Politics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
A recent question says (among other things):
In Ukraine, one claim used by Russia to justify its invasion is that the current regime is a "puppet regime", that is, the elections by which it was chosen were not valid and do not represent the will of the people.
What is the basis for Russia's claim that the Ukrainian government is illegitimate and that the presidential elections were supposedly invalid/stolen?
The official position from Russia following the 2019 elections wasn't at all one of non-recognition, at least according to Euronews:
Russia's prime minister says there is a chance for improved relations with Ukraine after a comedian with no political experience was elected president in a landslide victory.
Other Russian politicians said the election of Volodymyr Zelenskiy shows Ukrainians have rejected incumbent Petro Poroshenko's anti-Russian stance.
A Kremlin spokesperson said it was too early to speak about possible cooperation with Ukrainian Zelenskiy, but added that Moscow respected the choice of the Ukrainian people.
That's not the kind of statement put out when one government doesn't recognize the legitimacy of elections in some country. Also:
Russian president Vladimir Putin has not yet made an official statement, but Dmitry Medvedev the prime minister said the result shows voters are "eager for new approaches".
There is still a chance for Ukraine to improve its relations with Russia. What will it take? Honesty, as well as a pragmatic and responsible approach with due account for all the current political realities in Ukraine, primarily in the east of the country. Therefore, the main thing we can wish the new Ukrainian leadership is common sense, as well as to understand the inherent value of relations between the peoples of our countries that transcend all momentary political considerations.
This is the only way of reviving economic cooperation that has practically ceased, which would pave the way to resolving extremely challenging social problems millions of Ukrainians are facing today.
Also, Putin and Zelenskiy had a face-to-face meeting in Paris, in Dec 2019. That kind of high-level meeting is not arranged when you flat declare the guy next door stole the election.
Honestly I've not seen Putin mention the 2019 election recently, but he certainly likes to bring up the 2014 events, whenever it is convenient to claim that something is wrong in Ukraine.
Interstingly enough, the 5,300-words essay of Putin of last summer, which was made compulsory reading for Russian troops, and was deemed “one step short of a declaration of war” by some observers, doesn't dwell much on any post-2000 events in Ukrainian history. But does go a lot into the (alleged) mistakes of Soviet leaders in making Ukraine what it is today; no less than 13 paragraphs! And merely two or three paragraphs are devoted to 2014; none to 2019. And it simply states broadly stuff like "Russians and Ukrainians were one people – a single whole" and that the present government in Ukraine disappointed him as well:
The Western authors of the anti-Russia project set up the Ukrainian political system in such a way that presidents, members of parliament and ministers would change but the attitude of separation from and enmity with Russia would remain. Reaching peace was the main election slogan of the incumbent president. He came to power with this. The promises turned out to be lies. Nothing has changed. And in some ways the situation in Ukraine and around Donbas has even degenerated.
If you read between the lines, he realizes that democracy in Ukraine is unlikely to yield the kind of government in Ukraine that Putin wants. But he doesn't bother to say the 2019 election was fraudulent. More like Ukraine has a "rigged system", from Putin's perspective (to reuse the words of Donald Trump here.)
