Printable View
Ukraine is currently a NATO partner. Perhaps immediately accept it into full NATO membership. That would oblige all of the other NATO members to come to it's defense should it's territory be invaded. I don't know if that would stop Putin as he has already determined Obama is a wuss and a push over, but might give him something to think about. Even that would be too late for Crimea, that's pretty much a done deal now.
http://loiter.co/v/watch-as-1000years-o ... rs-change/ watching that video makes you realise the Europe's borders have always been rather fluid!
A uniformed Ukrainian officer have been killed, it does not say by who though.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/445984386551267328
http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-soldiers- ... NlYwNzcg--
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
I don't know what you mean by Georgia. Can you elaborate? Georgia is an independent state and no one is disputing that?
The Russian invasion of Chechnya during the First Chechen War probably wasn't necessary. I have read that the Russian president Yeltsin failed to exploit all possible means of a peaceful solution to that conflict. Supposedly, he already had a date lined up to meet the Chechen president Dudayev to discuss all pending issues some time in 1994. Dudayev was going for it. Yeltsin likely would have to give some concessions to Chechens in order have them agree to remain as a Russian subject. However, Russian generals convinced Yeltsin to simply draw Russian troops into the capital of Chechnya in 1994 in order to end the separatist conflict without giving any concessions. This of course was an incredibly stupid decision. The Russian tank column was incinerated within hours after entering Grozny. Chechens are one of the most war-like people on earth and they were well-armed. The original Russian conquest of the North Caucasus in the 19th century lasted for decades because of Chechens, even though earlier in 1812 Russia defeated Napoleon's massive army. Chechens were also helped by the rugged mountainous geography that's well suited for guerrilla warfare. Anyways, in 1994, Russians came in like a bunch of drunken sailors completely unprepared for any serious resistance, or like a bunch of boy scouts on a field trip. After a long and bloody conflict, Russia effectively was winning the first war, at a huge cost, but withdrew because Yeltsin decided to cut a deal with Chechens as soon as possible in order to end the war at all costs because his political situation was extremely precarious. He was so weak that he almost lost the second term re-election to Communists (even though most people were quite sick of 70 years of Communist rule). Most Russians now think of Yeltsin as an inept corrupt drunkard who was an incredibly weak leader at the time when Russia needed a good one the most. The rise of Putin and everything followed was a direct response to Yetsin's mediocre leadership. "Is this what the liberal western democracy and capitalism are about?" most people thought. Once Putin came to power, for the first time in like a 100 years, Russians suddenly saw a well motivated, strong, and a healthy man as their leader, and really liked him.
Anyways, Chechnya became sort of de-facto independent after the first Chechen War. However, I personally would make the argument here that independent Chechnya was a failed state that also attacked the Russian republic of Dagestan. Therefore, the Russian invasion of Chechnya during the Second Chechen War and the re-establishment of it as a subject of the Russian Federation was justified for security reasons. The problem was that fundamental Islamism rose in Chechnya after the first war, a courtesy of various Arab fighters that came to help during the first war. Originally, the Chechen separatism was all about nationalism, and they wanted to build a secular state since their practice of Islam was considered "moderate". The Islamist ideology spread rapidly. The Islamists decided in 1998-99 that it was the time to establish an Islamic Emirate in the entire North Caucasus, stretching from the Caspian Sea to the Black Sea, most of it on Russian territory, of course. They invaded the Russian republic of Dagestan in 98 or 99? Not even Chechen president could stop them. This gave more than enough excuses for Putin to invade Chechnya and re-establish Russian rule. And by the way, a lot of Russians are saying even now, "let's just get rid of Chechnya and other Muslim republics because we're sick of the constant conflict and terrorism coming from that region". I don't want to argue whether this is right or wrong, but this sort of thinking among at least some people in Russia does underscore that Chechnya has little significance to average Russians. If Chechnya became independent, Russians would forget about it in a couple of years, but Crimea is a lot different. Russians have been having this Crimean fever for the last two decades since losing it after the dissolution of USSR.
