO countries in official reports via several respected international agencies (UN, OSCE, HRW, etc.). But no punishment for the perpetrators. Why? Because the criminals were pets of my country, the USA, and so it was all ignored.

Go to the ICC website and look at who gets prosecuted and who does not. You will see lots of black and brown faces. You will see the names and faces of the those in the Gaddafi regime, but none of the Libyan "rebels" who were documented as having committed horrendous war crimes (including hanging innocent black people from meat hooks in the town square in Benghazi early on), a number of whom belonged to designated terrorist organizations. Isn't that interesting?

Now, you might accuse me of "whataboutism" but that is not what I am up to here. Even after years of bitter experience in various circles of war h*ll in various countries on various continents, I still believe justice should be our goal, no matter how much injustice has occurred in the past. But. Let's concentrate on the war crimes we consider to be war crimes if committed by our own, or risk being rightfully accused of hypocrisy and bringing the whole thing down.. Summary execution, rape, torture, etc. Not attacks on power grids/industrial facilities/bridges, etc., which we publicly proclaim to be legitimate targets. I do admit I am trying to warn you that all is not as it appears in our "rules-based order". The system is rigged., sure, but if our imperative is to speak up to "unrig" it, if we dare, let's start where we enforce it on our own.
 
Last edited:
Top