Global Implications of the Ukraine Crisis

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

 

 

The amount of irrational hate you people harbor for the guy is ridiculous. 

 

The US and EU pulled the trigger on this one. The Russian response was necessary and predictable (which is the goal of the US anyway if one reads the discussion on splitting up Ukraine in Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations"). If it erupts into a civil war, blaming Putin is mere hypocrisy. Putin is doing what Putin has to do but the US did not have to overthrow the government in Ukraine.

 

Naturally, I'm against civil war and splitting Ukraine. If it comes to that the Russians should intervene and break Kiev's back quickly before the conflict turns into the agony of the Balkan wars and millions end up dead over nothing.

 

I never cease to be amazed by the justification that supporters of Putin go around the Ukraine crisis, your post highlights an aspect of it

 

So now we have a situation in eastern Ukraine where several cities have there government building occupied by well organised and armed Russian speaking militias. This is a situation that no government in the world would accept

 

These are legitimate Ukrainian government buildings outside of Crimea. It is obvious that Russia is fermenting and encouraging insurrection against the Ukrainian government with an end goal to force a federal system of government in parts of Ukraine that is favourable to Russia

 

You are an intelligent person, are you really going to sit there and tell me that you think Russia is not directly involved in this social unrest. And I mean outside of Crimea in other  eastern parts of Ukraine

 

 

They're as involved in this unrest as the EU and US were in the Euromaidan. The west overthrew the legitimately elected government (Yanukovich won his elections fairly) because it said "no" and installed an illegitimate one. European heads of state were parading in the street, supporting insurrection while protesters were burning Kiev.

Now that your side has achieved its goals (at the expense of quite a few dead Ukrainians) you want the situation to stabilize and go back to business as usual.

 

Except the Russians can't let that happen and everyone knew they wouldn't. The Russians feel their vital interests are threatened by this. Its a fair concern, the two countries do share a border after all.

 

Is what the Russians are doing okay? No. But its important to note that everything that is happening is a reaction to the US and EU destabilization of the region.

 

You make some good points around the Wests involvement in the overthrow of Yanukovich and the result of that  but was the West that directly involved? My understanding is that an EU aligned Ukrainian government replaced Yanukovich. But were there Western soldiers in Kiev and were there Western government's actively controlling the anti-Yanukovich movement ?

 

So in other words Russia's current involvement in Ukraine is much more direct than anything the West did around the removal of Yanukovich. I understand why Russia is doing it but that doesn't make it more right or acceptable

 

 

The US-EU did not need "boots on the ground" to achieve its goals in Ukraine. Their involvement was financial, logistical, intelligence and media support. As to whether they're controlling the movement look to the video above.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

I'm looking at this from a Russian perspective because that perspective is lacking in this discussion but I'm not thrilled by anyone destabilizing a sovereign country that is already in dire straights (economically) because I know what this spells for the Ukrainian people. 

 

 

Don't worry there is a very vociferous Russian perspective on these forums. Members like Zora, 2133, Oby, Vals and Sarex all support the Russian perspective and have similar views to you. So the Russian view is heard clearly, its just that many of us disagree with the reasons given for Russian involvement in Ukraine

[Bartimaeus]

US ambassador in Kiev and US assistant secretary of state discussing who should be the next Ukrainian government, literally hand picking them.

 

Before declaring the Crimea situation an invasion you'd have to read up on Crimean history. Technically it is taking over a part of another sovereign country (like in Kosovo) but Crimea was a part of Russia for a very long time and came into Ukrainian possession in a very unnatural manner (as a gift from a head of state that had no business giving away what wasn't his to give in first place).

 

I'm looking at this from a Russian perspective because that perspective is lacking in this discussion but I'm not thrilled by anyone destabilizing a sovereign country that is already in dire straights (economically) because I know what this spells for the Ukrainian people. 

 

I am aware of their (previous) status as an autonomous republic, and their previous ownership by Russia before that - both conditions, I think, are disregardable when concerning the annexation of another country's territory. Neat video, by the way. Doesn't prove anything of the sort, but it certainly seems that they had been planning, whether wholly as a deliberate scheme or as a contingency, for this sort of outcome. Politics...

