Ukraine-in-a-thread

[Pannonian]

Economic sanctions. Putin can pour money at his problems, but he can't pour oil and gas at his problem. It's time to start phasing out natural gas purchases from Russia and start looking for another seller even if it means having to pay more. Maybe halt the shipment of two chopper carriers that are supposed to be built for Russia by France. Start tightening the screws until Putin gets a very clear understanding that aggression will cost him more than he would gain otherwise.

Legitimacy-schmegitimacy. Ask yourself if you are okay with Putin gobbling up chunks of Europe. If you feel just as safe today as you did yesterday, then by all means stay the course. If this develop is troubling for you, then we need to do something. Not talk about doing something, but actually do it. Hitler too had a referendum about taking Memel from the Lithuanians. And won. And everyone else said it was okay. Democratic.

I understand that Puerto Rico is currently going through a process of requesting US statehood. Now I suspect that that is rather more genuine than what is about to take place in Crimea, but both will give the requested state the option of incorporating it into their territory.

What would you suggest we do, if on the 17th or whenever the results come in, it turns out that Crimea have voted to join Russia. When that happens, Russia can withdraw troops, and that option will still be there. Would our argument, which our economic and military threats will hinge on, be that the democratic vote does not count, because Russia are expansionist? When Russia have already withdrawn troops before anything we do takes effect?

Note the date of the referendum, 16th this month, less than 10 days away. Russia will get their new legitimacy, without any need for overt action, before anything we can do becomes effective. What will your argument be for sanctions?

[rvg]

I understand that Puerto Rico is currently going through a process of requesting US statehood. Now I suspect that that is rather more genuine than what is about to take place in Crimea, but both will give the requested state the option of incorporating it into their territory.

What would you suggest we do, if on the 17th or whenever the results come in, it turns out that Crimea have voted to join Russia. When that happens, Russia can withdraw troops, and that option will still be there. Would our argument, which our economic and military threats will hinge on, be that the democratic vote does not count, because Russia are expansionist? When Russia have already withdrawn troops before anything we do takes effect?

Note the date of the referendum, 16th this month, less than 10 days away. Russia will get their new legitimacy, without any need for overt action, before anything we can do becomes effective. What will your argument be for sanctions?

I think you are getting to focused on the de jure technicalities. Can we wait 10 days? Sure we can and we will. If Putin backs down (and he can easily do that by telling his subordinates what kind poll results he wishes to see), then he has learned his lesson. I just don't think he's gonna back down. Then we have to step up. Vote or no vote, at the end of the day we can't afford to just limit our response to harsh words. At least I don't think we can. Believe me, I'm no warmonger. This is serious stuff though. Sanctions need to come first, they need to bite and they need to hurt. And no, I'm not looking forward to any of this: last thing I'd wanna do under normal circumstances is mess with the economy amidst a weak economic recovery. These aren't normal circumstances. I hope to God that I'm wrong, but imho this is just the beginning.

[Pannonian]

I think you are getting to focused on the de jure technicalities. Can we wait 10 days? Sure we can and we will. If Putin backs down (and he can easily do that by telling his subordinates what kind poll results he wishes to see), then he has learned his lesson. I just don't think he's gonna back down. Then we have to step up. Vote or no vote, at the end of the day we can't afford to just limit our response to harsh words. At least I don't think can. Believe me, I'm no warmonger. This is serious stuff though. Sanctions need to come first, they need to bite and they need to hurt. And no, I'm not looking forward to any of this: last thing I'd wanna do under normal circumstances is mess with the economy amidst a weak economic recovery. These aren't normal circumstances. I hope to God that I'm wrong, but imho this is just the beginning.

De jure technicalities matter when we live in a liberal democracy and we have a crap case to begin with, and our peoples are fed up with going to war on crap cases that everyone can see the weaknesses in. Doubly so when it scuttles our economy. Russia will almost certainly get their annexation option in 10 days time. Then if they're smart, and I don't doubt they are from events so far, they will withdraw any kind of presence, but leave the option open. There will be no expansionism just yet, but the option is democratically supported. And if we do anything, it will be against the lack of Russian presence, and against the democratic will of the Crimean people. You expect action against that background to last?

