Famine in Ukraine was 'not genocide'

[luiz]

Three things:
First of all as was recently mentioned, Ireland's food was also leaving the country rather than going to the Irish people. Thus the two cases are extremely comparable, as in both cases, food was being taken from the locals in order toi generate profit for the mother country.

As I and others said many many times, the people exporting the food were neither starving nor forced to do so, unlike the case of the Ukraine. In Ireland there was inaction that helped prevent a famine caused by a plague; in Ukraine there was a man caused famine. No, the most important goal of the confiscation was not to kill people, which is why generally I prefer the term "democide". But unlike the famine in Ireland, it was the direct result of government policy. The famine there was caused by the Soviets stealing from the peasants. The same is not true for Ireland, hence the cases are entirely different.

Two, direct government policy does not a genocide make. Stalin did some abhorrant things and killed millions of people, but it wasn't for the sake of killing people. Does it make it excusable? Not really. Does it mean that he didn't perform a genocide? Absolutlely.

He killed countless people (millions as you say: take note, apologist red_elk) for no reason whatsoever, just his mindless paranoia.
Not only that, he did kill many people for the sake of killing. The kulaks come to mind. What's the moral difference between murdering Kulaks because they're Kulaks and murdering Jews because they're Jews?

Finally, implicating that Lenin was as bad as Stalin is idiotic. Lenin actually cared about the people, which is why he started the New Economic Policy.

Please. Do some research on the man. Stalin merely continued the stuff invented by Lenin. Lenin was the one who decided to use terror as a political tool. He created the all powerful political police; he ordered summary executions of thousands just to send a message, and so on and so forth. There is no humanism in Lenin, he couldn't care less about the people.

 

[amadeus]

You can't very well blame the Great Depression on Stalin.

Because the Soviet Union was one of those market economies that suffered from business cycles and the like?

I'm also curious as to how Cameroon donated money to people in New York when it wouldn't become an independent country for another 25 years.

 

[red_elk]

As you know full well, the communist monsters in Soviet leadership did punish whole nationalities on more than one occasion. Just because everybody suffered under the blood-thirsty tyranny of Stalin does not mean that everyone suffered equally.

As you know full well, the Soviet leadership did all that for no reason, just because they were bloodthirsty baby-eating monsters

Actually, I believe the number is around 20 millions, which is the number used in several recent works (the most recent I've read is Ferguson's War of the World).

I don't care what you believe in, that's your religion. You posted a link about 60 millions and never admitted that it was outright lie.

Even most apologists will place Stalin's death toll in a few millions. Thousands is unheard of;

I referred to well-known number of 700.000 - 800.000 victims of executions for political reasons - for ~20 years of Stalin's rule.

One can well take into account millions of excessive deaths for all the other reasons, counting millions of victims of Putin's and Bush's bloody regimes as well.

you're really the moral equivalent of neo-nazis in denial.

You are really moral equivalent of Goebbels' school Nazi propagandist in your anti-Soviet rants.

I already said I condemn the British response to the famine. But as many have said, the people who exported food in Ireland were not starving, and were not forced to do it (even though it was still wrong).

Can't you see the difference between that and plainly stealing the production of peasants starving to death? Of course you can't.

Can't you see there were dozens of famines in Russia during XIX - first half of XX century?
Can't you see that after first 40 years of Soviet period there were no more famines and life expectancy of Soviet citizens doubled from 35 to 70 years approximately?
Of course you can't - communists cannot do anything good for the country, by definition.

 

[amadeus]

One can well take into account millions of excessive deaths for all the other reasons, counting millions of victims of Putin's and Bush's bloody regimes as well.

I'm no fan of George Bush, but I'm pretty sure extrajudicial killings and starvation by way of the government seizing people's food were pretty low in both nominal and per capita numbers during those 8 years.

 

[luiz]

rrw why do you care what some rich brazilian kid thinks?

A curious choice of words considering I am your age.
I am also an engineer, I work and pay my bills. If I am a "rich brazilian kid", what are you? A "pretentious austrian kid"?

he's as upper class as possible and thinks what his kind usually think, and nobody is going to change that.

Do you know how much I make? I have stated it in the thread about those Rhode Islad teachers; and it is half of what they make. If that makes me "as upper class as possible", I must say the upper class isn't what it used to be.

it's his very place in history.

I decide my place in history, it is not determined by my class or nationality or age.

