The worst I have seen in concrete terms is trying to force Russian speakers to use Ukrainian, and that had been limited. It’s mostly just fear mongering.

Then you clearly haven't bothered looking very hard, here are a few things you could start reading to educate yourself:

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I see sins aplenty, but no genocide.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Third link literally discusses ethnic cleansing, but ok...

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It literally says the opposite of that on page 12.

This analysis and common political science definitions show that genocide, fascist, junta, and terrorism are not appropriate terms to define the conflict in Donbas.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The study chooses to avoid using the term genocide, but if you actually read it you will see that it clearly states that the conflict is based around national identity and ethnicity. It also documents lots of crimes committed by the Maidan regime, and genuine desire from the people of Donbas and Crimea to separate from Ukraine. If you bother reading other sources I've provided above then I don't know how you can claim that the regime is not involved in ethnic cleansing.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The paper doesn't avoid the topic of genocide. It categorically and explicitly rules out genocide by name. And just because a conflict is based around national identity and ethnicity does not automatically make it a genocide. Nor do acts of violence. This is war.