might as well add this so you can read both of them. without further ado "in my opinion..."

The European Union finds itself in a perilous position, akin to a ship sailing toward an iceberg while its 27 captains debate the appropriate course of action. The vessel continues moving forward, propelled by bureaucratic inertia rather than strategic direction. This metaphor encapsulates the fundamental weakness of EU foreign policy architecture - a system paralyzed by its own design rather than any lack of awareness or intent.

The core mechanical flaw remains the exhaustive consensus requirement among sovereign members. Like a financial institution burdened by compliance checks or the United Nations' structural limitations, the EU's decision-making process creates procedural gridlock when facing urgent challenges. This system's failure is demonstrated by clear historical patterns: the same mechanism that allowed Poland and the Baltic states to block Chancellor Merkel's 2021 initiative for EU-Russia talks continues today as Hungary routinely vetoes actions proposed by the von der Leyen Commission.

This institutional paralysis created a vacuum filled by a power with fundamentally different strategic priorities. Washington's push for hard decoupling from Russia and confrontation with China serves American interests, yet forces Europe into a Cold War-style framework that undermines its economic stability and strategic independence. The EU's structural inability to formulate a cohesive alternative has left it passively adopting policies detrimental to its own long-term interests.

Globally, this paralysis is accelerating the shift toward a multipolar world. While authoritarian powers like China and Russia, and even large democracies like India, can act with a single, fluid voice—responding to crises with decisive speed—the EU remains mired in debate. Observers in Beijing and New Delhi do not see a cohesive strategic pole, but a collection of 27 often-divergent voices. Consequently, they are building a new world order where European influence is diluted, and Brussels is sidelined as an irrelevant bureaucracy rather than respected as a decisive leader.

The conclusion remains inescapable: the EU's bureaucratic machinery, obsessed with internal consensus, has become self-defeating. By allowing a single veto to block action, the system designed for unity now guarantees strategic paralysis. Like the ship with too many captains, the bloc remains on a collision course until it reforms its governance to balance consensus with the capacity for decisive action in times of crisis.

However, the very nature of the problem—the requirement for unanimous agreement among 27 states to alter a system that grants each a veto—makes such fundamental reform politically impossible. The EU is trapped in a paradox from which it cannot self-extricate. Therefore, in the absence of the reforms it so desperately needs, the current trajectory is set. The ship of European diplomacy, with its 27 captains, will continue its forward momentum until it meets the iceberg.

This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 8 2025 03:32am

Dont wanna start with 1914? *ferdia

the failures of today are institutional, they are uniquely 21st century.

But wouldnt it make more sense to start with november revolution? Maybe people will more understand

Just a thought

1918 i meant, from "ukrainian" perspective

This post was edited by Bananii on Oct 8 2025 10:38am

Can you, please, expand? Probably, you mentioned the November Revolution in Germany, 1918.

yes ok here - from Ukrainian Perspective. I trust you understand what that means.

The Unfinished Project: Ukraine's Century-Long Struggle for Independence, 1918-Present

Introduction

The modern history of Ukraine is often framed as a post-1991 phenomenon, an unexpected consequence of the Soviet Union's collapse. However, to view it as such is to ignore a century of continuous struggle, resistance, and the persistent pursuit of sovereign statehood. The period from 1918 to the present day constitutes a single, protracted narrative: Ukraine's unfinished project of building a stable, independent national state free from external domination. This paper argues that the declaration of independence in 1991 was not a beginning, but a critical resumption of a project violently interrupted in the 1920s. By tracing the arc from the revolutionary independence of 1918 through the brutal decades of Soviet rule to the national reawakening and the current war for survival, we can understand contemporary Ukraine not as a new state, but as an ancient nation finally completing its long revolution.

I. The First Independence: Hope and Catastrophe (1918-1921)

As the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires crumbled at the end of World War I, the window for independence swung open. From the chaos, two Ukrainian states emerged:

The Ukrainian People's Republic (UNR): Proclaimed in Kyiv, it descended from the Central Rada and fought for a democratic, socialist republic. The West Ukrainian People's Republic (ZUNR): Declared in the former Austro-Hungarian territories of Eastern Galicia, with its capital in Lviv. The two republics nominally unified in 1919, but it was a union under siege. The UNR, as suggested in the prompt, found its most definitive moment in late 1918 when the Directory, led by Symon Petliura, overthrew the German-backed Hetmanate and restored a genuinely Ukrainian government in Kyiv. However, this revived republic was immediately thrust into a "War of Many Fronts," simultaneously fighting: The Bolshevik Red Army: Which sought to reintegrate Ukraine into a new Soviet empire. The White Army: Russian monarchists who denied the very concept of Ukrainian identity and sought a "one and indivisible Russia." Poland: Which had its own imperial ambitions in Western Ukraine. Anarchist bands like Nestor Makhno's.

Despite diplomatic efforts and fierce military campaigns, the Ukrainian state was exhausted and outmatched. By 1921, the Peace of Riga treaty between Poland and Soviet Russia effectively partitioned Ukrainian lands between them. The UNR government went into exile, and the dream of independence was brutally extinguished.