Overall one really bad post.

 

[luiz]

Oh and Luiz, it's pretty funny that you imply I am biased when you are still excusing the Brits. I have admitted this famine was handled appallingly and some of it was even intentional, you have had the facts about the Irish famine opresented to you and you still can't bring yourself to criticise the UK because they were economically Liberal

Why do you keep doing that?

I did criticise the Brits. I did say they were guilty.

I just said the two cases are not comparable. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[luiz]

As you know full well, the Soviet leadership did all that for no reason, just because they were bloodthirsty baby-eating monsters

The Germans had reasons to kill Jews and Gypsies as well. They just were not good or moral or even sane reasons. The Soviets had reason to target nationalities too, but they were neither good nor moral.

I don't care what you believe in, that's your religion. You posted a link about 60 millions and never admitted that it was outright lie.

I posted several links to different tolls. I have repeated many times I believe in the 20 millions number.

I referred to well-known number of 700.000 - 800.000 victims of executions for political reasons - for ~20 years of Stalin's rule.

Well known by Stalin lovers and Russian uber-nationalists, perhaps. Not among mainstream scholars, that much is obvious.

One can well take into account millions of excessive deaths for all the other reasons, counting millions of victims of Putin's and Bush's bloody regimes as well.

That you compare Stalin to Putin or Bush just goes to show how out of touch you are.

You are really moral equivalent of Goebbels' school Nazi propagandist in your anti-Soviet rants.

That makes no sense.

Can't you see there were dozens of famines in Russia during XIX - first half of XX century?

And in several other places too. The fact that famines happen does not mean that all famines are equal.

Can't you see that after first 40 years of Soviet period there were no more famines and life expectancy of Soviet citizens doubled from 35 to 70 years approximately?
Of course you can't - communists cannot do anything good for the country, by definition.

Are you really that limited?

Technology advanced everywhere in those 40 years. Food ceased to be scarce, not because of the greatness of communism but because of technology. It happened pretty much everywhere. Compare the food production of any Western Country in 1917 and 1957 and you'll be very surprised. This was not a merit of the Soviets at all. The same goes for life expectancy. Look at the advances in medicine, sanitation and biology in general. Life expectancies advanced tremendously in Latin America too, that does not mean the regimes here were particularly enlightned. More lame and stupid Soviet apologism.

And how does that excuse they stealing the food from starving Ukranian peasants? How does that excuse they murdering Kulaks because of who they were?

 

[aelf]

Russia doing its best to cover its tracks I see... and with the usual suspects doing their best to clear them of all wrong.

Here's a question: is mass murder any different, regardless of whether it's against a specific group or a general group? Killing one million people isn't really that different from killing one million people because they're members of group x.

Then again, look at the audience I'm talking to. The Left loves to make unnecessary distinctions, hence the whole "hate crime" nonsense... crime is crime. Who cares about the motive; the action is what counts.

When did you become a card-carrying member of the Republican party who is always foaming about "The Left"? And when until you start advocating executions in the name of freedom and liberal democracy?

 

[holy king]

Do you know how much I make? I have stated it in the thread about those Rhode Islad teachers; and it is half of what they make. If that makes me "as upper class as possible", I must say the upper class isn't what it used to be.

cool story, but i demand a scan of your paycheck.

 

[red_elk]

The Germans had reasons to kill Jews and Gypsies as well. They just were not good or moral or even sane reasons. The Soviets had reason to target nationalities too, but they were neither good nor moral.

Unlike Western "democratic" and fascist regimes of that time, the Soviets treated all nationalities and races equally. So yes, that part was more good and moral.

I posted several links to different tolls. I have repeated many times I believe in the 20 millions number.

And you never admitted that some of the links you posted contain outright lies.

Well known by Stalin lovers and Russian uber-nationalists, perhaps. Not among mainstream scholars, that much is obvious.

Well-known by any historian who worked with archives.
http://lvin.ru/documents/gulagdebate/1993-4-Getty-Rittersporn-Zemskov.pdf

That you compare Stalin to Putin or Bush just goes to show how out of touch you are.

I'm not comparing Stalin to Putin or Bush.
The responsibility for executions and for famine deaths is very different.
That was all you can answer?

Are you really that limited?

