Ukraine’s security service blew up a railway connection linking Russia to China, in a clandestine strike carried out deep into enemy territory, with pro-Kremlin media reporting that investigators have opened a criminal case into a “terrorist attack.”

The SBU set off several explosions inside the Severomuysky tunnel of the Baikal-Amur highway in Buryatia, located some 6,000 kilometers east of Ukraine, a senior Ukrainian official with direct knowledge of the operation told POLITICO.

“This is the only serious railway connection between the Russian Federation and China. And currently, this route, which Russia uses, including for military supplies, is paralyzed,” the official said.

Four explosive devices went off while a cargo train was moving inside the tunnel. “Now the (Russian) Federal Security Service is working on the spot, the railway workers are unsuccessfully trying to minimize the consequences of the SBU special operation,” the Ukrainian official added.

Ukraine’s security service has not publicly confirmed the attack. Russia has also so far not confirmed the sabotage.

  • mierdabird@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Probably not so much the other way, most Ukrainians are fluent in Russian, I doubt many Russians are fluent in Ukranian

    • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wonder how many Ukrainians can only speak Russian. Languages can be hard for some people.

      • 0ops@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I thought I heard that zelensky himself only knew Russian until relatively recently

        • Uncle_Bagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They are incredibly similar languages that are more mutually intelligible, similar to Swedish/Norwegian/Danish or Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian.

          • lad@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I heard it’s more like Spanish/Portuguese which share some similarities but not mutually intelligible

      • Kraivo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Mostly all. It’s because USSR only used russian as country’s language so every nation in the country was forced to learn this language and there were many nations in ussr.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not true, there were plenty of native Ukrainian speakers and those knowing it well, also with, eh, changing prestige of the language more people learn it, it’s very close after all, like Scots to English.

    • SkaveRat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can anyone explain how different the languages are? Super different or “they kind of get eachother, just are noticably different”

      • nolannice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 year ago

        They have similar alphabets, grammar and a lot of cognates. If you only spoke one you’d be able to recognize most of a sentence with these things, but sometimes words are totally different. They probably sound similar to someone unfamiliar with both, but they are quite distinct.

          • lad@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            It appears, lexically they are closer than Spanish and Italian, close to like Italian and Romanian, but a bit further. There are many ways to measure language distance though, so this is just a vague analogy

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Actually they are not. It’s just that knowing a bit of the other language is too common to understand that for many people. Also very often for person asked some kind of surzhik (a mix) is imagined instead of one of these languages.

            That’s a bit like how English speakers often imagine Scots - just English with weird accent. It’s obviously not that.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Russian has too much Church Slavic influence, Ukrainian has a bit more Polish, German etc influence, and also the Church Slavic influence there is a bit different (say, the loanwords were adapted for East Slavic phonetics mostly).

          In Russian the prestigious language was Church Slavic, in Ukrainian - a written East Slavic language, so Ukrainian is a bit more consistent.

          If we hypothetically remove that, I’m not sure they’d be considered different languages (despite there being dialectal differences even in XII century).

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Similar enough for mutual intelligibility but different enough that Russian only speakers will probably run into a shiboleth

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Somebody once said to me that it’s rather like the difference between English and Dutch.

        If you ever hear Dutch it rather sounds like English and you’ve just not quite heard them correctly. If you were in another room and just heard the ebb and flow of the language you’d probably not be able to tell the difference, but in person directly you can.

        And as a non-speaker of both languages they sound basically the same to me so I think it is true

      • lad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is a lexical tree that gives some insight. Lexicostatistical distance would have worked better, I think, but I cant seem to find the numbers for that kind of metric.

        Here I’ve edited an excerpt from the table, that shows how far Russian and Ukrainian are and how that compares to some other European languages

        lexic distance comparison between some European languages

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t have data, but feels wrong. Maybe if this is about historical, genetic distance, then yes, Belarusian is quite a lot closer to Russian.

          But in reality Ukrainian and Belarusian have mostly the same West Russian lexicon, while Russian is different (say, more South Slavic, as in Church Slavic, loanwords), for historical reasons (in GDL West Russian written language was used for administration in its East Slavic parts ; in Muscovy Church Slavic was prestigious, so the official language was heavily influenced by that).

          • lad@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can as well download the PDF and read the description, the thing is not based on historical reasons, it analyses a selected part of each language core using algorithm that is used to analyse DNA distance, as far as I understand.