Admitting Ukraine into NATO is the best way to start a new Cold War. Not the "soft" Cold War, but a real Cold War that used to be. In fact, most of Russian interference in Ukrainian politics is because Russia does not want to Ukraine to be in NATO. If sometime in 2000, some kind of real solid guarantees could be given to Russia that NATO will never expand into Ukraine, I don't think that we'd see the dramas of the Ukrainian politics starting from the Orange Revolution in 2004. However, for the last decade or we've been hearing from various corners of American politics (including directly from the White House of George Bush): "Let's admit Ukraine and Georgia into NATO".Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Calling for Ukraine to join NATO is like calling for Canada or UK to join the Warsaw Pact (when it existed). If Western troops move into Ukraine or if there is a serious talk of Ukraine joining NATO, I have no doubt that Russia will simply invade with its full might as much of Ukraine as it can. To Russians of Russia, the idea of say the city of Kharkiv or Donetsk or Kiev as a NATO base sounds as absurd as Montreal or London being a Warsaw Pact base. And I am sure in a lot of places in Ukraine, troops with NATO insignias will be met with rotten tomatoes and eggs as there is a lot of Russians there, and they view NATO troops as clearly anti-Russian. The talk of admitting Ukraine into NATO also helped to divide Ukrainian politics. It encourages the west politicians to be bold, and the east politicians to be on the defensive. As a diverse multi-ethnic country, Ukraine needs to decide how to accommodate this diversity. Setting up a federation would be one way of doing things. Instead, we see east and west-side politicians trying to suppress the other half of country.
Here is an opinion piece by Henry Kissinger that talks about these issues:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...0b9_story.html
I am personally kind of sick of seeing the big stand-off surrounding Ukrainian politics. This has been going on for years. For more than a decade, Ukraine has been the side of a covert proxy war between NATO (on political/military side), EU (on political/economic side) and Russia. For example, the foreign funding and advising for the 2004 Orange Revolution are well documented, as well as the Russian influence through TV and by other means. It would be very hypocritical to say that Russia is right or wrong without admitting the complexity of the rest of this conflict. There are plenty of reasons to blame every side:
1) Ukraine: damn it, none of this would have happened if you could just get your house in order. Your politicians are just as inept and corrupt as Russians in the 90s (Russians are still corrupt today, but at least they get at least _something_ done). Your military is a joke. Your economy is a joke. You're in need of an immediate 15 billion bailout. You are Greece v2.0. Of course, under such conditions, the hawks are going to be circling over your half-dead body. Keep the tabs on your neo-Nazi groups. Practice the democratic rule, not the rule of Maidan mob. Also realize that your political system cannot adequately accommodate the diversity of your population. Let people elect their governors locally, and let people use Russian as the second official language in the regions where they want to. Set up your republic as a federation, and most of your internal political conflicts will go away.
2. West: Encouraging Ukraine to join NATO is reckless as Russia will never accept NATO in Kiev. Don't embolden politicians who are clearly anti-Russian. If you want to help Ukraine, then help and encourage those politicians who want to fight corruption and incompetence, instead of simply playing on the natural divisions within the Ukrainian society. Your puppet president Yuschenko was a demagogue and an inept politician, and that's why he lost his re-election.
3. Russia: Stop encouraging Ukraine's east for an open rebellion. Invading and annexing territory of a European country seems pretty radical in 21st century. I understand the feeling of injustice after seeing predominantly Russian Crimea assigned to Ukraine, but peaceful means could have been exploited first. After this act, the rest of the world will merely tolerate you because they still need to do business with you. And if you invade, then take the credit for it, instead of saying that "local people's militias" did it. And, your puppet president Yanukovich was a corrupt and inept son of a mother, and that's why he was overthrown. (At least Putin flies in fighter jets and looks good shirtless, but what has Yanukovich got?)
Question. To what degree was the current situation caused by the businessmen and oligarchs who inherited power as a result of the breakup of the USSR?Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
Take the issue of gas. People need it to keep their boilers running. The Ukrainian Government couldn't really make people pay a market price for it because wages were still incredibly depressed; as such, the government effectively subsidized peoples' gas bills to the tune of 17% of GDP.
Do you blame the for the decisions taken in either Moscow or Kiev? And to what degree, are the billionaires who actually control capital of Russia and the Ukraine from Londongrad SW3 to blame?
Do you not believe in the sovereignty of a nation?Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
The annexing of Crimea will only hasten Kiev's desire to make alliances with the West. It's been shown that Russia is no friend of Ukraine.