Edited April 14, 2014 by Bartimaeus

[Sarex]

I am aware of their (previous) status as an autonomous republic, and their previous ownership by Russia before that - both conditions, I think, are disregardable when concerning the annexation of another country's territory. Neat video, by the way. Doesn't prove anything of the sort, but it certainly seems that they had been planning, whether wholly as a deliberate scheme or as a contingency, for this sort of outcome. Politics...

 

Well when you consider that this whole situation is a copy/paste of how Milosevic's regime was put down (minus the bloodshed(though that is mainly do to how Milosevic handled the situation)), you can't really blame people for pointing fingers. Maybe in 10 years when the Obama files are made public you guys will accept who's fingers were in the pie. But I think I'm being overly optimistic.

[Tagaziel]

You make some good points around the Wests involvement in the overthrow of Yanukovich and the result of that  but was the West that directly involved? My understanding is that an EU aligned Ukrainian government replaced Yanukovich. But were there Western soldiers in Kiev and were there Western government's actively controlling the anti-Yanukovich movement ?

 

So in other words Russia's current involvement in Ukraine is much more direct than anything the West did around the removal of Yanukovich. I understand why Russia is doing it but that doesn't make it more right or acceptable

There exists no proof whatsoever that the West was directly involved in the Euromaidan. Random phone calls taken out of context are not evidence. Troops armed with military grade weapons, gear, and vehicles using Western military plates would be.

 

However, stating that invading a neighbouring country and annexing large parts of its territory is perfectly acceptable because of the suspicion that foreign powers were involved in the protests is ridiculous. The same as the proposition that the West provoked Putin. The West provoked Putin in the same way that Chamberlain provoked Hitler.

 

By Emperor's logic, Russia can annex Latvia and Estonia once they try to diversify their energy sources, because "vital interests" are threatened.

[obyknven]

By Emperor's logic, Russia can annex Latvia and Estonia once they try to diversify their energy sources, because "vital interests" are threatened.

 

You forget about annexation of Poland and Alaska also

http://youtu.be/eK9XTPR3-BY

Paranoia is always so funny. But IRL Crimea stay independent state  as Belarus, Armenia or Kazakhstan, Russia only provide military defence, citizenship and integration of economics. Russians make Tamriel Empire IRL and this is really so cool. Really nobody don't surprised by series of revolts in Eastern Ukraine - people do want live in independent self-governing republics istead of be part of despotic unitary Ukraine (where all taxes consumed by Kiev, regions has nothing, they even can't elect own regional rulers etc etc). And don't forgot - people really don't want live in Nazi state.

http://youtu.be/g_dSz0hNVpU

[213374U]

Suicide is a complex phenomenon. I'd argue it's only partly rational.

 

You know what's a comparable logical model? Migration. If a society sucks, how many people leave and where do they go?

 

Well, the comparison is certainly warranted. But I'd argue that, much like suicide, it's not so much how things really are as how people perceive they are. Things here are pretty bad, and have been for a few years now (bad from our coddled, postmodern perspective—1929 Capitol Plaza squatters would surely laugh). Illegal immigrants are interned in overcrowded "immigrant housing centers" that are rather like prisons with poor conditions (there has been at least one case of inmates dying of disease and lack of proper medical care). That doesn't seem to stop African immigrants from trying to jump the border fence en masse every other weekend. Is that really a better prospect than what these people face in their countries, do they even have all the facts before they leave home?

 

I think the idea that "everything is AWESOME in the west" and the fact that it is awesome indeed to go to sleep every night on a full stomach are both factors to be considered when analyzing immigration. But as you say, it's a complex phenomenon.

[Hassat Hunter]

The theory gets old too. I've heard Russian instigators where behind the violence in Euromaiden. And now they're behind East-Ukrain. Where can the West get some Russian Instigators, they seem to be behind everything!

 

It's not in the least suspicious either that after Kiev has fallen 1.2 billion from the EU could suddenly go that way (where the hell does that money come from anyway, isn't there some crisis here? 0_o), right?

 

Or how this rebbellion is "legitimate" while actually democratic votes are "illegitimate" because of, well, the West says so (any other reason, there is not).

 

But sure... all that means nothing compared to Russian weapons being there. I mean, not like a lot of them have been sold and Russian military AK-47's are worldwide used now, right?