Technology advanced everywhere in those 40 years. Food ceased to be scarce, not because of the greatness of communism but because of technology. It happened pretty much everywhere. Compare the food production of any Western Country in 1917 and 1957 and you'll be very surprised. This was not a merit of the Soviets at all. The same goes for life expectancy. Look at the advances in medicine, sanitation and biology in general. Life expectancies advanced tremendously in Latin America too, that does not mean the regimes here were particularly enlightned. More lame and stupid Soviet apologism.

So during that 40 years, everywhere in the world life expectancy doubled, all people became literate and hunger was eliminated? It was natural process, evil communists actually tried to stop it, but didn't succeeded?

And how does that excuse they stealing the food from starving Ukranian peasants? How does that excuse they murdering Kulaks because of who they were?

(Have you already stopped beating your wife?)
When you want to blame me in justifying something, provide quotes.

 

[luiz]

Unlike Western "democratic" and fascist regimes of that time, the Soviets treated all nationalities and races equally. So yes, that part was more good and moral.

Now this is a completely false statement that I will keep for future reference. The Soviet Union under Stalin was known for treating with extreme suspicion - which soon became brutality - a big number of nationalities the dictator mistrusted. Ukranians are just one of them; think of the Chechens, Poles, Volga Germans, Crimean Tartars, and many, many others. In fact Wikipedia has a list of all nationalities that were deported under Stalin.

If you think a regime that deports whole nationalities because they are not considered trustworthy is somehow treating everyone equally, well that makes you mad. This sort of collective punishment for real or frequently imaginary offenses is on par with anything the fascists did.

And you never admitted that some of the links you posted contain outright lies.

That's because they were not lies. Estimates published before the opening of the Moscow Files are unreliable by definition. See my next point:

Well-known by any historian who worked with archives.
http://lvin.ru/documents/gulagdebate/1993-4-Getty-Rittersporn-Zemskov.pdf

Obscure and non-mainstream.

Volkogonov, the head of the History Department of the Soviet Army and with illimited access to the Files, has estimated a toll of around 20 millions, as do modern mainstream historians. This includes not only executions but also the deaths in Gulag and resulting from forced deportations and manufactured famines.

Edit: I'll add Wiki's entry on the number of victims of Stalin to make it clear how much red_elk is an apologist.

Researchers before the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union attempting to count the number of people killed under Stalin's regime produced estimates ranging from 3 to 60 million.[79] After the Soviet Union dissolved, evidence from the Soviet archives also became available, containing official records of the execution of approximately 800,000 prisoners under Stalin for either political or criminal offenses, around 1.7 million deaths in the Gulags and some 390,000 deaths during kulak forced resettlement – for a total of about 3 million officially recorded victims in these categories.[80]

The official Soviet archival records do not contain comprehensive figures for some categories of victims, such as the those of ethnic deportations or of German population transfers in the aftermath of WWII.[81] Other notable exclusions from NKVD data on repression deaths include the Katyn massacre, other killings in the newly occupied areas, and the mass shootings of Red Army personnel (deserters and so-called deserters) in 1941. Also, the official statistics on Gulag mortality exclude deaths of prisoners taking place shortly after their release but which resulted from the harsh treatment in the camps.[82] Some historians also believe the official archival figures of the categories that were recorded by Soviet authorities to be unreliable and incomplete.[83][84] In addition to failures regarding comprehensive recordings, as one additional example, Robert Gellately and Simon Sebag-Montefiore argue the many suspects beaten and tortured to death while in "investigative custody" were likely not to have been counted amongst the executed.[12][85]

Historians working after the Soviet Union's dissolution have estimated victim totals ranging from approximately 4 million to nearly 10 million, not including those who died in famines.[86] Russian writer Vadim Erlikman, for example, makes the following estimates: executions, 1.5 million; gulags, 5 million; deportations, 1.7 million out of 7.5 million deported; and POWs and German civilians, 1 million – a total of about 9 million victims of repression.[87]

Some have also included deaths of 6 to 8 million people in the 1932–1933 famine as victims of Stalin's repression. This categorization is controversial however, as historians differ as to whether the famine was a deliberate part of the campaign of repression against kulaks and others,[43][88] or simply an unintended consequence of the struggle over forced collectivization.[55][89][90]

Accordingly, if famine victims are included, a minimum of around 10 million deaths—6 million from famine and 4 million from other causes—are attributable to the regime,[91] with a number of recent historians suggesting a likely total of around 20 million, citing much higher victim totals from executions, gulags, deportations and other causes.[92] Adding 6–8 million famine victims to Erlikman's estimates above, for example, would yield a total of between 15 and 17 million victims. Researcher Robert Conquest, meanwhile, has revised his original estimate of up to 30 million victims down to 20 million.[93] In his most recent edition of The Great Terror (2007), Conquest states that while exact numbers may never be known with complete certainty, the various terror campaigns launched by the Soviet government claimed no fewer than 15 million lives.[94] Others maintain that their earlier higher victim total estimates are correct.[95][96]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Calculating_the_number_of_victims

I'm not comparing Stalin to Putin or Bush.
The responsibility for executions and for famine deaths is very different.
That was all you can answer?

