9 Charts on the Russia-Ukraine War
By: Mohamed Younis (Gallup. com)
The danger with brush wars is that they become a status quo. All sides become too comfortable with the situation as it is. Even worse, governments begin to see a prolonged war as a benefit to themselves.
'The war' provides a stage for hardliners who have a vested interest in more war. We've seen that with Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Iran. We're still fighting a war in Korea. The hardliners frame the discussion; peace has no place.
The war in Ukraine has become a comfortable backdrop for political warriors. The war in Donbas did not attract enough public attention, so hardliners upped their game. The war in Ukraine has actually been a nine year war. Now with no end in sight. The hardliners want more. And the public seems comfortable with that.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
As the Russia-Ukraine war crosses the one-year mark, we are taking stock of public opinion across Ukraine, the U.S. and Russia. While the war has continued to spiral between offensives and counteroffensives, overall, the conflict has reached a stalemate. But how has public sentiment played into the key dimensions of this conflict?
1. Americans remain steadfast in supporting Ukraine, even if it is a prolonged war.
2. But not everyone is pleased with the current policy. A plurality of Republicans and about a third of independents say the U.S. is currently doing too much to support Ukraine.
3. Ukrainians, however, support fighting until victory. That resolve is even higher among those who live in the western region of the country.
4. Despite economic hardship, Ukrainians have rallied around their nation.
5. Nearly all Ukrainians denounce the Kremlin.
6. Most Ukrainians expect their country to join NATO and the European Union in the next decade.
7. Ukrainians aren't going anywhere. A record-low 9% say they would like to leave their country permanently.
8. Ukraine's neighbors have warmed to the idea of migrants living in their countries.
9. Still, Russians weren't feeling the pinch of Western sanctions in late 2022.
Bottom Line
A year into the war, Ukrainians and Russians seem prepared for a prolonged conflict. While the military situation remains fluid, the broad dimensions of the war and its sustainability, from a public sentiment perspective, seem clear.
Ukrainians have the will to fight, their U.S. allies remain supportive, and neighboring countries are more welcoming to migrants than they have been. However, the desired impact of sanctions seems to have failed among the Russian public, and Russians may be proving more resilient in the face of economic isolation than many expected at the outset of the conflict. This failure may force the West to fundamentally shift its calculus on how to bring the conflict to a decisive end in Kyiv's favor.
Author(s)
Mohamed Younis is Gallup's Editor-in-Chief.
Tags
Who is online
565 visitors
A quagmire by any other name is still a prolonged war of little consequence.
Thousands of innocent lives being snuffed out...and this is of little consequence?
And there's talk that Putin doesn't want to stop there!
If we don't support Ukraine, for as long as it takes, then we accept Russian genocide. There's no middle ground.
If the US hadn't become involved in WW2, Europe would have been lost...and ended up being under Russian control
That rendition of history ignores that Europe was divided between west and east following WWII. The United States can claim to have liberated western Europe but not eastern Europe. Those who are blind to history blame Russia for dividing Europe but the west/east divisions existed long before the 20th century. Western Europe was never Byzantine. And Catholics aren't an influence in Ukraine.
Commoners are always expendable in noble pursuits. Commoners are neither guilty or innocent; commoners don't matter. Let them eat cake.
Neither are the Jews but why mention either?
Eastern Orthodoxy is just at odds with answering to a Pope.
Now they have split from Russia and no longer recognize the Russian Patriarchate.
Other than that they as Catholic as they come.
Just another political victim like the Anglican Catholics.
Hope you don't mind that I enlarged the charts. My vision is waning and I had trouble reading the fine print even with a magnifying glass.
No problem on my end. Can you open the seed link to Gallup? The figures are actually interactive on the original article.
I already enlarged the ones on your copy of the article above - so no problem now.
You think we are still fighting the Korean Conflict?
Then we must still be fighting the Turks also, eh?
Your infatuation with Russia and Russian aggression is just bizarre. This isn’t a petty argument between two belligerents. Russia has invaded Ukraine. The fighting is 100% their doing. Ukraine is defending itself. If Russian troops simply went back home to Russia, the fighting would end. Ukraine has no interest in attacking Russia. They just want to be left alone. Characterizing this any other way is deeply dishonest.
Ukraine is not going to defeat Russia. And Russia is not going to overthrow the Kiev government. Biden has told us we are going to be involved in Ukraine for as long as it takes. Military experts are telling us that the war in Ukraine will continue for years. The hardline positions have achieved a stalemate as the new status quo.
The whine that 'Russia invaded Ukraine' is a call for war. Okay, we now have a war. You've gotten what you wanted. Is that supposed to be a new status quo? If we are in it to win it then what does winning look like? More of the same?
