lemmy - Link to source

EU Intelligence Confirms China Trained Russian Troops for Ukraine War

European Union officials have confirmed that China provided military training to hundreds of Russian soldiers who were subsequently deployed to participate in Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

During a briefing in Brussels on June 12, a high-ranking EU representative stated that intelligence services have gathered clear evidence of this training. Training took place across multiple locations within Chinese territory, according to Deutsche Welle.

...

On June 15, EU foreign ministers are scheduled to meet in Luxembourg to address this development. The agenda includes a broader discussion on relations with China, focusing on security and foreign policy. Ministers will also examine the European defense industry's reliance on Chinese supply chains and potential strategies to mitigate those dependencies.

...

Previous reports from various international sources have suggested that these training programs, which allegedly occurred in late 2025, utilized six military bases in China.

These programs were reportedly focused on the operation of drone systems, electronic warfare tactics, and advanced battlefield simulations. Some of the soldiers involved were reportedly linked to elite Russian drone units that have been active in the front-line regions of Ukraine.

At the same time, Russia launched a three-day exercise involving its nuclear forces on May 19, mobilizing around 64,000 troops and 7,800 units of military equipment just hours before Russian leader Vladimir Putin departed for a two-day trip to China.

...

Чиновник ЄС: Китай навчав солдатів РФ, ті потрапили на фронт

У Брюсселі заявили, що мають докази навчання російських військових у Китаї. За словами високопосадовця ЄС, йдеться про сотні солдатів, частина з яких потім опинилися на війні проти України.
Ксенія Польська (dw.com)
#Ukraine
in reply to Sepia

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

Western propaganda says that Russia is the aggressor and eastern propaganda says the west is. When the country descended into civil war due to a violent coup each side blames the other. That is normal and the opposite of working toward peace. Wave your flag all you like but to me you look disgusting as you stand on the bodies of others. You should learn the actual history of what happened before you attack.
in reply to Seppo

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

Ohh, come on. If you are going to descend into childish abuse I am sure you can do better than that. How about "Kremlin bot"? I see it as you that is uneducated given you lack the ability to look at the situation objectively and would rather thousands of people die and a whole country is destroyed. If people only follow the propaganda they only go to war. I am opposed to war.
in reply to rockerface🇺🇦

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

Do you seriously believe that Russia has no right to defend the people of Ukraine from the nightly bombing of the Donbas and Luhansk? In a civil war both sides are Ukraine. One side supported the coup, the other did not. The democratic government had been violently overthrown and a large proportion of Ukraine did not support the government in Kiev, they were still Ukrainian. The people of Ukraine asked for Russian help given that the other side in the civil war had mainly US support at that time but now has EU support but they are still Ukrainian. Given that Ukraine has predominately voted for pro Russian governments prior to the coup it is perfectly understandable that a large number of Ukrainians wanted Russian presence so your wording shows your lack of objectivity. That does not mean you are wrong but you are showing your bias. I do not support the Russian side but unlike you I am able to see that they have one.
in reply to ModCen

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

Even in your article it mentions "On Thursday, the bloodiest day of recent unrest, at least 21 protesters and one policeman died." which suggests a violent coup. I am sure you are aware that the BBC is an extremely biased report yet they admit to the violence yet they say that it was not. I accept that you cannot see neutrality when faced with it but despite what you say there was still a violent coup with many people murdered. Yanukovych was not a good leader and I am not saying he should not have been removed but many Ukrainians supported him and murdering them puts the situation in doubt. If the situation had been allowed to take its course he would have left but the civil war that he fled completely changed the international view of what was going on. The problem for the coup organisers was that if Ukraine returns to normal a pro Russian government would return. If you look at the history of elections in Ukraine the people elect pro Russian parties. So the coup government started pogroms to remove the ethnic Russian and ethnic Hungarian population. So the country entered civil war. I do not support Yanukovych but I can look at the facts and see that a large section of the people of Ukraine did support him so I can see that the civil war was inevitable and to start a pogrom against those people was not a good move. A pogrom is the wrong word as it refers to a minority but it was a majority that were being ethnically cleansed. To be opposed to war does not indicate a support of either leader. Yanukovych fled the threat of imminent murder, that is not justice. Entire political parties were burnt to death in the aftermath. The BBC still cannot speak about the subject objectively and still only refer to Russia's invasion rather than the war in Ukraine. They still refer to a country that was in civil war as a "sovereign" country when by definition it was not because neither side controlled the entire country. That was not caused by Yanukovych but was caused by the coup.
in reply to Jamie

lemmy - Link to source

lokalhorst

First of all, China publicly denies being involved in the Russian war on Ukraine and tries to present itself as neutral country. The UK does not make a secret out of supporting Ukraine. The second point is, Russia invaded Ukraine for imperial reasons to gain territory. If you can't see how the sides are different, you are crazy, or stupid, or both.
This entry was edited (Sunday, 14 June 2026, 11:06)
in reply to lokalhorst

