[mercy_dude]

Even western polls show around 54% population support for Ukraine to join NATO [1]. Not by a huge majority. And I suspect the Eastern parts the number is substantially lower. When Ukraine is discussed, a lot of western media assumes east and west in same terms which is really not the case.

[1] https://www.iri.org/resources/iri-ukraine-poll-shows-support...

[lalaland1125]

I think it's a bit misleading to state that 54% figure without also mentioning that 18% didn't answer the question.

So 54% supported joining NATO and 28% opposed, almost a 2 to 1 ratio of support to opposition.

[friedturkey]

I don't think Ukraine was even being seriously considered for NATO until Russia decided to surround the country with its military recently.

It's like punching someone, some guy passing by tells you to stop, then you justify your reason for punching that person because you were worried that the person who told you to stop was going to attack you.

Nobody was going to do anything to say anything to you if you hadn't gone out of your way to attack someone.

[dragonwriter]

> I don't think Ukraine was even being seriously considered for NATO until Russia decided to surround the country with its military recently.

NATO, in a statement from the NATO Summit, explicitly indicated last June (so, before the late 2021 encirclement) the intention that Ukraine would join the alliance through the Membership Action Plan.

This reiterated a 2008 policy statement that had effectively been shelved by the Yanukovych governments anti-NATO position, but never formally restated after a more NATO-friendly government had emerged in Ukraine and sought to advance towards membership.

[friedturkey]

Do you think Russia's funding of terrorist groups in the eastern portions of Ukraine known for atrocities against civilians could've influenced that decision?

Or maybe going back farther Russia's sudden seizure of Crimea with a fraudulent vote with 97% in support could've been what made Ukraine nervous that they'd be invaded and seek support from other countries?

Or maybe going back a little farther to the USSR's atrocities against Ukraine, including Holodomor--the outright genocide of the Ukrainian people--might've been the thing that makes Ukraine want to ally with literally any country but Russia?

The idea that Ukraine should want to associate with Russia is the most bizarre political claim there ever was. Their history is nothing but being ravaged and literally raped by Russia, so them considering joining NATO is nothing but a big "no shit". Putin deserves to be surrounded for his actions. All he's done is shown that the Russia's intentions to destroy the Ukrainian people haven't changed in 100 years.

[mercy_dude]

A big part of the general population of Ukraine never wanted to do anything with NATO, even at the peak of the crisis western backed poll found the support for NATO only around 54%. Your count of history of Ukraine being raped and ravaged by Russia is generally not supported by large part of Ukrainian population, as supported even the western polls.

> Do you think Russia's funding of terrorist groups in the eastern portions of Ukraine known for atrocities against civilians could've influenced that decision?

What? Eastern Ukraine including Donbass and Crimea has a large majority of Russian speakers with ties with Russia. Ukrainian parliament decided to deny minority languages meant to provoke Russia http://www.iconnectblog.com/2021/04/minority-rights-ukraines...

[lalaland1125]

> NATO only around 54%

And opposition to NATO was only 28%. Twice as many people want to join NATO as those who oppose joining.

That's a huge majority and the way you are trying to undersell it means you are either being intentionally misleading or didn't understand how the poll worked.

[friedturkey]

America has a large portion of English speakers. It historically had a large portion of people with direct ties to the UK. Haiti had plenty of people with ties to France and still has French speakers. Taiwan has Chinese speakers and people with family in China.

There's a clear pattern here. But Russia pays people to pretend that Russian speakers means it's their land to stabilize. When in reality, it's a completely irrelevant statement.

[DeathArrow]

Maybe you read some history? To learn how parts of Russia, Hungary, Romania, Slovacia and Poland were forcefully integrated into Ucrainei along with their respective populations by Soviet leaders?

[ailef]

> Do you think Russia's funding of terrorist groups in the eastern portions of Ukraine known for atrocities against civilians could've influenced that decision?

You are maybe confused with neo-Nazi Azov battalion and co. also funded and trained by the USA, which have committed documented war crimes against civilians.

[friedturkey]

The very first paragraph of Wikipedia even says Azov formed as a consequence of something.

That reason? To push Russian forces out of their country.

If Russia weren't terrorizing the region, Azov would not exist. Russia pays to astroturf the claim that Azov is some thing that appeared out of nowhere when it's a group that formed directly to keep Russia and its violent militias out.