[Malcador]

People are too hung up on right and wrong when this is a game being played. Think DE was hinting at that, not that Russia messing about with Ukraine or the US/EU making designs on the Ukraine (even accounting for out of context, the phone discussions are a bit suspicious) are okay or good, but just how each player is responding to moves.

 

Indirect involvement is involvement nonetheless, and it allows you to claim your hands are clean.  Russia just does things more brazenly (seems to be a thing with Russians and/or Slavic people if I can generalize for an aside).

[Walsingham]

 

Suicide is a complex phenomenon. I'd argue it's only partly rational.

 

You know what's a comparable logical model? Migration. If a society sucks, how many people leave and where do they go?

 

Well, the comparison is certainly warranted. But I'd argue that, much like suicide, it's not so much how things really are as how people perceive they are. Things here are pretty bad, and have been for a few years now (bad from our coddled, postmodern perspective—1929 Capitol Plaza squatters would surely laugh). Illegal immigrants are interned in overcrowded "immigrant housing centers" that are rather like prisons with poor conditions (there has been at least one case of inmates dying of disease and lack of proper medical care). That doesn't seem to stop African immigrants from trying to jump the border fence en masse every other weekend. Is that really a better prospect than what these people face in their countries, do they even have all the facts before they leave home?

 

I think the idea that "everything is AWESOME in the west" and the fact that it is awesome indeed to go to sleep every night on a full stomach are both factors to be considered when analyzing immigration. But as you say, it's a complex phenomenon.

 

 

No I doubt they do have access to all the facts. It's quite possibly one more reason why they fancy living somewhere they COULD.

 

They won't of course. Because a fully naturalised westernoid won't pay the slightest bloody attention to facts.

[JadedWolf]

Saying that what Russia is doing is just the same as the U.S. and the E.U. were doing strikes me as rather simplistic. There's a difference in gradation.  The latter did not march their armies to Ukraine's borders, did not invade parts of the Ukraine and did not send in their agents to incite unrest while disguising themselves as native Ukrainians.That's not to say I think that what the U.S. and the E.U. are doing is much better. Both sides are simply playing power politics, and in the end it is the people in the Ukraine that have to suffer for it. Yanukovich was a crook, but this new government doesn't seem much better. Not too bright, either. If they hadn't started off by curtaining the rights of the Russian speaking population it wouldn't have been so easy for Russia to feign being the champion of the poor oppressed Rus people.

[Drowsy Emperor]

People are too hung up on right and wrong when this is a game being played. Think DE was hinting at that, not that Russia messing about with Ukraine or the US/EU making designs on the Ukraine (even accounting for out of context, the phone discussions are a bit suspicious) are okay or good, but just how each player is responding to moves.

 

Indirect involvement is involvement nonetheless, and it allows you to claim your hands are clean.  Russia just does things more brazenly (seems to be a thing with Russians and/or Slavic people if I can generalize for an aside).

 

Russia ran out of options. Yanukovich wasn't their "man", he was trying to play both sides. Every other party in Ukrainian politics is in US/EU pockets, along with key figures in the army (quite obvious since they failed to intervene when it was apparent that a coup was imminent). 

 

They must have been really threatened, considering that this is the second revolution in Ukraine that was sponsored by the west - the first time around, when Yuschenko came to power, they didn't react. 

The way I see it, having too little influence on the field and no perspective to increase it in time mean that they were to act brazenly or do nothing.

 

 

As for the people trying to whitewash the whole deal with the "we didn't do it like they're doing it" there's this:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article182058.html

Then there's the whole issue of the opposition sponsored snipers that the Estonian minister confirmed in the other leaked call. Euromaidan was going to falter and so they stepped up the heat by shooting their own people and police and blamed it on the government. I find it hard to believe they'd do something so brazen without confirmation from their sponsors.

I suspect its all true knowing that KLA terrorists were trained in camps in Germany and Austria prior to acting in Kosovo, but its a moot point to argue either way. There's not going to be concrete evidence any time soon and the events have gone rendered the discussion somewhat pointless.

 

The burning question now is if there's going to be civil war or not. The Russians know what's at stake, eastern and south eastern Ukraine, where they still have a strong base, has all of Ukrainian industry and the sea access. The rest of the country is worthless in comparison.

[Hassat Hunter]

Well, it's a little hard to march armies to the borders when you don't match borders... don't you think?

Not that the US really cares about borders, and happily attacks countries half-the-world away, but that's another story.