Considering that you post this as a reply to my remark about the relationship of Ukraine with NATO, I think you haven't read my reply to Starter about Ukraine's NATO prospects just one above. And yes, I believe in sovereignty of a nation, but not always when it's a half failed chaotic nation that's being pushed by very much stronger special interests from abroad. Without the 800 pound NATO gorilla trying to muscle in by shamelessly exploiting the ethnic divisions in the Ukrainian society, Ukraine's sovereignty would not have been in question. Here in America, they require that kids study about tolerance in high schools and colleges. But what do they do in Ukraine? Trying to incite a new Balkan style ethnic warfare? Sovereign nation or not, bringing a strong foreign backed alliance to its neighbors gates is a very hostile and reckless act and Russia will respond, and very strongly. I think what we see in Crimea is only a demonstration. The hawks and neocons in Washington and Brussels say they want to bring NATO to Ukraine because they want to defend a weak but "freedom-loving democracy" (see their videos below) in the face of Russian aggression. However, in reality, what they want is to bring the NATO air bases, nukes and, missile defense right to Russia's border. That's what it's all about. Russia will never accept this, not only because of security reasons, but also because of a perceived threat of the Western take over of the very land where the Russian civilization formed originally in the Kievan Rus in 10-12th centuries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Moreover, bringing NATO into Ukraine is an unpopular and a divisive decision even within Ukraine. It's not even clear if a true democratic process would even allow this. South-Eastern Ukraine is populated by Russian-speaking Ukrainians or outright Russians most of whom see no threat from Russia. In fact, they are very idea of being a "NATO member" will be quite enraging to them. The day after a air base opens in Ukraine, there will be a mob of angry people outside the gates throwing rotten produce.
Here are some cool fresh youtube videos from the freedom loving Ukraine under the new pro-western government that strives to emulate the western liberal democratic values at home. Some of this stuff is both sad and hilarious. Why don't they run this on CNN?
A mob of protesters (almost certainly part of well organized radical militant youths who have filled Kiev) attack their own unarmed Ukrainian police on the streets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TNGxBfMg5k
Watching this makes me chuckle at the remarks of those who said that the popular protests in Ukraine that ousted the president were just a bunch of random peaceful guys being forced to defend against police. The extent the participation of far right wing and neo-fascist activists on the Maidan is becoming clear with each day.
A Ukrainian TV boss is beaten up in his office and forced to resign by Ukrainian MPs (!!):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5GeBpZ5VHY
Later they tried to delete the video, while some Ukrainian bloggers suggest that rights and liberties may have to be suspected sometimes because the country is at war. One of the guys doing the beating belongs to some kind of "Freedom of Speech Committee". The punishment was for transmitting Putin's speech from Kremlin days ago.
Video: A notorious far right activist Muzychko attacks prosecutor's office in Rovno (oldie, but still a goodie)
http://rt.com/news/ukraine-radical-a...rosecutor-080/
The right wing militias who now rule on the streets of Ukraine:
http://rt.com/news/ukraine-right-sector-militants-210/
Oh, I think I get it. You mean like Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, the two Congos, Syria and the Central African Republic just to name some of the first ones that come to mind. Not all are prime players as proxies for other countries but all most definitely qualify as "failed chaotic nations". So I should assume that all are ripe for picking by any neighbor who wishes to take over? All of those countries also have citizens of their neighbors living in them, so they are prime places to be "Putined".Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
do you not believe they are able to vote?? Plus they are a sovereign nation as a result of the voteQuote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
That's right. In that part of world, the weak will always be taken advantage of. It may be morally wrong, but it's part of human nature, or as some people would say, simple realpolitik. If Ukraine wants to move forward, its people and politicians coming from all sorts of ends of spectrum should say we are one people and we will work together towards a common goal. But instead, the center stage of politics is dominated by populist and highly divisive demagogues from extreme fringes of the politics and society, and most are just pawns in the hands of Ukrainian oligarch class. Here is another fresh video from Ukrainian Rada:Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7-nwKa4DlY
and a 10 years old but still quite relevant commentary from the contributors of now dead English language exile.ru:
http://exiledonline.com/ukraine-the-gogolean-bordello/
Now that the annexation is complete. At what point do the maps get redrawn? Or do they ever?
These days all the maps are drawn in pencil.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Has it not ever been thus?Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
I am with the Euros on this deal - Who gives a sh!t - fire up my heaterQuote:
Originally Posted by Mark
So Russia have been excluded from G8 or should I say G7 now. so will this hold do you think?
Also what will Russia do if lots of countries stop buying from them?
Do you think Russia have plans for there next conquest?
All questions which are worrying.
Should have been done when the first Russian soldier set foot in Crimea.Quote:
Originally Posted by steveaki13
Unlikely this will happen.Quote:
Also what will Russia do if lots of countries stop buying from them?
Yes. First eastern Ukraine then Moldavia.Quote:
Do you think Russia have plans for there next conquest?
i
Europe should stop worrying and start acting. Either that or start learning to speak Russian.Quote:
All questions which are worrying.
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Moldova is ROMANIAN territory.
I'm ready. I've already studied it for about 4 years. Difficult language.....Quote:
Europe should stop worrying and start acting. Either that or start learning to speak Russian.