They’re not trying to. They’re just trying to survive.
It’s not a whine. It’s a fact.
Bull. Ukraine had no interest in going to war with anyone. Your absurd take is equivalent to saying a rape victim was “calling for sex.”
What I wanted???? What have you been smoking? Where do you get the idea that I wanted war?
What the Dean taught us in our first lecture on our first day in Law School was that there is ALWAYS another side to a story, and if we were not capable of determining and understanding the other side of the one we were advocating or defending we might just as well quit Law School on our first day here and walk out that door. It's a lesson I never forgot, and I feel sorry for those who are incapable of comprehending it.
Sure, that’s fine. How does it relate to what I wrote?
To simplify, I was saying that there are always two sides to a story - you are defending only one of them.
What makes you think I am obligated to argue in favor of both sides? Most people aren’t doing that with this seed or any other. They consider the seed or comments of others and express their own take. But you want to make special rules for me? That’s not going to happen.
Instead, I invite you to do what anyone else would do and respond to the content of my comment.
If you want to rebut my words and defend Russian aggression you are free to do so.
I wasn't arguing with you, and I wasn't demanding that you alter your opinions, all I did was make a point that there are two sides to every story, and your reply was unnecessary. I don't give a damn whether you agree with that or don't agree with it.
Congratulations. You have managed to state the obvious, which applies to every seed. It’s also irrelevant to anything I have said.
Except in Donbas. Kiev sent tanks into Donbas to legitimize a newly formed government and was fighting a real war in Donbas. Kiev was requesting military support from the United States and NATO years before Russia invaded. That doesn't sound like peace.
Ukraine had retained an international arms industry (from the Soviet era) and was selling advanced military arms around the world. Ukrainian arms were used against US troops in Iraq. Ukraine had amassed an arsenal of military weapons, some of which is still in the fight. Ukraine had battle hardened troops that had been fighting in Donbas for eight years when Russia invaded a year ago. It appears that the United States and Europe were completely ignorant that Ukraine had prepared for war.
Ukraine had a war tested military; Russia did not. Russia could not have captured Kiev with 150,000 troops. Only comic book warriors, fat brassed generals, and US politicians would believe that sort of fantasy.
Donbas in in Ukraine. Russia recognized Ukraine as an independent state, with the borders we all understand, way back in 1991. Ukraine therefore has the right to do as it will within those borders and it’s not Russia’s business.
Ukraine and Russia. One of these parties is trespassing. The other is on their own property.
You claimed Ukraine didn't want to go to war with anyone. The facts are that Ukraine was already fighting a war. The interim Kiev government, installed by the Rada, had declared Russian speaking people in Donbas were terrorists and was fighting a real war to expel people with ties to Russia from Donbas. The war in Donbas was not started by an elected government in Kiev. That's a very Soviet tactic.
Refugees from Donbas really were migrating across the Russian border. Negotiated cease fires wouldn't last 24 hours. OSCE monitors were attacked by all sides. Atrocities were committed against civilians on both sides. Kiev has been fighting a political war for nine years, now. The people in Donbas were fighting for their homeland.
Don't be obtuse. We were talking about Ukraine and Russia. We were not talking about events internal, specific, and isolated within Ukraine.
Even if you see it that way, Ukraine was not attacking or invading Russia. Russia does not have the right to even be in Ukraine.
Why are concepts like borders and national sovereignty so hard to understand, much less respect? If the Mexican army invaded the United States because they didn't like the way we were treating immigrants or anyone of Mexican heritage, or because they thought Arizona wanted to secede, would that be ok with you?
The Rada coup to install an unelected government was about Ukraine and Russia. The war in Donbas was about Ukraine and Russia, too. The US and NATO began pouring economic aid into Ukraine when an unelected government that sided with west was installed. Wasn't that about Ukraine and Russia?
Russia did not attack or invade the United States. Russia did not attack or invade NATO. Yet the war on the border of NATO is viewed as an existential threat. The United States and NATO are fighting Russia. using a Ukrainian proxy, without having been attacked or invaded.
How is US and NATO support for Kiev different than Russian support for Donbas? If the separatists in Donbas had threatened to overthrow Kiev, would the US and NATO have intervened?
Biden doesn't talk about Ukraine. Biden talks about Kiev. Kiev is free. Kiev is strong. As long as Kiev stands, democracy stands. It's all about support for a government that sides with the west.
Russian troops are physically in Ukraine. That's how.
