How were the secession movements in Luhansk and Donetsk anywhere close to resembling the Balkanization process.
Nobody in Luhansk and Donestsk wanted to be part of Russia, there was a seperatist movement, yes but with the aid of people of Strelkov and little green men that suddenly went full violent in 2014. It wasn't organic like, say, the Catalonian independence movement.
Fast forward, and Luhansk and Donetsk were still allied with Russia under the guise that they would get their own Republics out of it. Only, Russia decided to annex them as occupied regions.
Those regions did have secession movements yes, but nobody wanted to be a part of Russia.
Yep, close to no similarities.
- First of all, the Luhansk/Donestsk are not a different ethnicity to Ukrainians. Albanians are a different nation to Serbians, that's why basically Serbians did an ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.
- There is some analogy between Ukraine - Russia negotiations (Minsk agreement) and the Rambouillet conference, I must admit. By the way, if Serbia/Yugoslavia accepted the Rambouillet agreement (which was giving substantial autonomy to Kosovo), there was no way Kosovo ever becomes independent.
- There is nothing similar to Ahtiisari negotiations in Russia-Ukraine. For my Serbian friends who love to forget it (
@Nani Nana), Ahtiisari talks were a series of negotiations (lasted over 2 years) where the Serbian and Kosovo leaders were met to come with a solution. It was done with an UN mandate. It was supposed to be final. It was supposed to be a compromise. It was supposed that the Ahtiisari recommendation was going to be final and accepted by all sides. Except, at the last moment Serbia and Russia backed down and said 'nah, we do not accept anything'. Because from the beginning, similar to Rambouillet conference, they were not negotiating in good faith. For them the entire negotiations was just to postpone everything indefinitely, instead of coming to a solution.
- Oh, Kosovo's declaration of independence was sent to the international court justice, under a UN mandate, with Serbia asking for it. The court said that there was no breaking of the international law. Serbia said, 'we do not care' again. Basically, everything that Serbia has done in negotiations, that in some form or another have been going for over 25 years has been to buy time, with the hope that something changes. When the Serbian want Kosovo back, I always ask them if they are ok with genocide and ethnic cleansing. Because if they ever get it back, that is the only way. To their credit (honesty points), many admit to be ok with it. Which isn't surprising, many (including their president and prime minister and pretty much everyone in their government) still deny Srebrenica genocide.
- But most importantly, and the thing there is completely opposite in these two situations,
the last time I checked Kosovo did not become the 51st US state. Kosovo was always about independence and freedom. Crimea, Luhansk and Donestsk was never about that, no one there wanted to become free and independent. Instead, it was a territorial grab from Russia, invading another country and getting parts of it. It was something that hasn't happened in Europe since the second world war.
So, I find this analogy a bit stupid. I think it is possible to draw some analogies between say Catalonia and Kosovo (if for example Catalonia actually started an insurrection, and Spain started massacring them), but between Kosovo and Ukraine. Sorry, no such thing.
