I've taken an occasional interest in your blog because I briefly lived in Malaysia many years ago, and found some posts interesting.
But I have to say that I found this posting on Ukraine objectionable for reasons I will not be able to fully articule this late on a Sunday night in NY, USA.
When I checked The Economist's Global Democracy Index link you provide I came to this lead article:
U.S. remains a ‘flawed democracy’ in annual rankings
Maybe not worth fighting for or defending as well?
All democracy's are flawed and Ukraine has been on htis track far less than the U.S. So, the fairly transparent though unstated suggestion that the West's support for Ukraine is unwarranted because of democractic flaws there, and worse, is perhaps misguided, because unresolved issues from the breakup on the Soviet union are insufficiently appreciated by outsiders, is quite lame itself.
I'll wager that's far from the conclusion the CFR reached, another source you cite, and far closer to the narrative you want to put down - that of an invading tyrant. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the extensive writings about the demonstration threat that Ukraine has posed to Putin's regime (and similar Slav society) precisely for breaking away from the autocracy that still prevails in Russia and in Russian society. Ukraine has changed dramatically since 1991, more again as a result of 2014, and more profoundly since the Russian invasion nine months ago. I believe in this war's aftermath, with Russia's ignominous defeat, Ukraine will emerge irrevocably even more democratic.
To be blunt your post seems to support an ill-informed view of the conflict. Perhaps that because it's so clearly just plain lazy, flinging at readers a few sources, I'm not sure you have actually read. Certainly you don't demonstrate that you have by offering considered opinions about them. Maybe you'll do a bit more reading and take another swing at this.
What a brilliant post Mr.Hunter! Thank you.
Thank you
I've taken an occasional interest in your blog because I briefly lived in Malaysia many years ago, and found some posts interesting.
But I have to say that I found this posting on Ukraine objectionable for reasons I will not be able to fully articule this late on a Sunday night in NY, USA.
When I checked The Economist's Global Democracy Index link you provide I came to this lead article:
U.S. remains a ‘flawed democracy’ in annual rankings
Maybe not worth fighting for or defending as well?
All democracy's are flawed and Ukraine has been on htis track far less than the U.S. So, the fairly transparent though unstated suggestion that the West's support for Ukraine is unwarranted because of democractic flaws there, and worse, is perhaps misguided, because unresolved issues from the breakup on the Soviet union are insufficiently appreciated by outsiders, is quite lame itself.
I'll wager that's far from the conclusion the CFR reached, another source you cite, and far closer to the narrative you want to put down - that of an invading tyrant. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the extensive writings about the demonstration threat that Ukraine has posed to Putin's regime (and similar Slav society) precisely for breaking away from the autocracy that still prevails in Russia and in Russian society. Ukraine has changed dramatically since 1991, more again as a result of 2014, and more profoundly since the Russian invasion nine months ago. I believe in this war's aftermath, with Russia's ignominous defeat, Ukraine will emerge irrevocably even more democratic.
To be blunt your post seems to support an ill-informed view of the conflict. Perhaps that because it's so clearly just plain lazy, flinging at readers a few sources, I'm not sure you have actually read. Certainly you don't demonstrate that you have by offering considered opinions about them. Maybe you'll do a bit more reading and take another swing at this.