Ukrainian genocide

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Askold
Member
Posts: 1815
Joined: 23 Mar 2002 08:30
Location: Ukraine

Post by Askold » 12 Jan 2007 16:21

Kunikov:

First two are nationalist Ukrainian sites

- I am curious as to what makes up a "nationalist" site?

User avatar
Kunikov
Member
Posts: 4454
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 19:23

Post by Kunikov » 12 Jan 2007 17:12

Askold wrote:Kunikov:

First two are nationalist Ukrainian sites

- I am curious as to what makes up a "nationalist" site?


From the first site: The Kremlin used the famine as a political weapon to destroy Ukrainian aspirations for independence.

That's nationalist.

Second site: The main goal of this artificial famine was to break the spirit of the Ukrainian farmer/peasant and to force them into collectivization. The famine was also used as an effective tool to break the renaissance of Ukrainian culture that was occuring under approval of the communist government in Ukraine.

That's nationalist.

Sergey
Banned
Posts: 931
Joined: 05 May 2006 14:23
Location: Moscow

Post by Sergey » 12 Jan 2007 19:25

Yes, there was a famine in Ukraine in 30's. But was it a genocide? I'm not sure.

My mother-in-law was a little girl but he knows what really happened from words of her parents. Soldiers and agents of NKVD with dogs (mainly Ukrainians btw) searched every corner in houses and barns. The parents tried to hide some food in her bed. They said to the agents: 'a girl is ill'. But the bed was searched anyway. Thank God parents of my wife managed to hide some food in other places.

As a result many villagers were forced to work in nearby city of Dnepropetrovsk to receive food.

By this artificial famine Stalin forced Ukrainian peasants to work on industrial objects. Some didn't return to their villages and became workers. Some Ukrainians fled to Urals, Siberia (as parents of my Aunt) and to Soviet Far East.

Who knows, maybe without these 'new workers' Soviet industry would be too weak and the war with nazi would be lost.

Who died due to the famine? Mainly Ukrainians.
Who made searches, who performed actions that led to the famine? Mainly Ukrainians too.

So 'a genocide' is a wrong word. Usually one people organises a genocide of another people. It is a crazy idea that Ukrainians organised a genocide of themselves.

Lenin ordered mass killings of Russian officers, businessmans, clerics and so on. The killed were mainly Russians and the killers were mainly Russians too. It was a crime but not a genocide.

User avatar
Kunikov
Member
Posts: 4454
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 19:23

Post by Kunikov » 13 Jan 2007 00:33

It was not 'artificial.'

Jacob Peters
Banned
Posts: 88
Joined: 20 Dec 2006 04:20
Location: Boston, USA

Post by Jacob Peters » 13 Jan 2007 01:12

My mother-in-law was a little girl but he knows what really happened from words of her parents. Soldiers and agents of NKVD with dogs (mainly Ukrainians btw) searched every corner in houses and barns. The parents tried to hide some food in her bed. They said to the agents: 'a girl is ill'. But the bed was searched anyway. Thank God parents of my wife managed to hide some food in other places.


Anecdotes and personal stories are insufficient for trying to measure economic and demographic aspects of a country. Memoirs are only useful in trying to examine personal perceptions of their environment. The claim that all the grain was seized is simply not true because it is clearly documented in Soviet archives that grain collection projections throughout 1932 were substantially reduced from 30 million tons to 18 million tons. Research conducted by serious economic scholars Mark Tauger, Stephen Wheatcroft, and R.W Davies shows that this famine was by no means artificial.

Who died due to the famine? Mainly Ukrainians. Who made searches, who performed actions that led to the famine? Mainly Ukrainians too.


That is just simply wrong. Hundreds of thousands of Rusians died in the Volga region and even 100 thousand Russians in the Northwest consumer region died.
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/econo ... deaths.xls

Chinaski1917
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: 07 Jul 2007 13:51

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by Chinaski1917 » 10 Oct 2009 11:29

Mark Tauger claims that even Robert Conquest has changed his view on the famine in 1932/33 ! He no longer claims it was artificial.

For those not familiar with the historian , Tauger has repeatedly written papers on scientific journals claiming that it was not a Ukrainian genocide.

— Недавно я прочел, что Конквест, который раньше считал, что голод в СССР был организован искусственно, в последние годы поменял свое мнение. Это действительно так?

— Да, он изменил свою точку зрения. Но поскольку я последние два года занимаюсь другой темой, то у меня не было возможности прочесть, что именно сказал Конквест.
"Inteviewer :- Recently I read, that Conquest, who earlier considered the famine in the USSR as artificially organized , in recent years has changed his opinion. Is this true ?

-Mark B. Tauger : - Yes, he changed his point of view. But since for the last two years I'm dealing with another theme, i did not have the opprotunity to read precisely what he said"

http://www.2000.net.ua/f/60752
December 2008
Last edited by Chinaski1917 on 14 Oct 2009 11:12, edited 1 time in total.

Chinaski1917
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: 07 Jul 2007 13:51

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by Chinaski1917 » 14 Oct 2009 10:59

What recent research has found in the archives is not a conscious policy of genocide against Ukraine.
source : Michael Ellman "The role of leadership perceptions and of intent in the Soviet famine of 1931-1934" , Europe-Asia Studies vol.57 , No.6 (sep.2005). p.833
Last edited by Chinaski1917 on 14 Oct 2009 11:11, edited 1 time in total.