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

When did the UK admit to having troops in Ukraine and stop making out it only offered defence? Even if you were correct how would that change what I said? There are lots of differences between the two sides but when someone says that Russia invaded they clearly did not follow what happened. We took a side in the civil war as did Russia. We sent in troops secretly and after 8 years of trying to stop the ethnic cleansing and genocide Russia took a side. Russia took the side of the ethnic Russian people who were being cleansed which, given they are ethnic Russian I can see there reason. We took the side of the people waving the Bandera flag. The Nazis. At least Russia spent 8 years trying to agree a peaceful way through before Boris Johnson stepped in and got Zelenskyy to agree to war.
in reply to Jamie

lemmy - Link to source

Lucius_Sweet

The old saying goes that we need to know our history so that we do not repeat the mistakes of the past. Real life suggests that the general population is ignorant of history and would likely not understand it anyway.

You speak of the "ethnic Russian" people Putin was trying to protect in another land. This is the exact same excuse Hitler gave of protecting the Germanic people in the Sudetenland. This is the same lame excuse every imperial power has given for land grabs and you in your ignorance believe in it with no doubt in your naive little heart as you have clearly never read a history book. Dictators like Putin call people like yourself "useful idiots" as you eat up every little lie they tell with no questions despite how ridiculous it makes you look when you come out like this defending him.

in reply to Lucius_Sweet

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

I did not say anything about what Putin was doing, I only spoke about Russia. Yes, Hitler, Putin, Zelenskyy and even Trump are extremely similar. Tell me, have you ever lived in Ukraine or Russia? Do you actually know anything about what you are ranting about? Or do you simply like to provoke? You talk about history yet give no comments to back that. You simply rant. Do you believe that the UK could have taken on Germany in September 1938? Given that we lost in 1940 after spending two years preparing I doubt it. What would we have done without the help of Russia? Did Hitler spend 8 years trying to settle the issue peacefully? Did Czechoslovakia spend 8 years bombing Sudetenland before Hitler invaded? No, so I think you are simply dragging Hitler into the debate to sound righteous.
in reply to Lost_My_Mind

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

OK, I accept that yours was simply another poor attempt at abuse but lets try debate. Forget that I want peace and imagine that I accept that war is the only way. If we do have an all out war with Russia that involves Ukraine as the main battlefield, how would that help Ukraine? China, Iran etc. would take Russia's side which would mean arms exchanges in either direction. How do you believe we would survive? Even if you manage to murder enough people to claim a victory what state would Europe be left in? Do you honestly see it as worth the mass murder and destruction on both economic and infrastructure? Why is peace such a bad option? Remember, Russia only wanted a referendum. Russia wanted democracy yet Boris Johnson wanted war. The people of Ukraine voted for Zelenskyy because he stood on a platform of avoiding the war that everyone could see coming. It was not Russia or Ukraine that wanted this war. What do we gain? I walked through the streets of east London 15 years after WWII and the rubble had been cleared and there was just miles of roads with no buildings. Winning is not as great as it sounds. It took decades to rebuild Europe. To make me see differently you need to convince me that war is worth it. You need to tell me how war is better than democracy. We had the debate over Northern Ireland where there were two entrenched sides at war and it was US President Clinton that said that the UK should allow the IRA to run in the election. The UK said that they would never surrender to terrorists etc. (after having handed part of Palestine to Irgun) but eventually the IRA formed Sein Fein and were allowed to take part in the elections. They got 2% of the vote and the IRA crept away into the shadows. Peace works. The Ukrainian people want it.
in reply to Jamie

lemmy - Link to source

Lucius_Sweet

We had the debate over Northern Ireland where there were two entrenched sides at war and it was US President Clinton that said that the UK should allow the IRA to run in the election. The UK said that they would never surrender to terrorists etc. (after having handed part of Palestine to Irgun) but eventually the IRA formed Sein Fein and were allowed to take part in the elections. They got 2% of the vote and the IRA crept away into the shadows.


