Traffic on the single bridge that links Russia to Moscow-annexed Crimea and serves as a key supply route for the Kremlin’s forces in the war with Ukraine came to a standstill on Monday after one of its sections was blown up, killing a couple and wounding their daughter.

The RBC Ukraine news agency reported that explosions were heard on the bridge, with Russian military bloggers reporting two strikes.

RBC Ukraine and another Ukrainian news outlet Ukrainska Pravda said the attack was planned jointly by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and the Ukrainian navy, and involved sea drones.

  • kescusay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    147
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    At this point, any Russian families remaining in Crimea really should leave for their own safety. They know full well they live on stolen land.

      • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        69
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What? Do you have anything that shows the demographics significantly changed at all? The population was 76% russian in 2014 before Russia took it. You have data that shows that significantly increased?

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          42
          ·
          1 year ago

          No it was at 67.9%, up from 60.4% in 2001 down from 67% in 1989. Up from 6.6% in 1850 when Russification really started. Also note the suspicious absence of Tatars during the times of the Soviet Union and their return afterwards. And TBH I trust those censuses 2014 onwards about as much as I trust Russian referenda.

          Also, “people speak Russian at home” is not, by a long shot, the same thing as “want to be part of Russia” much less “want to live under <currenttsar>'s boot” or “want to suffer yet another Holodomor”. Crimea had a referendum just as the rest of Ukraine did and it didn’t want to be part of Russia by a good margin. The question of “part of Ukraine or independent” was more split, but that turned towards “part of Ukraine” as Ukraine failed to treat Crimea badly and independence would be difficult for such a small country in such an exposed situation.

          • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            34
            ·
            1 year ago

            And TBH I trust those censuses 2014 onwards about as much as I trust Russian referenda.

            Then just speak to some people physically in Crimea? You’re on the internet it’s not difficult to seek out and have conversations with people in different places in the world.

            but that turned towards “part of Ukraine” as Ukraine failed to treat Crimea badly and independence would be difficult for such a small country in such an exposed situation.

            Ukraine did treat Crimea badly though? Are you completely unaware of the political turmoil in Ukraine prior to any of this? Increasing ethnic persecution against Russians and finally banning the russian language is what started the separatism in these regions.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              21
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Then just speak to some people physically in Crimea? You’re on the internet it’s not difficult to seek out and have conversations with people in different places in the world.

              Of course. Because that’s totally not something the FSB would do to sniff out partisans and shit. There’s a war going on in case you haven’t noticed and truth is always its first victim.

              Increasing ethnic persecution against Russians and finally banning the russian language is what started the separatism in these regions.

              Neither was there prosecution nor was the Russian language banned. The Ukrainian army largely operates in Russian, FFS.

              I suggest you have a good look at the reliability of whatever place you get your information from.

              • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                13
                ·
                1 year ago

                Of course. Because that’s totally not something the FSB would do to sniff out partisans and shit. There’s a war going on in case you haven’t noticed and truth is always its first victim.

                This is just closed mindedness. You refuse to take on any new information, you have made up your mind what the situation is and utterly refuse to even consider listening to anyone with first hand experience.

                Neither was there prosecution nor was the Russian language banned. The Ukrainian army largely operates in Russian, FFS.

                No. This is just factually incorrect. The flashpoint that started the separatism was the repeal of the language laws that made Russian (and many others) one of the many state languages in these regions (majority russian ethnicity regions). This occurred in 2014 immediately following the Maidan coup/revolution.

                This law change by the new far right bandera supporting government was the final straw in a long line of things that had led up to it, and was what created popular support for violent separatism among the local populations. Many people saw it as existentially important to separate themselves from Ukraine as they believed the Bandera supporters sought to kill or deport them all.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The flashpoint that started the separatism was the repeal of the language laws that made Russian (and many others) one of the many state languages in these regions (majority russian ethnicity regions).

                  What you’re citing there is a question to the Commission, not a research paper. The guy posing that question? A Greek Nazi, becoming MEP on a Golden Dawn ticket. Here’s the answer:

                  The Commission is not aware of any ban on use of minority languages in Ukraine. In February 2014, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a law, revoking the language policy law of 2012, which has however been effectively vetoed by the then Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov, and therefore has not entered into force.

                  The law adopted in 2012, giving the local and regional authorities the right to determine regional languages in addition to Ukrainian for contacts with public bodies, has been largely positively assessed by the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe in its opinion. At the same time, the opinion noted: ‘the question remains whether, having regard to the specific situation in Ukraine, there are sufficient guarantees, in the current Draft Law, for the consolidation of the Ukrainian language as the sole State language, and of the role it has to play in the Ukrainian multilinguistic society.’

                  Yes, the Ukrainian government has been actively trying to make Ukrainian the de facto, not just de jure, lingua franca of Ukraine, to halt secondary effects of Russification.


                  I’m not even going to address anything else you said. A Tankie relying on hallucinations of a Nazi to make points, how fucking classic.