Chinaski1917
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: 07 Jul 2007 13:51

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by Chinaski1917 » 14 Oct 2009 11:11

So there are these historians who claim that the famine of 1931-1933 was NOT an Ukrainian genocide :


Mark B.Tauger
amongst other quotes here is one concluding an article of his:
For these and other reasons, several scholars have argued that the famine cannot be considered in the same category of "crimes against humanity" as the Holocaust
Tauger does claim that Stalin and the leadership of USSR had responsbility but not an intention to provoke a so called Ukrainian genocide.

R.W. Davies & S.Wheatcroft
Davies & Wheatcroft , on the basis of detailed study of the sources - many of them previously unused archival documents - and an enviable knowledge of the period , come down strongly on the "unintetional" side.
source : Michael Ellman "The role of leadership perceptions and of intent in the Soviet famine of 1931-1934" , Europe-Asia Studies vol.57 , No.6 (sep.2005).p.823

N.Pianciola
Pianciola also supports the 'unintentional' interpretation.
source : Michael Ellman "The role of leadership perceptions and of intent in the Soviet famine of 1931-1934" , Europe-Asia Studies vol.57 , No.6 (sep.2005).p.824

Chinaski1917
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: 07 Jul 2007 13:51

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by Chinaski1917 » 14 Oct 2009 11:16

Let me remind that unintentional famine , unlike murder or deportation , is not classified as a crime against humanity (see article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court).

Chinaski1917
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: 07 Jul 2007 13:51

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by Chinaski1917 » 15 Oct 2009 04:01

Michael Ellman :
I agree with Davies and Wheatcroft that in 1929-30 when Stalin initiated the collectivisation policy he certainly did not intend to implement a starvation policy
M.Ellman, "Stalin and the famine of 1932-33 revisited", Europe-Asia Studies vol59 , No.4 June 2007 , p.665
If the present author were a member of the jury trying this case he would he would support a verdict of not guity (or possibly the Scottish verdict of not proven). The reasons for this are as follows. First , the three physical elements in the alleged crime can all be given non-genocidal interpreations. Secondly, the two mental elements are not unambiguous evidence of genocide. Suspicion of an ethnic group may lead to genocide, but by itself is not evidence of genocide. Hence it would seem that the necessary proof of specific intent is lacking.
M.Ellman, "Stalin and the famine of 1932-33 revisited", Europe-Asia Studies vol59 , No.4 June 2007 , p.686

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23254
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by David Thompson » 25 Mar 2010 22:02

A post from Kanadon, containing personal remarks about another poster and adding nothing of informational value to the discussion, was deleted by this moderator - DT.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23254
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by David Thompson » 26 Mar 2010 13:43

Two off-topic posts from Kanadon were also removed, along with an off-topic post from Igor Igor. - DT.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: 28 Dec 2003 01:52
Location: World

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by Sergey Romanov » 01 May 2010 10:49

Conquest did indeed change his opinion as to the intentionality of the famine.
Abstract: This Reply, while confirming that Stalin's policies were ruthless and brutal, shows that there are no serious grounds for Ellman's view that Stalin pursued a conscious policy of starvation of the peasants during the famine. It also rejects Ellman's claim that in their recent book [Davies and Wheatcroft (2004)] the authors neglect Soviet policy and leadership perceptions in their account of the famine.

[... excerpt ...]

Our view of Stalin and the famine is close to that of Robert Conquest, who would earlier have been considered the champion of the argument that Stalin had intentionally caused the famine and had acted in a genocidal manner. In 2003, Dr Conquest wrote to us explaining that he does not hold the view that 'Stalin purposely inflicted the 1933 famine. No. What I argue is that with resulting famine imminent, he could have prevented it, but put ''Soviet interest'' other than feeding the starving first-thus consciously abetting it'.
(Source: R.W.Davies, S.G.Wheatcroft, "Stalin and the Soviet Famine of 1932 - 33: A Reply to Ellman", Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 58, No. 4, June 2006, 625 - 633.)

And of course if it was not intentional, it could not have been a genocide according to the most widely used definitions.

Which is a red herring anyway, since just because a crime is not a genocide it's no less of a crime.

PFLB
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 10:21

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by PFLB » 01 May 2010 13:10

It seems to me that the famine was simply the result of the Soviet government wanting all the grain it could get for its industrialisation program, regardless of the needs of the civilian population. One could argue that to rob people of their food in circumstances where it will obviously kill them is to thereby intend to kill them.

However, genocide requires intent to biologically destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, not just 'peasants living in Ukraine whose grain we need'. Also, it is generally considered that a higher degree of intent is required for genocide - simply doing something with the knowledge of a certain result is not enough.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: 28 Dec 2003 01:52
Location: World

Re: Ukrainian genocide

Post by Sergey Romanov » 01 May 2010 13:30

I would say that the famine itself would happen no matter what. It's the enormous death toll that is "man-caused", not the famine itself. Stalin and his henchmen are guilty at the very least of criminal negligence, manslaughter. They may not have "wanted" the excessive mortality, but they were fully responsible for it.

If anything, they should have requested help from the West, as had been done during the 1921 famine. Instead the famine was covered up with the help of useful idiots (or stooges) like Duranty. Which is a crime.

I should note that Ukrainian nationalists played into Kremlin's hands by insisting on the recognition of the famine as genocide. The famine does not become less or more of a tragedy just because its politico-historical characterization changes a bit. But now that their (nationalists') efforts have failed at PACE, the attitude of the pro-Soviet apologists is likely to be dismissive - "Hey, even PACE doesn't agree that it was a genocide". Which of course misses the point - people still died as a result of Stalin's policy. But this "argument" will probably be repeated over and over again.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”