I suppose that depends if there are enough Russians in Transistria to cause trouble for Moldova. Not likely anytime soon since Russia would have to swallow Ukraine first and then would be in conflict with Romania, a NATO member.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveaki13
Much of the Russian government budget is based on taxes from the exports of energy commodities: natural gas, oil, maybe some coal. There is of course some trade in manufactured goods (Russia imports electronics and manufactured goods and sells weapons) as well as agricultural commodities. If foreign countries stopped buying some of those key commodities, it would of course hit Russia hard. However, I don't see sanctions of this sort happening unless the West is prepared for an all out Cold War v2.0 with all the costs that implies. When you place trade sanctions on a country, you don't just hurt that country. You're hurting yourself. Once sanctions are in place, you have to buy the stuff elsewhere at a higher prices, if at all possible. So serious trade sanctions are not going to be possible at the moment.
One interesting possibility is to pull some kind of financial trick to make the Russian Ruble collapse. Russians depend on a strong ruble so they could afford to buy a whole lot of imported goods. Once a smartphone costs as much as a typical monthly salary, it could make things harder for Russians. However, Russia sits on a war chest known as the "Stabilization Fund" which receives a portion of commodity taxes when the price of oil is higher than some specific amount in dollars per barrel. Supposedly, as of March the fund has 440 billion in foreign currencies, so collapsing Russian Ruble is going to be very hard and very expensive.
Quote:
Do you think Russia have plans for there next conquest?
All questions which are worrying.
I don't think Russia has an outright plan to attack its neighbors, but after Georgia and Crimea, I am sure certain "contingency plans" may exist. The most likely target could be Ukraine again. The country has a relatively weak military, and it is divided along linguistic lines. The Ukrainian South East speaks Russian and does not trust politicians who represent the west Ukraine. The three big cities in the east are already experiencing an open revolt, with people rallying demanding the ability to elect their governors, some are asking for Russia's help or demand the right for referendum, just like in Crimea. In some ways, the East mirrors the situation in Crimea, although the East is not as important to Russia strategically as Crimea. All in all, a Russian invasion of mainland Ukraine will look very bad and the West will have to revise its response against Russia. So I assume that Russian invasion is only possible under extreme circumstances (e.g. NATO accelerates Ukraine's admission or a real civil war in Ukraine)
Baltic countries: highly unlikely. Russia already lost and conceded there. They're all members of NATO and NATO is bound to defend them. They're also members of European Union, so a Russia invasion will result in serious sanctions.
Belarus and Kazakhstan: highly unlikely. These countries are in pro-Russian camp. They're members of Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (Russian version of NATO) and Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia.
Moldova: The main sticking point is the status of Transnistria and the rights of Russians and Ukrainians living there. If the current status quo is preserved or if the Transnistria conflict is resolved in a way that satisfies the local Slavic minority, I don't see any reason why Russia would want a broader conflict in that area. For one, it's a conflict that Russia could actually lose because of the logistics. Moldova does not share a land border with Russia. The only Russian troops that could take part in the conflict would have to be airlifted to Moldova or go through Ukrainian territory (almost unthinkable because of Ukrainian resistance). Romania, a NATO member, certainly will not like this.
Georgia: The Russo-Georgian war started after Georgian troops invaded Georgia's separatist region of South Ossetia and fired on South Ossetian and Russian peacekeeping troops stationed there. The Georgian objective was to reconquer South Ossetia by force in a surprise attack. To me this seemed like a totally insane crazy mission since day one. It's akin to poking a sleeping bear with sticks, but apparently the former Georgian president Saakashvili was crazy enough to do it. His party lost the power, and he is now living abroad. It's unlikely the same type of conflict could repeat unless another crazy comes to power in Georgia.
Azerbaijan: This country threads safely, without joining the Russian security organization or the customs union, but also without doing things that are openly anti-Russian. They do a lot of trade with Russia. However, there is the frozen conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the Karabakh region, de jure part of Azerbaijan but de facto controlled by Armenians. I wouldn't be surprised if it could flare up again. Not right now, but one-two decades later, and then Russia will have to decide if it wants to choose sides. In many ways Russia has already chosen Armenia's side because Armenia is member of the security organization and the customs union, and there is a major Russian military base in Armenia.
