Okay so some of your (both of yours) links require subscriptions and in not paying, but the about 5 articles I read exclusively talked about the Azov and one talked about the Colonel Melnyk reburial. Calling a Nazi collaborator from 1940s a hero is obviously a bad look, but that does not equal modern day Ukraine being Nazis.
And literally all the other articles talk about some sort of far-right volunteer group of militias (Azov) fighting the Russian separatists. How is Azovs political standpoint in any way indicative of the Ukrainian state’s political view as a whole?
Azov stopped being a volunteer militia when they were formally incorporated into the Ukraine military, given funding, training, and operational support. The government prior to 2014 was very very clear who the bad guys were (Nazis) and who rescued them from the Nazis (Soviets). Since 2014, the government has changed their stance. Now the Soviets were the bad guys and the “Ukrainian nationalists” were the good guys. Except the nationalists were Nazis.
a Nazi collaborator from 1940s a hero is obviously a bad look, but that does not equal modern day Ukraine being Nazis.
Why does this read like you’re trying to soften him? Just say “a Nazi”. Does it feel better to mention he was a Nazi in the 40s, or the “collaboration” part removes him from Nazism? Idk you tell me I guess.
Also throwing a parade for him in 2026 is what would implicate them being Nazi in modern day. Just FYI
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/11/ultranationalism-in-ukraine-a-photo-essay
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/ukraine-has-nazi-problem-vladimir-putin-s-denazification-claim-war-ncna1290946
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-06-12/ukraine-s-neo-nazis-won-t-get-u-s-money
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right-fighters-ukraine-neo-nazis
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/05/world/europe/nazi-symbols-ukraine.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/in-ukraine-nationalists-gain-influence-and-scrutiny-idUSBREA2618D/
https://truthout.org/articles/nyt-discovers-ukraines-neo-nazis-at-war/
https://www.reuters.com/article/opinion/commentary-ukraines-neo-nazi-problem-idUSKBN1GV2TC/
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraine-s-got-a-real-problem-with-far-right-violence-and-no-rt-didn-t-write-this-headline/
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/359609-the-reality-of-neo-nazis-in-the-ukraine-is-far-from-kremlin-propaganda/
Don’t forget (pick the least worse reporting publication)
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/24/world/europe/ukraine-melnyk-nationalist-collaborator.html
https://www.timesofisrael.com/ukraine-reburies-nazi-collaborator-with-state-honors-drawing-israeli-condemnation/
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2026/06/04/zelensky-s-rehabilitation-of-controversial-figures-in-ukrainian-nationalism-sparks-anger-in-israel-and-poland_6754112_4.html
Okay so some of your (both of yours) links require subscriptions and in not paying, but the about 5 articles I read exclusively talked about the Azov and one talked about the Colonel Melnyk reburial. Calling a Nazi collaborator from 1940s a hero is obviously a bad look, but that does not equal modern day Ukraine being Nazis.
And literally all the other articles talk about some sort of far-right volunteer group of militias (Azov) fighting the Russian separatists. How is Azovs political standpoint in any way indicative of the Ukrainian state’s political view as a whole?
Good luck to you guys!
Azov stopped being a volunteer militia when they were formally incorporated into the Ukraine military, given funding, training, and operational support. The government prior to 2014 was very very clear who the bad guys were (Nazis) and who rescued them from the Nazis (Soviets). Since 2014, the government has changed their stance. Now the Soviets were the bad guys and the “Ukrainian nationalists” were the good guys. Except the nationalists were Nazis.
It was 3 links but sure.
It does when it keeps happening.
When the president keep meeting with them, giving prizes, shaking hands and do not comment about the neo-nazi part of it.
Why does this read like you’re trying to soften him? Just say “a Nazi”. Does it feel better to mention he was a Nazi in the 40s, or the “collaboration” part removes him from Nazism? Idk you tell me I guess.
Also throwing a parade for him in 2026 is what would implicate them being Nazi in modern day. Just FYI