II. The Soviet Erasure and Resistance (1922-1991)

The subsequent seven decades were a period of systematic assault on Ukrainian national identity, punctuated by fierce resistance. The 1920s: Ukrainianization and Its Reversal: The Soviet Union initially pursued a policy of korenizatsiia (indigenization), allowing the promotion of Ukrainian language and culture. This brief flowering was a strategic concession. By the 1930s, Stalin violently reversed course. The Holodomor (1932-33): This artificial famine, engineered by the Soviet state through the forced confiscation of grain, was a deliberate act of terror and genocide. It killed millions of Ukrainians, broke the back of the peasantry—the traditional bearers of national culture—and crushed the spirit of resistance. Political Terror and Russification: The Soviet secret police (NKVD) systematically targeted the Ukrainian intelligentsia, cultural leaders, and religious figures in the "Executed Renaissance." Post-World War II saw further waves of repression and a relentless policy of Russification, suppressing the Ukrainian language and promoting a myth of a unified "Soviet people." Persistent Dissent: Despite the terror, resistance never died. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) fought a partisan war against the Soviets into the 1950s. The Brezhnev era saw the rise of the dissident movement (shistdesiatnyky), with figures like Viacheslav Chornovil jailed for defending human and national rights.

The Chornobyl disaster of 1986 became a powerful catalyst for the final phase of the independence movement. The Soviet state's criminal negligence and secrecy exposed the bankruptcy of the entire system and galvanized public anger, giving rise to a mass environmental and national movement, Rukh.

III. The "Second" Independence and the Post-Soviet Struggle (1991-2013)

On December 1, 1991, following the failed Moscow coup, an overwhelming 92% of Ukrainians voted in a referendum to confirm their independence from the Soviet Union. This was not a secession, but a dissolution. However, the independent state that emerged was weak and plagued by the legacy of Soviet rule: Weak Institutions: The state was built on corrupt, Soviet-era foundations. Economic Collapse: The transition from a command economy was devastating. Identity Divide: A political and cultural cleavage persisted between the more nationally-conscious West/Center and the more Russified East/South. Russian Leverage: Moscow maintained immense influence through energy supplies, economic ties, and the manipulation of these internal divisions.

The Orange Revolution of 2004 was a pivotal moment. It was a massive, peaceful civic uprising against a fraudulent election, demonstrating a deep public desire for democracy, rule of law, and a pro-European course. However, the subsequent government's failure to deliver on its promises led to disillusionment and the 2010 election of the pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovych.

IV. The War of Sovereignty and National Consolidation (2014-Present)

The Revolution of Dignity (Maidan) in 2013-14 marked a definitive break. When Yanukovych reneged on an EU association agreement under Russian pressure, Ukrainians again poured into the streets. This time, the protest was not just for clean elections but for a fundamental European choice of values: democracy over kleptocracy, dignity over servitude. The revolution's success was met with a swift and brutal Russian response: The Annexation of Crimea (Feb-March 2014): A swift military operation followed by an illegal "referendum," resulting in Russia's seizure of Ukrainian territory. The War in Donbas (2014-2022): Russia fomented and directly supported a pseudo-separatist war in eastern Ukraine, leading to over 14,000 deaths before 2022. These events acted as a tragic but powerful catalyst for national consolidation. The "identity divide" began to collapse as Russian aggression forced a reevaluation of history and allegiance. The Ukrainian army, initially decimated, was rebuilt into a formidable fighting force with volunteer battalions and Western support.

V. The Full-Scale Invasion and the Fight for Existence (2022-Onward)

Russia's full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022, was the logical culmination of its policy to deny Ukraine's right to exist as a sovereign, European nation. It was an attempt to finish the project that Stalin began in the 1920s. Instead of a swift victory, Russia met with stunning Ukrainian resilience and the legendary defense of Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Mariupol. This war has irrevocably transformed Ukraine: National Identity: The war has forged an unbreakable, civic Ukrainian identity, transcending language and region. Geopolitical Reorientation: Ukraine is now a formal candidate for EU membership and is integrated with NATO, a future once deemed impossible. Historical Reckoning: The country is actively de-Sovietizing and de-Russifying its public space and historical narrative, directly confronting the legacy of the 20th century.

Conclusion

The journey from the halls of the Ukrainian People's Republic in 1918 to the trenches of the Donbas in 2024 is one continuous story. The declaration of 1991 was not a genesis but a restoration. The current war is not a discrete conflict but the latest, most violent phase in a long struggle against an imperial neighbor that has refused to accept Ukraine's sovereignty. The "Ukrainian project" that began a century ago—to build a secure, independent, and democratic state—remains unfinished. Yet, through immense sacrifice, the Ukrainian people have moved from being the object of history to its subject, finally completing the revolution their ancestors began in the fires of 1918. Their ultimate victory would mark the closing of a painful historical cycle and the definitive triumph of a nation's will to exist.

Ferdia - obviously thats Deepseek without ANY nuance. still, worth reading i guess. I should probably zoom in on the individual periods.

This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 8 2025 11:30am

To me this is an illustration that Russia could have easily done this for the last 3 years and didn’t. After what a year of Ukraine going after Russias energy, Russia claps back in a big way and within 1-2 weeks cripples Ukraine’s energy




https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1976212000955855340?s=46

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Oct 9 2025 10:43am

I mean, just listen to the missiles at the end.



This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 9 2025 10:53am

Intersonic missiles going by two with a 0.5 m gap? "Lil' Oreshnik"? Those look more like HIMARS/Tornado-S. The "intersonic" part is on the one who uploaded the video.

CBC casually interviews a third assault brigade “warrior” with swastikas tattooed all over - complaining about Russian agents. You cannot make this up.





This post was edited by Malopox on Oct 10 2025 05:32am