In addition to Puerto Rico's vote to join the US, part of the UK will be having a referendum next year on whether or not to become independent. Do you care to threaten the Scots with economic sanctions and military action if their vote goes the wrong way?

[rvg]

De jure technicalities matter when we live in a liberal democracy and we have a crap case to begin with, and our peoples are fed up with going to war on crap cases that everyone can see the weaknesses in. Doubly so when it scuttles our economy. Russia will almost certainly get their annexation option in 10 days time. Then if they're smart, and I don't doubt they are from events so far, they will withdraw any kind of presence, but leave the option open. There will be no expansionism just yet, but the option is democratically supported.

If this is what happens, then of course we don't lift a finger. I just have very serious doubts about it happening this way. I wish, really I do.

In addition to Puerto Rico's vote to join the US, part of the UK will be having a referendum next year on whether or not to become independent. Do you care to threaten the Scots with economic sanctions and military action if their vote goes the wrong way?

Scottish vote is not done under the auspices of a nuclear dictatorship, nor is it a case of one country stealing land from another country. I do hope that Scots stay vote to keep the status quo, but beyond that I do not feel in any way threatened by the vote results.

[Husar]

The fact that the protesters overplayed their hand does not give Putin the right to annex territory of another sovereign nation. Today it's Ukraine, I wonder who it might be tomorrow. Are you ready to trust in benevolence and good judgement of a despot?

Putin is as democratically elected as the new government of Ukraine. He's the elected president of Russia and not some unelected dictator.

I just don’t think Putin should get a pass on this.

Sure, he has a better image than most. Not too well deserved however.

He is corrupt, that is how he made his billions. He is volatile, and ruthless.

He has helped his country, apparently. At least they think so.

How much of that does not apply to various US congress members and presidents?

But strong-arming and invasion are not acceptable. Even it you don’t happen to like the other guy.

Once upon a time there was a country that didn't like that other guy. That other guy's name was Saddam...

[rvg]

Putin is as democratically elected as the new government of Ukraine. He's the elected president of Russia and not some unelected dictator.

Thank you, captain obvious.

Once upon a time there was a country that didn't like that other guy. That other guy's name was Saddam...

That's why there's an extra star on the US flag and Iraqi senators are causing all kinds of ruckus in DC. Oh wait... we don't do that anymore.
Nice try though.

[rvg]

I'm curious to know if Mr Myth has any interesting news regarding what his compatriot saw in Crimea.

[Husar]

Thank you, captain obvious.

Indeed, it was obviously necessary given the wrong names you called him.

That's why there's an extra star on the US flag and Iraqi senators are causing all kinds of ruckus in DC. Oh wait... we don't do that anymore.
Nice try though.

So you're saying there was no strong-arming and no invasion?

[rvg]

Indeed, it was obviously necessary given the wrong names you called him.

You know who else is an elected president? Robert Mugabe. Ain't he a charmer?

So you're saying there was no strong-arming and no invasion?

What I'm saying was that there was no annexation. Gotta say that I'm surprised that I have to explain this.

[Husar]

You know who else is an elected president? Robert Mugabe. Ain't he a charmer?

Is Obama a charmer?

What I'm saying was that there was no annexation. Gotta say that I'm surprised that I have to explain this.

Neither Ukraine nor Crimea have been annexed so far and noone was talking about annexation anyway in the segment you quoted.

[rvg]

Is Obama a charmer?

Of course he is. The man's a friggin JFK. He will be gone 3 years though, and that's great, good riddance. But not to acknowledge his charisma would be silly.

Neither Ukraine nor Crimea have been annexed so far and noone was talking about annexation anyway in the segment you quoted.

Please tell me the address of the rock under which you're living. I'm seriously considering moving there.