[OrvalWintermute]

The Azov Battalion was formed out of at least three groups, Patriot of Ukraine [1], the Social-National Assembley [2] , and Right Sector [3]. Right Sector, or Right Sektor, was the one most talked about in the West PRIOR to any invasion, mainly because they were neo-nazis. While I have spent a good amount of time in Ukraine prior to any of these events, if you want see something on it, watch the VICE Media video on Right Sektor. This issue was not politicized at the time.

Since all of their foundings predate the Russian re-entry into Ukraine, I think your history is a little bit wrong.

When the CIA supported coup happened in Kiev, and a Pro-Russian leader forcefully deposed, Pro-Russian forces in Ukraine were burned alive [4]. This is just one of many atrocities that happened . Given that like half the country is Russian, most of which is on the East, this gave Russia Casus Belli to seize territory that was historically Russian, and to protect the Ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

So, long before Ukraine became a client state of the US State Department, and Rich Oligarchs supported by the US formed nationalist groups into Ukrainian elite units, these neo-fascists existed. Media on the left, center and right confirm this, to deny it is merely convenient revisionism.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_of_Ukraine

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social-National_Assembly

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Sector

[4] https://www.exposingtruth.com/media-wont-tell-odessa-massacr...

[ailef]

I can't help but notice that instead of condemning Azov crimes and recognizing that they too are a terrorizing force in the region, you conveniently blamed their existence on Russia. The hypocrisy here is blaring. We are now at the point of tolerating, hiding and in some extreme cases even justify the crimes committed by these people. All the while forgetting the fact that the US has provided them with military training, money and weapons.

In fact, if the US can interfere in a country that's thousands miles away by funding extremist military groups, I find it way more legitimate for Russia to fund Russian separatists in the Donbas region, which has historically had strong ties with Russia and whose population would rather stay there than join the "Western" side. It's also interesting how everybody always talks about self-determination, but only in the case where people want to "self-determine" themselves in the right direction. I would be interested in knowing why it doesn't apply in this case.

To conclude: the Ukrainian army along with this these neo-Nazi groups (that have been effectively integrated into the army) has destroyed several hospitals, schools and other civilian infrastructure and killed more than 3000 civilians since 2014 in the Donbas. Ignoring this situation and blaming everything on Russia is one of the reason that we are in this situation right now, and surely one very myopic way of assessing what's going on.

[mercy_dude]

> I don't think Ukraine was even being seriously considered for NATO until Russia decided to surround the country with its military recently.

West backed Ukraine leadership applied for NATO membership as early as 2008.

http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-287949.html

[DeathArrow]

And Putin came personally to 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest to tell that Russia won't tolerate this.

[dillondoyle]

polling is way higher on EU trade and EU membership though and strong support !== necessarily mean strong opposition.

Just a couple google sources before the invasion put it at 69%, 57%, 58% join EU versus 21% wanting the opposite of an economic union with ussr countries.

IDK xtabs or if there is a poll with strong/lean scale, but a strong plurality above 50% is pretty big regardless see another example last link below showing decent majority strong yes with relatively small no.

Main point is that NATO wasn't even on the table for Ukraine.

The first invasion happened after the Ukrainian people chose a new government because Yanukovych refused to sign the EU trade agreement.

I think a lot of countries in their position (like finland) the citizens were rightly worried about poking the nuclear bear by trying to join NATO.

There are more than a few articles and polls out now showing the sentiment has changed now with this recent war.

Finland for example is now above 53% join nato for while only 28% against.

Another example of lopsided enthusiasm painting a different picture of support.

https://www.iri.org/resources/iri-ukraine-poll-shows-support...

https://www.statista.com/chart/26933/ukrainians-survey-nato-...

https://www.eureporter.co/world/ukraine/2021/03/16/ukrainian...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/03/03/business/finnish-swed...

[DeathArrow]

I don't think Ucraine will ever be a member of the EU since that requires the agreement of all member countries.

[dillondoyle]

Maybe. We'll see how this shakes out.

One point I was trying to make was Russia's actions have galvanized support in the opposite direction Putin wanted.

I don't know why what I contributed is worth downvotes. I provided sources showing a difference in EU support compared to NATO support to parent comment and gave reasonable arguments that even a majority in mid 50s of support does not mean the opposition is -100*-1 it's usually way less.