 

I would be very very surprised if they didn't actually have agents there assisting at Euromaiden. They're just better than hiding it than the Russians, and no-one's willing to look as dilligently for them.

 

The EU and US intentionally did this hoping to gain a stronghold so near Russia. Is anyone surprised they don't turn over and let us waltz all over them?

 

Also I find it funny putting a pro-west government in place isn't 'invading.' Maybe we should let Russia decide Congress next?

[Tagaziel]

Russia ran out of options. Yanukovich wasn't their "man", he was trying to play both sides. Every other party in Ukrainian politics is in US/EU pockets, along with key figures in the army (quite obvious since they failed to intervene when it was apparent that a coup was imminent). 

 

They must have been really threatened, considering that this is the second revolution in Ukraine that was sponsored by the west - the first time around, when Yuschenko came to power, they didn't react. 

The way I see it, having too little influence on the field and no perspective to increase it in time mean that they were to act brazenly or do nothing.

 

 

As for the people trying to whitewash the whole deal with the "we didn't do it like they're doing it" there's this:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article182058.html

Then there's the whole issue of the opposition sponsored snipers that the Estonian minister confirmed in the other leaked call. Euromaidan was going to falter and so they stepped up the heat by shooting their own people and police and blamed it on the government. I find it hard to believe they'd do something so brazen without confirmation from their sponsors.

I suspect its all true knowing that KLA terrorists were trained in camps in Germany and Austria prior to acting in Kosovo, but its a moot point to argue either way. There's not going to be concrete evidence any time soon and the events have gone rendered the discussion somewhat pointless.

 

The burning question now is if there's going to be civil war or not. The Russians know what's at stake, eastern and south eastern Ukraine, where they still have a strong base, has all of Ukrainian industry and the sea access. The rest of the country is worthless in comparison.

You know, I can't quite figure out why you think Ukraine should be treated as a part of Russia and that waging war on Ukraine is merely "affirming their interests".

[JadedWolf]

As for the people trying to whitewash the whole deal with the "we didn't do it like they're doing it" [...]

 

 

I find the "we" bit here rather odd, because I don't think anyone here has any say in what the U.S. or E.U. does.

 

You can live in a country (though the E.U. isn't even a country, and I really think some people here are really overestimating E.U. capabilities and foresight here - if anything, they've shown once again how incompetent they are at foreign policy) and still not actually be on board with or be responsible for what that country does.

 

As for German trained snipers? ... I'm sorry, but can I have some of that stuff you've been smoking?

[Sarex]

Well, it's a little hard to march armies to the borders when you don't match borders... don't you think?

Not that the US really cares about borders, and happily attacks countries half-the-world away, but that's another story.

 

I would be very very surprised if they didn't actually have agents there assisting at Euromaiden. They're just better than hiding it than the Russians, and no-one's willing to look as dilligently for them.

 

The EU and US intentionally did this hoping to gain a stronghold so near Russia. Is anyone surprised they don't turn over and let us waltz all over them?

 

Also I find it funny putting a pro-west government in place isn't 'invading.' Maybe we should let Russia decide Congress next?

 

Let's not mention their border with Mexico either. For a country that was founded with immigrants, that stuff is too funny. They are fixing things half way around the world but I guess it's too hard to do it on their doorstep. Cheap labor is too good I guess.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Sarex

[obyknven]

I would be very very surprised if they didn't actually have agents there assisting at Euromaiden. They're just better than hiding it than the Russians, and no-one's willing to look as dilligently for them.

 Psst! I have dark to you. Yanukovich IRL is US puppet, he sell entire Ukraine to Chevron and Shell (you can easy find news about this year ago )... and Russia overthrow him by Euromaidan, Russia is true creator of this event (though stupid foreighn intellegence services do huge amount of work instead us) and modern Ukrainian Temporal  government is Kremlin puppets - they destroy Ukraine as we wish. 

[Drowsy Emperor]

What Geman trained snipers, can't you even read the post before you comment?

 

@Tagaziel: The Ukrainian "government"  seized power in an illegitimate coup even though Yanukovich agreed to early elections (and other demands) and practically gave up. Yet they didn't accept that but took power by force (probably afraid of possible election results).

If you take power by force you're fair game in international relations. That's how the game works. Legitimacy isn't found under a rock, its earned, internally and externally.