[Husar]

Please tell me the address of the rock under which you're living. I'm seriously considering moving there.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/annexation

2. To incorporate (territory) into an existing political unit such as a country, state, county, or city.

This has already happened? Has Russia officially announced that Crimea is now Russian territory?
Haven't heard that yet from under my rock.

[Fragony]

If you aren't afraid of those who have power over you you are an idiot imho.

[rvg]

Haven't heard that yet from under my rock.

That's why I'd wanna move there. Away from the troubles of this world.

[Brenus]

“The democratic vote must be annulled,” Err, that was done before, and not in Putin’s Russia but in Europe, where all countries which vote “no” to the European Referendum were batter to death until they change their vote or the electors’ decision by-passed by Parliament (i.e. France).
You have referendums and referendums. Like you have recognised International Borders and others not so much recognised International Borders, NATO Rescuing Missions and Land(s) Grabbing Russian Aggression.

“Maybe halt the shipment of two chopper carriers that are supposed to be built for Russia by France” And who will pay the workers your decision put on out of job? French tax payers. Who will provide the natural gaz to Europe: USA, so money does there: Smart from USA, not that much for EU. We pay for US failed policy.

“Hitler too had a referendum about taking Memel from the Lithuanians. And won.” EU and USA had a referendum in Kosovo. You can fill what follows…

“but imho this is just the beginning.” Ahhh, the good “domino effect”, dear to the US heart…

“What I'm saying was that there was no annexation.” Sorry, can’t stop laughing… News: Putting Military bases in every country you attack is NOT an annexation, and Hitler didn’t annex the Sudetes, or USSR Latvia, Lithuania, and others. France and UK never annex their Colonial Empires.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Interesting: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-26491349

FSB?

This woman appears to be travelling Ukraine to tell people how great the Russians are.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I want to see the EU expand and weaken under the weight.

I would support the independence of Crimea if it didn't come at the end of a Russian gun with annexation expected.

The EU and NATO need black sea military capabilities for hard power projection to strengthen soft power intentions.

The US needs to get creative with sanctions which target individuals in the Kremlin.

Ukraine has a tough job, but calling the revolutionary government illegal is pointless. By that standard, all modern Republics are illegal as most were born by throwing away what was considered legal government at the time. The fact is that no government has a "right" to govern, they must just create a web of enough BS that the people stop questioning their monopoly on power and force. People saw through the chirade of Yanuvcovitch and exposed the mandate of heaven as a fraud. It doesn't mean our own governments have any more of a right to govern us just because of legalese, but the chirade is stronger. All men are born to govern themselves Individually. As there is no system that has been to tried effect this, we settle for BS power authorities of all stripes, but no government anywhere is legitimate.

[Gilrandir]

Interestingly enough, a few days ago, Putin unambiguously said that Russia isn't interested in annexing Crimea and still hasn't officially changed his position. Could it be that this is another blank check he's safe-keeping in case he needs it later, like parliament approval of use of armed forces...

Putin has also unambiguously said there are no Russian troops in the Crimea and those guys with machine-guns sitting in armored personnel carriers are Crimean self-defense forces. When he was asked about apparently Russian outfit of those he said that they could have bought it in some stores. I imagine that shopping:
- What would you like to have, sir?
- Oh, let me see... A couple of APCs, three military trucks, two dozen uniforms, a couple of hundred machine guns and bullets aplenty. You know, my wife likes those toned goggles, do you have any discount on them?
- I'm afriad not. Where would you like to have the stuff delivered?
As for negotiation stage we have reached, I think we haven't. As Putin states he can't have any negotiations with an illegitimate government of Ukraine. He does not recognize any obligations (including Budapest memorandum) as, according to him, "We did not have any agreements with THIS Ukraine. It is a new country and all older obligations are void." At the same time he thinks Ukraine must honor all treaties (not only economic but the Kharkiv treaty as well which allows Russia to keep Sevastopol navy base until cows come home).
The same point of view is held by the new Crimean government: we don't see anyone who has right to parley with us.