            To address what you’ve said, it sais:

            Four factors influence lexical similarity registered in the tree: (1) genetic or genealogical relationship of languages, (2) diffusion (language borrowing), (3) universal tendencies for lexical similarity such as onomatopoeia, and (4) random variation (chance).

            So the Ukrainian and Belarussian are likely different enough in everything else than the lexicon you’ve mentioned

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              So the Ukrainian and Belarussian are likely different enough in everything else than the lexicon you’ve mentioned

              They are similar in lexicon and grammar, but phonetically very different, almost as if they were in the opposite directions from Russian.

      • Kraivo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d say, Ukrainian have more brutal (deep throat) sounding than russian, but maybe it’s only local thing with Ukrainian guys i was talking with. So, usually it’s like 14 years old kid in Ukraine sounds like grown up Russian dude

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That may be about pronunciation of a few sounds, anybody from the southwest of Russia sounds the same.

          Also intonation in Ukrainian can on the contrary feel more gentle\polite.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, your imagination betrays you on this subject.

      Most Ukrainians are fluent in Russian, but with southern accent, and plenty of them also bad at Ukrainian at the same time.

      A lot of Russians speak it with the same southern accent and know some Ukrainian.

      There’s no clear border in that sense. Also there are still plenty of people born in Ukraine living in Russia and vice versa, maybe millions.

      For half of Ukraine and half the (Slavic) south of Russia the whole idea of choosing between being Ukrainian and Russian was preposterous not so long ago.

      • alvvayson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Very interesting to hear this.

        So are you saying that (aside from this war) people from Donetsk and Rostov used to be more similar to each other culturallly and linguistically than compared to either Moscow or Kyiv?

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In Donetsk and Rostov specifically - yes, but it’s still been a one-sided gradual change from people speaking Ukrainian or dialects closer to it to Russian with southern accent, as I said. Mostly during Soviet years, as Don, Kuban, even Terek Cossacks and their dialects would sometimes be described as Ukrainian. So yes, but not quite.

          While, say, in Polesye, Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian dialects literally form a continuum, which fits your question more as an example.

    • Siegfried@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think it could be worst for russia even thinking about fluency: as I understand, russia reallocated thousands of Ukrainians in its far siberian territories as part of the ethnic cleansing of crimea and surroundings

      Edit: this was done in the 30s

        • Chocrates@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Wasn’t relocation a huge part of the Soviet system? As they took territory they would move people around so that there were more Russians in the territories, presumably less chance at ethnic uprisings?

          • Justas🇱🇹@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, but that was not the only reason.

            The Soviets would send foreign intelligentsia and bourgeois (including slightly better off farmers) to die in Siberia in order to reduce the chances of uprising.

            They would also mix populations in order to reduce national loyalties and would also encourage mixed ethnicity families to eventually absorb smaller nations into the Russian identity.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not just Soviet system, Russian colonization of Siberia, North Caucasus etc was in large part done by Ukrainians. These people don’t usually identify as such, though, it’s a purely historical note.

            As they took territory they would move people around so that there were more Russians in the territories, presumably less chance at ethnic uprisings?

            And that’s false and seems to be taken from some strategy game.

            I mean, the USSR did have dubious ethnic policies, somewhere aiming for ethnically homogeneous population, and somewhere as intermixed as possible. Like ethnically cleansing Ukrainians from Poland and settling them in Ukraine, and ethnically cleansing Poles from Ukraine and settling them in Poland.

            The “moving around” thing wasn’t connected to this, it was a direct consequence of the “distribution” system where a graduate was legally required to work a few years in a place they were sent to (which could be on the other end of the union), and also people would move all over the union to study in better universities etc.

            Most people wouldn’t return to their birthplace, even if they wouldn’t remain at the place they were sent to after graduation.

            Which, well, makes sense for young people.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You do realize that Russians in Siberia are most often descendants of Ukrainian colonists, I hope? Same near Kazakhstan (and in it), same in the North Caucasus.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes that’s exactly what I meant, the similarity of the languages, but I didn’t know whether that is equal both ways. I sincerely hope you are right, that it’s more difficult for the Russians.
      I noticed this in the beginning of the war, that it would be relatively easy for Ukraine to perform sabotage in Russia. I’m kind of surprised it’s not more wide spread?

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s quite easy to understand each other for both parties, but Ukrainians actually learn the Russian language in school, so they can speak good Russian. Russians can’t speak good Ukrainian as they don’t learn it. And speaking is very important for sabotage operations.