Yes, because smartphones are the basic thing everybody needs to live...Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
I live in Poland, EU country, and smartphones here costs a monthly salary. What crimes has Poland commited so it's punished so hard by other countries? (I don't remember anexing anybody in the last decade)
From what I know, smartphones are already expensive in Russia, they cost more than in the West.
yep I sold my old iPhone 5 for 450us to a russian.Quote:
Originally Posted by moto99
The Israeli scythe is an interesting touch to an already farcical premise:
http://i.imgur.com/c7xpMhd.jpg
Oleksandr Muzychko, the scandalous activist of Ukraine's radical "Right Sector" group from some of the youtube videos above, got killed a few days under strange circumstances. He was killed in a cafe/restaurant shortly after a swat team showed up on the premisses. No one knows exactly what happened. Was this a hit or did he resist the arrest? The Interior Ministry does not deny that the cops were there to arrest Muzychko. Everyone knows that Muzychko always moved armed and possibly with bodyguards, so being killed when resisting an arrest seems plausible to me, but the leader of the Right Sector thinks it was a hit.
http://rt.com/news/yarosh-nationalis...n-killing-157/
Hey - What I want to know is how many countries are the Euros going to let Russia take?? Looking at the map they could have a hell of a payday coming. I am very glad we are on the sidelines for this one and hopefully we will stay there.
So instead of Russia packing up all of its military equipment after gaining Crimea, it still sits just over the border from Ukraine in waiting.
Now East Ukraine is being overtaken by more Pro Russian forces. I bet it will just happen that Russia try and liberate the east of Ukraine.
Only because they are Russian people who want to be part of the home country again of course.
They are saying on the News that Russia has said it has no plans to get involved. Not really much chance anyone will believe them after whats happened.
Russia are looking for more land by the looks of it.
What has happened?Quote:
Originally Posted by steveaki13
If you don't know then I cant help you. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowSon
yeah and the "pro Russians" in Eastern Ukraine aren't even living there but it is shipped in fro Russia by Putin.Quote:
Originally Posted by steveaki13
From hat I understand the majority of the people in Eastern Ukraine still want to be with Ukraine.
I cant speak from that angle as I don't know the facts, but I bet Russia will not worry about that fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by BleAivano
I am sure they will see it as an opportunity for a bit of conquest
I'll put up a couple of pints that say Russian forces will be in eastern Ukraine by the end of the month.
Seems from what the AP is saying is that this whole charade is organized and was done so well in advance of what we are seeing now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Crimea was the excuse to actually invade.
It is almost certain that the rioters in the eastern Ukraine are being organized and funded by some kind of powerful force, Russia probably. The Russian state is probably using its propaganda machine and agents to skillfully create an anti-west Ukrainian hysteria in the eastern provinces. However, I would stop short of saying that those protesters are Russian citizens. On Russian news, the journalists a few times asked people in the crowd where they're from, and they showed Ukrainian passports. A lot of them said they were pissed off to be accused to be from abroad.Quote:
Originally Posted by BleAivano
It's hard to see where is the truth. It could be that people in the crowd were given fake passports, though I doubt this theory right now. In east Ukraine, there are plenty of genuinely pro-Russian people, they may be the majority or large minority, and they have enough reasons to be pissed off because their president was ousted from power a few weeks ago by a bunch of unlawful protesters in Kiev, many of whom happened to be well-prepared, well-trained, and organized rioters with links to Ukraine's "Right Sector" organization as well as sponsors from abroad.
I suspect the Russia's plan is to force the government in Kiev to reform the constitution to change Ukraine's political organization into a federation. The troops at the border are probably to intimidate the government in Kiev, to prevent a violent crackdown on the protesters in the East, and to force Kiev to accept the idea of federalization. The Russian politicians are openly saying that they want Ukraine to become a federal state. I can see where this is going. Ukraine organized as a federation will forever remain weak and susceptible to Russian influence. This will also set the stage for the further partition of Ukraine in case of future upheavals.Quote:
Originally Posted by steveaki13
This of course, is really terrible. In my opinion, the politicians in Kiev should get their act together instead of engaging in fist-fights right on the podium in their parliament. They should send a strong message that they wish to transfer more power into the regions, but without accepting the federalization. People in Ukraine's provinces need to be able to elect their leaders. I think this alone could defuse a lot of tensions.
Masses are easy to be manipulated. It's enough to infiltrate a few stirrers in the crowd. I lived such experiences in 1990 when the country was divided into two camps. Living in the central area I had to attend ( involuntarly of course ) a lot of meetings and riots and was amazed by how people could act. Before that I was sure such things can't happen in my city and to my people.Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
Gadjo, if I were living in one of the former USSR client states, I would be very concerned. Should Putin take over eastern Ukraine (or all of it) there will be no real opposition from the West. He has large ambitions. Read your history books folks, those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it.Quote:
Originally Posted by gadjo_dilo
There is almost never a 100% "black & white" situation. I'm sure many in Ukraine had had enough of the corrupt government. Enough to essentially dissolve the country though? Doubtful, but then I don't live there. It's also doubtful that this was orchestrated from within Ukraine and that's where the problem lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85