It is not different if the famine was caused by soldiers stealing the food of starving peasants on orders of the dictators, is it?

Face the fact that the famine was caused by the confiscation of food. This did not happen in other famines, which is what makes this one specially evil.

So during that 40 years, everywhere in the world life expectancy doubled, all people became literate and hunger was eliminated? It was natural process, evil communists actually tried to stop it, but didn't succeeded?

I am pretty sure much of the world saw tremendous increases in life expectancy and literacy rates, yes. And of course the communists did not try to stop it, where did I say that? Just because they're evil doesn't mean they will try to stop progress. The Nazis were evil too but that doesn't mean they were opposed to increasing literacy and life expectancy.

(Have you already stopped beating your wife?)
When you want to blame me in justifying something, provide quotes.

As the Grand Apologist of Stalin on CFC, you insist that the Terror Famine was similar to any other famine.

When you acknowledge that the Soviets actually confiscated the food of starving peasants, I'll stop accusing you of justifying this monstrous crime. Can you do that? Can you actually write that the glorious Soviet Union ordered the confiscation of food from people who were starving, and executed all who tried to stop it?

 

[red_elk]

Now this is a completely false statement that I will keep for future reference. The Soviet Union under Stalin was known for treating with extreme suspicion - which soon became brutality - a big number of nationalities the dictator mistrusted. Ukranians are just one of them; think of the Chechens, Poles, Volga Germans, Crimean Tartars, and many, many others. In fact Wikipedia has a list of all nationalities that were deported under Stalin.

So that was the result of some irrational "mistrust", not massive Nazi collaboration of people in that regions during WW2?

That's because they were not lies. Estimates published before the opening of the Moscow Files are unreliable by definition. See my next point:

You posted that link after opening of Moscow files, without statement that the numbers are "unreliable by definition" and pretending that the numbers there are correct.

Obscure and non-mainstream.

Volkogonov, the head of the History Department of the Soviet Army and with illimited access to the Files, has estimated a toll of around 20 millions, as do modern mainstream historians. This includes not only executions but also the deaths in Gulag and resulting from forced deportations and manufactured famines.

And I was talking about victims of executions.
Volkogonov didn't have access to classified documents, just as all the other historians.
Famines were not "manufactured".
Deaths in GULAG can't be counted together with executions, otherwise all people who die in modern Russian or U.S. prisons are also victims of evil Medvedev and Obama regimes.

It is not different if the famine was caused by soldiers stealing the food of starving peasants on orders of the dictators, is it?

Face the fact that the famine was caused by the confiscation of food. This did not happen in other famines, which is what makes this one specially evil.

This did not happen in other famines? (like in XIX century's Russia)?
Famine was caused by soldiers stealing food, there were no problems with bad crops?
Soviet urban citizen didn't need food?

I am pretty sure much of the world saw tremendous increases in life expectancy and literacy rates, yes. And of course the communists did not try to stop it, where did I say that? Just because they're evil doesn't mean they will try to stop progress. The Nazis were evil too but that doesn't mean they were opposed to increasing literacy and life expectancy.

So, that was natural process, life expectancy incidentally doubled and communists just did not opposed that process? The fact that the same things did not happen in most of Asian, African, South-American countries was just unfortunate exception?

As the Grand Apologist of Stalin on CFC, you insist that the Terror Famine was similar to any other famine.

Really? What else I'm insisting as Grand Apologist of Stalin on CFC?
That Stalin was the greatest ruler of all the times perhaps?

When you acknowledge that the Soviets actually confiscated the food of starving peasants, I'll stop accusing you of justifying this monstrous crime. Can you do that? Can you actually write that the glorious Soviet Union ordered the confiscation of food from people who were starving, and executed all who tried to stop it?