[Gilrandir]

Interesting: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-26491349

FSB?

This woman appears to be travelling Ukraine to tell people how great the Russians are.

It is what I said in my post but you don't seem to trust me.

[Pannonian]

I want to see the EU expand and weaken under the weight.

And why should the EU comply with this wish?

I would support the independence of Crimea if it didn't come at the end of a Russian gun with annexation expected.

The EU and NATO need black sea military capabilities for hard power projection to strengthen soft power intentions.

The US needs to get creative with sanctions which target individuals in the Kremlin.

Ukraine has a tough job, but calling the revolutionary government illegal is pointless. By that standard, all modern Republics are illegal as most were born by throwing away what was considered legal government at the time. The fact is that no government has a "right" to govern, they must just create a web of enough BS that the people stop questioning their monopoly on power and force. People saw through the chirade of Yanuvcovitch and exposed the mandate of heaven as a fraud. It doesn't mean our own governments have any more of a right to govern us just because of legalese, but the chirade is stronger. All men are born to govern themselves Individually. As there is no system that has been to tried effect this, we settle for BS power authorities of all stripes, but no government anywhere is legitimate.

These revolutionary governments acquired legitimacy after they showed that they could back up their words with force. However wonderful the ideals of your founders, they got their legitimacy not through declaring independence, but from defeating Britain in war. You may celebrate the declaration of independence, but the loyalists had no less valid a case, right up until the point where you decisively made your case by defeating and expelling their cause. At that point, the patriots became the legitimate government. Similarly with Russia and the Reds, China and the Communists, etc.

The Ukrainian would be revolutionaries threw out the existing rules because they weren't happy with the outcome. After that, legitimacy comes from whoever can establish facts on the ground. They thought they would be the ones to do so. It doesn't look like they're right.

[Brenus]

"If you aren't afraid of those who have power over you you are an idiot imho." Not really an answer to democracy and the need to right to bear arm. Perhaps it was not an answer...

[ICantSpellDawg]

And why should the EU comply with this wish?



These revolutionary governments acquired legitimacy after they showed that they could back up their words with force. However wonderful the ideals of your founders, they got their legitimacy not through declaring independence, but from defeating Britain in war. You may celebrate the declaration of independence, but the loyalists had no less valid a case, right up until the point where you decisively made your case by defeating and expelling their cause. At that point, the patriots became the legitimate government. Similarly with Russia and the Reds, China and the Communists, etc.

The Ukrainian would be revolutionaries threw out the existing rules because they weren't happy with the outcome. After that, legitimacy comes from whoever can establish facts on the ground. They thought they would be the ones to do so. It doesn't look like they're right.

It shows much more power to throw your government out with minimal loss of life. The EU will comply because of the natural need to expand until you come up against resistance more fierce than your own interest to expand.

[Pannonian]

It shows much more power to throw your government out with minimal loss of life. The EU will comply because of the natural need to expand until you come up against resistance more fierce than your own interest to expand.

In the EU's case, the need for Russian energy is greater than the need to incorporate Ukraine into itself. The US should be more familiar than anyone on how territorial occupation does not equal satisfaction of interests, as it prides itself on not being an imperial power whilst simultaneously having a finger in every pie around the world.

[Brenus]

“The same point of view is held by the new Crimean government: we don't see anyone who has right to parley with us.” So, you have a BIG problem, because, at the moment, Russian Troops are in Crimea, so you have to speak to someone. The entire problem is with whom. With the Crimean Separatists: you recognise (so legitimate) them.
The problem, imo, is this revolution started as a social revolt (against poverty, unemployment, corruption) and the spark came from the refusal by the Ukrainian Government of EU proposal and initiates the movement (like the suicide by fire in Tunisia did) for democracy and freedom. A social need started a political request. Then, thanks to poor choices, the extreme-right took the floor and stormed the revolution. Then Putin took advantage of it and “took” Crimea.
Due to the complete failure to understand (or anticipate) what the Ukrainian “Russians” would think of it, Kiev carried on a policy like if they didn’t exist. Because like it or not, no resistance at all was shown in front of the Russian went they went out of the barracks they had in Crimea.
It looks that the locals are more concern by Kiev than by Moscow. And all the rhetoric from RVG changes nothing to this reality.