 

For the Russians, the Kiev government is a non-entity and they're within their rights to do as they please.

For the west, they're a new client state that they pledged to support, so now they're doing it...sorta.

[Sarex]

In the first iteration of this topic I said that until there is a election held this new "government" is illegitimate, and various pro-west Ukrainians told me how it will take place, one even said in May. Well what happened?

[BruceVC]

What Geman trained snipers, can't you even read the post before you comment?

 

@Tagaziel: The Ukrainian "government"  seized power in an illegitimate coup even though Yanukovich agreed to early elections (and other demands) and practically gave up. Yet they didn't accept that but took power by force (probably afraid of possible election results).

If you take power by force you're fair game in international relations. That's how the game works. Legitimacy isn't found under a rock, its earned, internally and externally.

 

For the Russians, the Kiev government is a non-entity and they're within their rights to do as they please.

For the west, they're a new client state that they pledged to support, so now they're doing it...sorta.

 

I disagree that Yanukovich was removed illegally, but lets say you are correct for argument sakes. It is a strange justification for Russia to now use surreptitious methods to effectively  annex parts of Ukraine. This is about the sovereignty of Ukraine and the fact that Russia wants to create a buffer zone between it and an EU friendly Ukraine.

 

I want to ask you another question, lets say a country has an internal coup and particular government is overthrown. In your books does this now mean other countries can basically invade the country and challenge the new government. I am interested in your comment " take power by force you're fair game in international relations"

[213374U]

I disagree that Yanukovich was removed illegally, but lets say you are correct for argument sakes. It is a strange justification for Russia to now use surreptitious methods to effectively  annex parts of Ukraine. This is about the sovereignty of Ukraine and the fact that Russia wants to create a buffer zone between it and an EU friendly Ukraine.

 

I want to ask you another question, lets say a country has an internal coup and particular government is overthrown. In your books does this now mean other countries can basically invade the country and challenge the new government. I am interested in your comment " take power by force you're fair game in international relations"

 

 

I see your Russian illegal annexation and raise you an unconstitutional presidential ouster and a Crimean secession referendum. And no, "sovereignty" does not mean that a country (or whatever the hell you are applying the word to, maybe you can clarify) can do whatever and everyone else JUST SHUT UP, because governments are only sovereign under a liberal prism if they a) act in the best interests of the people, and b) uphold the rule of law. And they are always sovereign in lieu of the people, the primary source from which sovereignty flows.

 

As for your "question", let me pose a question to you instead. Which do you think is worse, an internal coup and subsequent invasion* by a foreign power or an invasion by a foreign power and subsequent forced government change?

 

*Reminder that there have been no shots fired in the Russian "invasion" of Ukraine. But I guess peeps consider the enforcement of a no-fly zone that results in some NATO members running out of ordnance more reasonable and lawful than a series of non-violent sieges that end with 80% of the defenders defecting to the other side and a referendum. Because the UN says so, and I heard somebody in the UN once won a Nobel Piss Prize.

[Elerond]

*Reminder that there have been no shots fired in the Russian "invasion" of Ukraine.

 

Except that there has been shots fired in the Russian invasion of Ukraine and I would also point out that Germany's invasion in Czech was also quite bloodless, but it was still invasion, as are every occurrence where foreign army goes in country uninvited by its government regardless of do you think that government is legitimate or not, or do you think that country is evil or not, or etc.. 

 

And using wrong doings of others as basis of your own wrong doings is just plainly idiotic reasoning, if you want to be the "good guy"

[Walsingham]

I say again that's it's at best naive to even be surprised by Russian intervention. It's not as if Putin hasn't got involved before.

 

And while I don't support it I am intellectually obliged to recognise that it's being run quite well.

[Sarex]

Except that there has been shots fired in the Russian invasion of Ukraine and I would also point out that Germany's invasion in Czech was also quite bloodless, but it was still invasion, as are every occurrence where foreign army goes in country uninvited by its government regardless of do you think that government is legitimate or not, or do you think that country is evil or not, or etc.. 

 

And using wrong doings of others as basis of your own wrong doings is just plainly idiotic reasoning, if you want to be the "good guy"

 

Dude you must really have trouble reading... Who here has said that Russia is the good guy.

[IndiraLightfoot]