                  Learn some research skills and source criticism and then maybe you’ll be able to contribute to discussions.

                  • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    What you’re citing there is a question to the Commission, not a research paper. The guy posing that question? A Greek Nazi, becoming MEP on a Golden Dawn ticket. Here’s the answer:

                    Yeah this was just pointed out to me. Which is why I went and dug out some other stuff instead, I’m not particularly fond of relying on that one and won’t be using it in future.

                    A couple of western media articles discussing the split the existing language law was causing in the country:

                    2000: Ukraine wages war on Russian language

                    2012: Russian language debate splits Ukraine

                    2012: Ukrainians(far right) protest against Russian language law

                    2014(when the law actually occurred): Ukraine Revokes Linguistic Rights

                    This last one is the most interesting, also 2014 from Time: Many Ukrainians Want Russia To Invade

                    Within two days of taking power, the revolutionary leaders passed a bill revoking the rights of Ukraine’s regions to make Russian an official language alongside Ukrainian. That outraged the Russian-speaking half of the country, and the ban was quickly lifted. But the damage was done. With that one ill-considered piece of legislation, the new leaders had convinced millions of ethnic Russians that a wave of repression awaited them. So it was no surprise on Friday when a livid mob in Crimea attacked a liberal lawmaker who came to reason with them. Struggling to make his case over the screaming throng, Petro Poroshenko was chased back to his car amid cries of “fascist!”

                    Is this article a hallucination too? This aggressive response is quite unnecessary. Have a more academic conversation.

            • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              1 year ago

              There is a loooong road from “has political turmoil” to “wants to be part of Russia.”

              Florida has political turmoil. Doesn’t mean they want to be part of Spain because some people there speak Spanish.

                • athelard@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  We’ll take it. The land is valuable, and the current residents will voluntarily flee to the rest of the USA, horrorified by our free healthcare.

              • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Sure. But I assure you that when russian ethnicity people read twitter and see nafo and other morons (like half this comment section) saying all russians should die blah blah blah it only ends up pushing them to russia for safety. Even Navalny’s people who I despise say this:

                Like, what do you people expect the russians in Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk to think exactly when they read half the shit they’ve seen from libs on Twitter, reddit, etc etc who have all behaved indistinguishably from fascists in their bloodthirsty calls for russian blood? They see it as attacks on themselves, not the russian army, not putin, they see it as ethnic threats and it has pushed fencesitting russians with family in both ukraine and russia (about half are mixed families) over to the russian side because they just don’t feel the west can be trusted. They see them as wanting all russians dead, which you can hardly blame them for with all the behaviour you’ve surely seen online.

                • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  People are mean on the Internet? People are also mad at Russia because they’ve invaded a neighbor. People were calling out “death to America” for invading Iraq. It’s how the world works.

                  • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Sure. But the point is that all those ethnic russians in all three of these regions, who are the majority of the population and were the majority before 2014 by a large margin, all have been pushed to russia because of it.

                    The political reality in these regions is that while before there were some mixed views on the issue, particularly among those with mixed families, now there are almost none among the majority russian ethnic population. Which is something of a problem if you consider yourself to believe in democratic outcomes.

          • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ehh besides the rude ones most of this is alright. I think only 2 people were particularly rude and they got blocked so meh. Some other conversations here actually got quite interesting @barsoap@lemm.ee seems mostly alright once we get off the topic of the war.

    • sinovictorchan@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      You mean that Ukrainians who are ethnically and linguistically Russians and who had been residing in Crimea before the formation of the current Ukraine country should have no political righst nor property ownership rights?

    • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      84
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Crimea is 76% russian. It was almost 70% russian before 2014 and it is around 76% russian today. Almost all of these people lived there already.

      • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        86
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Russian speaking != Russian. A majority in Crimea voted for independence from Russia in 1991 and that desire for independence from Russia did not lessen between 1991 and 2014 when Russia’s imperial war of conquest against Ukraine began.

        • Filthmontane@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          51
          ·
          1 year ago

          A majority of Russians rose up in opposition against the Ukrainian government during the Ukrainian revolution in support of Russian annexation. You can’t just ignore that a large number of people in Crimea were onboard with annexation.

          • andyburke@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            30
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Certainly can, and will! Nothing justifies another country just annexing that territory. Nothing. No amount of you talking will justify it. No number of people there who speak Russian justify it. There is no justification.

            • Filthmontane@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              26
              ·
              1 year ago

              So, you don’t care about the people or how they feel about anything? So when the people in Crimea felt they were being treated unfairly by the Ukrainian government, they should’ve just put up with it instead of standing up for themselves? With that attitude, the US would still be a British territory.

          • fidodo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Then do it democratically through referendums. An illegal war is inexcusable. Claiming land is yours because there are people from your country there is textbook fascist strategy.

            • Stovetop@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              To offer an example, this was Hitler’s basis for invading and annexing the Sudetenland, part of what was then Czechoslovakia.

          • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’m going to quote this next year when Xi annexes Sakalin.

            Russia has been too large for too long, it should have been split into a dozen separate countries centuries ago.

            • Packet@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah man, I agree. USA should do so too. Ya know, too big of a country eh? Texas and Florida should separate and California following them as an example. Especially California, I hate California.

              • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It’s funny you say that, because both California and texas each have a larger GDP than russia by themselves.

                Of course that was before the catastrophic failure of a war, now I’m sure Russia’s smaller than Florida too.

                BTW, it’s pronounced “Knee-how”, just to help you for next year.

        • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          64
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Sure. But that doesn’t really change the census data much.

          This applies to Donetsk and Luhansk too. All three of these regions were ethnic majority Russian, and the separatism kicked off when the Maidan government banned the Russian language in official government usage (schools, local institutions etc).

      • kescusay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        54
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        As others have pointed out, Crimea is not 82% Russian. The majority of the populace speaks Russian, but a shared language does not indicate a shared culture. They don’t want to be part of Russia, and were illegally invaded.

        • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          81
          ·
          1 year ago

          Crimea wasn’t “invaded”. Russia was already there as it leased the port and officially managed it for military use already. That’s why there was no fighting. They already ran the checkpoints, they already were the entire military presence in the region. The changeover from “this is Ukraine” to “this is Russia now” was entirely the signing of papers and changed absolutely nothing about the presence in the region or the average day to day. They certainly took it over, but to say it was invaded is somewhat misleading, more of a “we’ve decided that this is ours now”.

          • kescusay@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            56
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This is a gross and flagrant distortion of events in Crimea leading up to the illegal annexation. It leaves out the fact that the operation of the checkpoints was still subject to Ukrainian governmental oversight, the fact that prior to the take-over, Russia illegally brought soldiers in unmarked uniforms over the border (the “little green men”), and the fact that the “changeover” was far from violence-free, let alone just a “signing of papers.”

            • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              52
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The denial of reality going on here is absurd. Pre 2014 I know they operated the checkpoints because I went to Crimea for 2 weeks in 2009. I’m not saying that there wasn’t also fuckery involved but denying the reality of events is nonsensical. There is even a vice documentary that shows just how casual the transition was. It’s extremely painful discussing these topics with people online whose only understanding of these regions comes through the lens of this war.

              • kescusay@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                24
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                I never said Russia didn’t operate the checkpoints. But prior to 2014, Crimea was indisputably Ukrainian territory, and Russia operated security checkpoints inside Ukraine at Ukraine’s discretion.

                No one is claiming that the annexation of Crimea involved violence at the scale of the current war, but it was not non-violent, either. Characterizing it as just “signing of papers” is false.

                It’s extremely painful discussing these topics with people online whose only understanding of these regions comes through the lens of this war.

                What other lens should we look at the annexation through? It was clearly the early stages of this war.

                • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  28
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m not saying it wasn’t Ukrainian territory. I’m saying that the presence there was 100% russian military because it was functionally operated as their military port.

                  This is precisely why there was no battle over it, no deaths, no nothing. Just “this is russia now” and continued operation of it as they always had but with different flags.

                  What other lens should we look at the annexation through? It was clearly the early stages of this war.

                  I’d much prefer a non-war lens of the place and how cool it is. Most people in america hadn’t even heard of it until the annexation, it’s very unfortunate.

                  I don’t think calling it the early stages of this war is quite accurate but it’s not really that important and kinda gets into unnecessary semantics. The war probably wouldn’t be happening if the Minsk agreement had been kept. Russia were never going to let Crimea go because they needed it as a military port but they avoided Donetsk and Luhansk up until the Minsk agreement failed. If they had taken these regions in 2014 it would have been a breeze for them as Ukraine had no military to speak of, which is why the civil war was fought by the nazi volunteer batallions (azov, right sector, etc etc). Ukraine’s military was ramped up between 2014 and 2021. They did not really have much of anything until the 2016 Stategic Defense Bulletin followed by the State Program for the Development of the Armed Forces (2017-2020). In 2014 the military was only 90k active personnel with over half being civilian staff.

                  • kescusay@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    16
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    We’d all prefer a non-war lens of Crimea. You’re right, it was a cool and interesting place, and hopefully still will be when the war is over.

                    But Russia has no say over whether another country’s territory will be used as Russia’s military port. The fact is, Ukraine was amenable to hosting Russia’s military there, so long as Russia didn’t try to actually own the land, but they’ve forfeited their right to use it now.

                    Ultimately, Russia’s military will be ousted from Crimea along with the rest of Ukraine, and that will be that. Had they never annexed it or escalated to open warfare, they would still be operating there freely today, with a much friendlier Ukraine happily hosting them.

      • galloog1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is an ethnic argument, further pointing to the idea that you are making distinctly fascist points in this thread.

        • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It is impossible to talk about a genocide without talking about ethnicity. Stop being so pigheaded. I’m going to block you now.