“FSB?”: Sure. Spy always show themselves on social networks, as we say now…

[ICantSpellDawg]

In the EU's case, the need for Russian energy is greater than the need to incorporate Ukraine into itself. The US should be more familiar than anyone on how territorial occupation does not equal satisfaction of interests, as it prides itself on not being an imperial power whilst simultaneously having a finger in every pie around the world.

I don't know about that. Ukraine will receive Russian gas but the price will be higher. 80% of all Russian natural gas moves through Ukraine. They need to start taxing the movement if Russia wants to get petty about it.

[Pannonian]

I don't know about that. Ukraine will receive Russian gas but the price will be higher. 80% of all Russian natural gas moves through Ukraine. They need to start taxing the movement if Russia wants to get petty about it.

And you reckon the EU's going to be happy if Ukraine plays silly buggers? If Russia says the EU can have a relatively low starting price, but it gains massively in transit through Ukraine, what do you think will happen?

[ICantSpellDawg]

And you reckon the EU's going to be happy if Ukraine plays silly buggers? If Russia says the EU can have a relatively low starting price, but it gains massively in transit through Ukraine, what do you think will happen?

I don't know, why don't you tell me the future? Maybe the suggestion that this was all an EU ploy to weaken Russia will crumble. Or are you happy that your gas costs are subsidized by Russian exploitation of Ukranian land rights?

It doesn't make sense that Ukraine is worried about gas shipment cessation. Any gas that comes through Ukraine is Ukrainian if they were determined to take it. They are a middleman and middlemen demand a cut or they can stop the trade. Maybe Russia could build more pipelines through Belarus instead, but I suspect that EU encouraged revolution would occur there as well if that occurred - further isolating Russian interests.

[Pannonian]

I don't know, why don't you tell me the future? Maybe the suggestion that this was all an EU ploy to weaken Russia will crumble. Or are you happy that your gas costs are subsidized by Russian exploitation of Ukranian land rights?

Why should we care how our gas costs are subsidised? One thing is almost certain though. If Russia and the EU have a common interest in trade which Ukraine is blocking, then Ukraine has a far greater need for their neighbours than the neighbours have for them.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Ukraine isn't really in a position to do very much. Ukraine hasn't been able to pay for the gas it "buys" from Russia even at artificially low prices (payment for their cooperation, basically), and has been "tapping" the pipelines destined for the EU.

Not so long ago, that lead to Moscow reducing the volume of gas exports unilaterally. Only after the EU (well, the Germans and Italians, mostly) put pressure on them did they resume normal service, but both Germany and Russia have been quite keen to get rid of the unreliable middleman or at least find more reliable alternatives.

So I don't think Ukraine has very many bargaining chips when it comes to the current arrangement... they are beholden to that gas even more than any European country is...

[ICantSpellDawg]

Why should we care how our gas costs are subsidised? One thing is almost certain though. If Russia and the EU have a common interest in trade which Ukraine is blocking, then Ukraine has a far greater need for their neighbours than the neighbours have for them.

Yes, Ukraine is weak - I get it. But 80% of Russian oil and gas to Europe comes through them. They should use this as leverage instead of being bludgeoned by it. What it sounds like you are saying is that Europe has a great interest in the outcome of the Ukraine crisis. Maybe you should start treating your foreign policies like they have consequence and work to secure the black sea which is becoming a powder keg - from Turkey to Moldova to Ukraine, Russia, and Georgia. Start acting like a responsible international actor.

The American pivot to Asia was a great idea. Russia is weakest in Asia. Leaving Europe to fend for themselves has revealed serious gaps in the ability of Europe to secure itself. Good. Your defense spending is too low and it will leave you with few options to leverage conflict or secure your interests.