Well, I'd be willing to bet that you never even CONSIDERED the other side of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Who gives a shit would you’d be willing to bet? You take a certain side of an issue all the time, but you don’t apologize for it. And I don’t see you holding anyone else to this lofty standard. Put your hypocrisy and sanctimony to bed, and try discussing the topic instead.
Frankly I don't give a shit about you, so you can put your nasty fucking comments to bed as well.
One country invaded another unprovoked, brutally murdered tens of thousands of people and utterly demolished hundreds of homes and buildings. What other side is there to CONSIDER ?
I don't intend to take sides, and never did. My opinion was from the beginning that negotiations to prevent the war from happening should have taken place before it even started. Read Nerm's posts if you're looking for comments about "the other side".
Oh, I've seen those.
I've studied the "other side", i.e., the Russian/Putin side of the Ukraine issue for several years. Putin is driven solely by a desire to re-instate the Russian/Soviet Empire with himself as the Tsar figure. For some insight into Putin's goals, it is worth reading about one of his neo-fascist ideologists, Alexander Dugin. This link is to an article from 2014. I could supply many more.
You cannot seriously think that Putin ever had any interest in negotiating anything with the Ukrainians. His only goal is conquest.
I can't open a bbc link. I guess China deems it to an unfriendly news source.
Were there not some negotiations between them nearer the beginning of the war. Russia has said they will still negotiate with Ukraine, but Ukraine said it will not negotiate unless every Russian soldier and their armaments have left the entire Ukraine (and I assume they also mean Crimea), which, of course is a non-starter.
You know, GG, I'm not really into taking a big interest in this war. As I said, I'm not taking sides. I'll become more interested if peace talks start to happen.
I do not believe a single thing that comes out of the Putin/Russia propaganda machine. There was some slight hope for Russia following the fall of communism, but it has deteriorated into a totally fascist state. The government there now is as evil as when it was the U.S.S.R.
I wouldn't expect there to be peace talks any time in the near future. I believe there will be a fairly long conflict that will only be resolved by a decisive military victory.
Take your own advice. All you have done here is give me shit for having an opinion. Not for the opinion itself, but just for having one.
All I did was state that there are always two sides to every story, which IMO is undeniable, and you overreacted by getting sensitive about it - maybe you felt guilty for choosing one of them, so then you just HAD to give me shit for saying it. Now as far as I'm concerned you can shove YOUR opinion up your ass.
What a fish story. Your sole focus and critique of my comments was that I was not giving due consideration to the other side. You contributed nothing of value. You did not address the content of my comments, nor did you offer any argument in support of the other side that you claim is so important.
[deleted]
Stop inventing what I said. I NEVER claimed the other side was important - if anything I simply noted that it existed. I contribute more of value to this site than you ever did.
When were Russian troops not in Ukraine? Russia didn't annex Crimea with an amphibious assault. In fact, the Kiev government renewed the lease on the naval base before the Ukrainian Rada installed an unelected government.
Good. If it’s now your position that it wasn’t important, then in the future, kindly refrain from interjecting yourself into a conversation with unimportant junk.
If 100 percent of Ukrainians disapprove of Russian leadership, where are all those pro-Russian Ukrainians we used to hear about? I seem to remember being told that great numbers would welcome Vlad Putin's invading armies. That Putin was really liberating the Ukrainians. So?
Except in Donbas. Which where the war started 9 years ago.
The hardliners on all sides will pick the numbers that bolster their hardline position. The hardliners want more war. The hardline demand for victory isn't about achieving peace. Hardliners attempt to overthrow governments; the commoners are expendable. Hardliners, on all sides, speak in terms of humiliating enemy governments using body bag statistics.
I read recently that in well over a century the United States has NOT been involved in wars for only about 16 of all those years. Naturally the Military Industrial Complex requires war to exist for the benefit of the industry and the economy of the USA, so keeping it going rather than ending it is necessary. Therefore I don't expect this war to end soon, do you? Although China's 12 point plan for peace is mostly acceptable to Ukraine, since it mentions territorial sovereignty being a necessity. I guess it depends on how you interpret territorial sovereignty, and whether that either supports or contradicts Russian occupation of parts of Ukraine, in order for Russia to agree with it.
I haven't seen details of the 12 point plan. What has been reported appears to be a proposed reset of conditions to prepare for a return to the Minsk agreements. I have doubts that can be achieved at this point.
IMO Europe wants to continue the war in hopes that Russia can be defeated and required to pay reparations. My view is that Ukraine is trying to lead Europe into repeating the Versailles Treaty that ended WWI. But the short-term gains obtained from the Versailles Treaty set the stage for WWII. Defeating Russia would give rise to hardline politics that would simmer until a larger and more dangerous war breaks out.