Don't remember where I deny anything like that, but anyway I won't acknowledge.
It would be interesting to see how you enter into infinite loop of accusations

Are everybody who refuse to accept that Soviet famines 1932-1933 were man-made and were act of genocide, Stalin's apologists?

 

[Yeekim]

Unlike Western "democratic" and fascist regimes of that time, the Soviets treated all nationalities and races equally. So yes, that part was more good and moral.

Crimean Tatars beg to differ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sürgün
So do Chechens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Lentil_(Caucasus)

 

[luiz]

So that was the result of some irrational "mistrust", not massive Nazi collaboration of people in that regions during WW2?

Your apologism grows sicker and sicker.

First, several of the worst deportations actually happened after the war, so there goes your argument. And IIRC some happened before.
Second, collective punishment is generally considered quite evil.
Third, they were not only deportations but murderous deportations. The conditions were so harsh that countless people died in the process.
Finally, not all of the deported nationalities were collaborating with the Nazis in any meanignful way. And some Russians also collaborate with the Germans.

You posted that link after opening of Moscow files, without statement that the numbers are "unreliable by definition" and pretending that the numbers there are correct.

I don't even know which link you're talking about, but I do know that I never claimed that the correct death toll was 60 millions for sure. I always maintained that the most likely figure, counting executions, the GULAG, deportations and etc was about 20 millions. The 60 figure, as per Wiki, was the highest estimate prior to the opening of the files..

And I was talking about victims of executions.
Volkogonov didn't have access to classified documents, just as all the other historians.
Famines were not "manufactured".
Deaths in GULAG can't be counted together with executions, otherwise all people who die in modern Russian or U.S. prisons are also victims of evil Medvedev and Obama regimes.

The Famines were the result of deliberate government policy of forced collectivization and confiscation.

Deaths in the GULAG are different for two reasons. First, they were inhuman holes, not common prisons. Second, unlike in modern Russia or the US, the people there were frequently entirely innocent, so their suffering is to blame on Stalin, not on them. That you compare the GULAG to modern prison systems is yet another trace of apologism.

This did not happen in other famines? (like in XIX century's Russia)?

Not the ones I know of, no.

Famine was caused by soldiers stealing food, there were no problems with bad crops?
Soviet urban citizen didn't need food?

Encyclopedia Brittanica and many other sources claim there was no natural reason for famine.

And modern people in the cities also need food, yet surprisingly there is no need to confiscate the production of starving peasants nor to execute them en masse.

Another interesting point is that it took decades for the Soviet agricultural production to catch up with that of Tsarist Russia. How come?

So, that was natural process, life expectancy incidentally doubled and communists just did not opposed that process? The fact that the same things did not happen in most of Asian, African, South-American countries was just unfortunate exception?

I am willing to bet in some selected countries of those regions it increased more than in the USSR. There's nothing remarkable, and the West achieved more. Countries like Korea, Taiwan and several others managed to educate their population, raise life expectancy much above Russia's and industrialise a lot without resorting to Stalinist terror. And their starting point was much worse than Russia. How come?

Really? What else I'm insisting as Grand Apologist of Stalin on CFC?
That Stalin was the greatest ruler of all the times perhaps?

You claim that he was just another dictator.

Don't remember where I deny anything like that, but anyway I won't acknowledge.
It would be interesting to see how you enter into infinite loop of accusations

If you won't acknowledge you're still in denial.

 

[red_elk]

Crimean Tatars beg to differ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sürgün
So do Chechens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Lentil_(Caucasus)

Agree, they were mistreated. Though you should understand the difference between exterminations because of ideology of racial supremacy (in Nazi case) and deportations, after some WW2 events which some of that people participated into.

 

[luiz]

Agree, they were mistreated. Though you should understand the difference between exterminations because of ideology of racial supremacy (in Nazi case) and deportations, after some WW2 events which some of that people participated into.

What's the rationale of deporting people, frequently to their deaths, after the war ended? You call that "mistreatment"? I call it democide.

 

[red_elk]

Your apologism grows sicker and sicker.

First, several of the worst deportations actually happened after the war, so there goes your argument. And IIRC some happened before.

Which ones?

Second, collective punishment is generally considered quite evil.
Third, they were not only deportations but murderous deportations. The conditions were so harsh that countless people died in the process.
Finally, not all of the deported nationalities were collaborating with the Nazis in any meanignful way. And some Russians also collaborate with the Germans.