The absolute ignorance you have of the history of the conflict in Northern Ireland is mind boggling. I have never seen so much incorrect BS in such a short passage of writing in my life, take a bow son, truly impressive failure!

Not surprising you get fairly easy to verify historic facts so wrong given your crazy take on how we got to where we are in the Ukrainian war.

I walked through the streets of east London 15 years after WWII and the rubble had been cleared and there was just miles of roads with no buildings. Winning is not as great as it sounds. It took decades to rebuild Europe. To make me see differently you need to convince me that war is worth it.


It sounds like you are trying to say it was not worth it for Britain to fight against Hitler and Nazi Germany. That is a bold take. As long as the Ukrainian people want to fight Putin and his imperial land grab I will support them.

in reply to Lucius_Sweet

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

You seem be far too busy criticising to actual say what you think. I find that lazy. I am used to the childish abuse to deflect but you appear to attempt to justify you statement but don't. Please try again and make sense. I can accept that you have a different opinion but either give you opinion or accept that you are merely deflecting without a reason. I assume you wish to argue rather than discuss which is your option.

As for the second part. I recalled a memory. I did not suggest anything other than what I said. If you always accuse without cause you will understand that you are not someone who should be taken seriously. Why do you choose to twist what I said to reply to something else? More deflecting?

in reply to Jamie

lemmy - Link to source

Burstar

This is factually inaccurate. Ukraine has made several overtures for peace that russia has declined for imperialist reasons. Also, Ukraine has democratically declared their disinterest in becoming a russian vassal as evidenced by their ouster of the pro-russian government, which precipitated this whole thing. Freedom is more important than peace, particularly when all that needs to be done to obtain peace is for russia to withdraw to their pre 2014 borders and cut the shit.
Cries for peace at all cost are cries for capitulation, and consequently, pro-invader garbage.

Jamie reshared this.

in reply to Jumi

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

The French and the British had a defence pact with Poland in 1939 so they had a reason to be there. All wars involve two sides and therefore two points of view. As for accepting any offer from Hitler, given that he had made an agreement with Chamberlain and broken it I cannot see that as practical. Mind you, that was a very long time ago and it is far too late to work toward an end to that war. I am merely saying that I want this war to end yet all western governments want war. Russia already has over 90% of their objective. How many people need to die before you will be content?
in reply to Sepia

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Jamie

@Burstar Russia and Ukraine did have an agreement that involved Donbas and Luhansk holding a referendum on autonomy. Crimea held their referendum and at the time the coup government accepted it. Zelenskyy had actually signed that agreement and campaigned for election on a platform of enacting that agreement. Once the Ukrainian people had elected him he tore that up after a discussion with Boris Johnson. Everyone in Ukraine was fully aware of what would happen next. I fail to see how Zelenskyy was making an overture for peace given that it was Russia that had pushed that agreement. Russia has never wanted Ukraine as a vassal (do you even know what that means?) and would not take Ukraine if offered. They will however not allow the genocide that was going on to restart. Ukraine did not oust the pro Russian government that they had voted in to power. A small minority that had been armed took power. They do not represent eastern Ukraine or south west Ukraine. Who had funded them? You shout about "Freedom is more important than peace" yet you fail to respect that statement in regard to the 40% ethnic Russian Ukrainians or the 20% ethnic Hungarian. Why are only a minority allowed freedom? Is that freedom? When I was there it was less than 20% that could speak Ukrainian, now everyone else is being treated as second class. That is not freedom. So if Russia stops defending the people of Ukraine the majority lose their freedom that you claim to support. I do not support capitulation, the offer on the table was for referendum. The ethnic minority areas would have remained within Ukraine. After 8 years Russia stopped working for peace and took a side for the ethnic Russian people of Ukraine. Russia did not want capitulation, they asked for democracy. What is wrong with democracy? Democratic Ukraine ended with a violent coup financially supported by the US. Joe Biden stood on the stage at Maidan and encouraged the coup. You are attempting to make this ideological but I am talking about the facts. I seriously wish it had not got here and believe we should be discussing how to move forward but I think that our options are far fewer now. The coup ended the 2014 borders for very obvious reasons. Ukraine does not have a hive mind, why would those opposed to the coup get on board with it if they are free? Absolute freedom is anarchy which is not in any way freedom as it gives anyone the right to do as they wish i.e. I like your car so I will take it. Democracy is not perfect but it is the best we have. Russia wanted democracy the west wanted war. We got it and now we are struggling to find a way out without admitting quiet how much we lied to the people.
⇧