So, the reason for deportations was collaboration or Stalin's paranoid mistrust to people of such nationalities? If second, can you prove your point?

Deaths in the GULAG are different for two reasons. First, they were inhuman holes, not common prisons.

Do you have the data of death rates in GULAG - was it higher than for example in Russian Empire's prisons?

Second, unlike in modern Russia or the US, the people there were frequently entirely innocent, so their suffering is to blame on Stalin, not on them.

How frequently? Why modern U.S. has higher incarceration rate than Stalin's USSR if so many people in GULAG were innocent?

Encyclopedia Brittanica and many other sources claim there was no natural reason for famine.

Here, another "obscure and non-mainstream source" for you:

"This interpretation of the famine overlooks inconsistencies between official grain harvest statistics for the early 1930s and the evidence of famine, as well as indications from other sources that these statistics are unreliable. New Soviet archival data show that the 1932 harvest was much smaller than has been assumed and call for revision of the genocide interpretation."

"A 25 February 1933 Central Committee allotted seed loans of 320.000 tons to Ukraine and 240.000 tons to the northern Caucasus. Seed loans were also made to the Lower Volga and may have been made to the other regions as well. Kul'chyts'kyy cites Ukrainian party archives showing that total aid to Ukraine alone was 60 percent more than amount exported during the same period"

Mark Tauger, "The 1932 Harvest and the Famine of 1933"
http://www.as.wvu.edu/history/Facul...932 Harvest and the Famine of 1933, SR 91.pdf

Apparently, there was clear intention to starve off Ukrainians

I am willing to bet in some selected countries of those regions it increased more than in the USSR. There's nothing remarkable, and the West achieved more. Countries like Korea, Taiwan and several others managed to educate their population, raise life expectancy much above Russia's and industrialise a lot without resorting to Stalinist terror. And their starting point was much worse than Russia. How come?

Wanna compare those Korean and Taiwanese life expectancy and education parameters with Soviet ones in 1960s, right after "Stalinist terror" times? When USSR just had launched first space satellite and was building nuclear weapons? Which obviously has nothing to do with education...

You claim that he was just another dictator.

No! He was very-very special dictator.

If you won't acknowledge you're still in denial.

Yes, you promised to continue blaming me. Proceed.

BTW, Are everybody who refuse to accept that Soviet famines 1932-1933 were created purposedly and were act of genocide, Stalin's apologists?

 

[Yeekim]

Agree, they were mistreated. Though you should understand the difference between exterminations because of ideology of racial supremacy (in Nazi case) and deportations, after some WW2 events which some of that people participated into.

Sure, I agree that (institutionalized) racism was typically not among vices of USSR. Just wanted to point out some exceptions.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Calling historians "mainstream" is meaningless, since in this case it means "Western" and "Pro-Western," and just because there is a chorus of Western historians chanting something doesn't mean its true. For example, how can you claim to trust the "factual emperical evidence" produced by a member of British propaganda, the IRD? But I'm all to aware of the tendency to see anti-communist writings as "fair and balanced" and "unbiased" while anything that challenges those conclusions or suggests something contrary is Stalinist apologism.

 

[red_elk]

PACE refuses to label Soviet-era Great Famine genocide against Ukrainians
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has refused to recognize the Great Famine that struck the Soviet Union in the 1930s as genocide of the Ukrainian people.

PACE’s decision comes just a day after the Ukrainian president said that Holodomor cannot be called genocide against any particular nation, since mass famine was a tragedy for all countries in the Soviet Union. His announcement marked a U-turn in Kiev's position on the issue, as the previous administration had actively tried to label the famine as Moscow's genocide of Ukrainians.

However, according to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Victor Yanukovich’s words should not be taken as sensation.
“From the horrible famine of the 1930s, connected to decisions the Soviet leadership took, suffered Russians, Ukrainians, Kazakhs, Belarusians and many other nations that lived on the territory of the Soviet Union,” Lavrov said. “This is just an objective historical fact.” “And the fact that the Ukrainian president confirmed it should not be taken as sensation,” he declared. “It may be considered a sensation only in regard to the anomalous stance of the previous Ukrainian leader.” “I think that it is just a restoration of an absolutely normal, objective approach to history,” Lavrov concluded.

http://rt.com/Politics/2010-04-28/pace-holodomor-ukraine-genocide.html

Those damned Stalin's apologists...