|
|
Post by spaceflower on Mar 2, 2014 17:45:57 GMT
In Crimea there is a majority of Russians. This has served as a pretext for Putin to invade Crimea with Russian troops. They have to protect the Russians. Just like he did in Georgia. www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/02/john-kerry-russia-putin-crimea-ukraineOf course, the Russians in Crimea are not threatened but the Ukrainians. The "threat" was Russia's diminished influence in Ukraine after the protests of Ukrainians in Maidan and the flight of Viktor Yanukovych. |
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Mar 2, 2014 21:47:18 GMT
The Guardian has taken a blunderbuss to the situation whilst the BBC's report is more measured, BBC report on Crimea. I'm not completely up-to-date yet so I won't comment yet. Edited to add: Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America Editor says "the West seems ill-prepared for this escalation of the crisis, which they should have seen coming - as I wrote when the protests were at their height. It was obvious Putin would not give up easily." America's only option now is an economic squeeze, but as Mark says, "The problem for Obama is that an economic squeeze takes a long time to work. Putin may not mind the diplomatic pressure at all - he seems to enjoy tweaking the noses of Western leaders." And therein lies the key. Putin knows that military intervention will make him popular at home, and he needs the popular support. It will detract from Pussy Riot and all the other groups who objecting to his abuse of power. And anyway, the Crimea is a solid area of Russian supporters. They even speak Russian and not Ukrainian. Force them to integrate with Europe and there will be bloodshed for decades, as there has been in Northern Ireland. I can only see an independent Crimea as the only humane solution. The problem is, what will happen to the rest of Ukraine? |
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 3, 2014 8:33:22 GMT
I am very upset by the situation in Ukraine. The problem is very complicated and I am pessimistic about the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeP on Mar 3, 2014 10:12:14 GMT
Is there any particular danger to Poland on account of sharing a border? (Plenty of other reasons to worry of course)
I assume the Russians are interested in the Russian-speaking south & east of Ukraine and if it gets to civil war it won't affect the north-west as much ...
|
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 3, 2014 10:31:42 GMT
How to live under the shadow of war? I just visited the eastern tip of Polish/Ukrainian border without realizing the Russian imperial power is crouching in. I don't think there is any real danger in the near future for Poland. But psychologically, I feel threatened and I really hate it  |
|
|
|
Post by JoeP on Mar 3, 2014 12:24:05 GMT
Who knows what could happen. I understand you feeling threatened.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Mar 3, 2014 17:06:26 GMT
What kind of argument is that? There are Frenchspeaking people in Belgium, therefore France could annect that area? And The Netherlands the other one? There are Italian-speaking people in Switzerland. The whole island of Åland is Swedish-speaking, would this give Sweden the right to take Åland from Finland?
There are of course Russian-speaking people in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania also. Would the rest of world just look on if Russia invaded there too?
Putin has declined to do anything about Syria b/c other countries should not intervene. But it is ok for Russia to intervene. What a bloody hypocrisy!
And EU, USA, UN, nobody can do anything. The Ukrainians stand alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 3, 2014 17:30:58 GMT
The situation there is not clear cut. There is real pro-Russian sentiment in Ukrainian society which has been mobilized so far by what happened in Kiev and the following Russian aggression. Indeed, there is not much the West can do right now. I am basically a pacifist, I sincerely hope a hot war will be avoided.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Mar 3, 2014 18:19:22 GMT
Realistically, the chance of Europe deploying their military is very small at the moment, however they have no choice but to give a very firm reply. If they don't, it gives Russia the upper hand in all future dealings. However, Europe is firmly dependent on Russia for gas and other forms of energy. Russia is holding a lot of strong cards at this moment. As long as it doesn't overplay its hand, I'm quite sure Russia will get what it wants.
|
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Mar 3, 2014 18:57:34 GMT
I agree.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Mar 6, 2014 1:02:34 GMT
I did not realise that Europe was depending on Russia for gas. How so?
|
|
|
|
Post by jayme on Mar 6, 2014 7:22:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Mar 6, 2014 10:39:58 GMT
I can't help thinking, as much as I abhor the use of force, that Putin's actions have stabilized a very volatile situation. Before his troops entered Crimea, I could easily see mainland Ukraine descending into civil war with the Russian speaking population in the east fighting against the pro-European majority in the West. Putin's actions may cause Crimea to secede - which is no great loss since Crimea used to be part of Russia until Khruschev gave the district to Ukraine in 1954 - but it has united the remainder of West Ukraine against a common enemy and most likely calmed the situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by whollygoats on Mar 6, 2014 18:04:55 GMT
Thanks, Steve...I was wondering when these boundaries got defined...often, that is the real problem, bad boundaries. Also exists in the Middle East and central Asia, all of Africa and Southeast Asia, thanks to European imperialism. What we are seeing is basically the result of the other side of the imperialism, from the Russian/Soviet sphere.
It seems as though the boundary fudged post-WWII was carried along after the disintegration of Soviet empire.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Mar 6, 2014 18:45:56 GMT
What I find disconcerting, is the number of Russian 'soldiers' trying to cross the border into Ukraine with weapons of all sorts.
Tangent, economists and socio-politicians agree with your view on Putin's influence on the situation. Despite that, Russia has no right to invade a country under the guise of protecting it as it did.
Still, I suppose we have no right to talk with Iraq etc. still in memory.
|
|
|
|
Post by whollygoats on Mar 6, 2014 19:41:11 GMT
The US has generated a huge, long list of sovereign nations it has invaded under the guise of protecting somebody...usually US citizens (Grenada) or 'American interests' (too many to list). The process seems to be a tried and true method of imperialist powers. We won't even start on the Brits...
|
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 6, 2014 20:37:32 GMT
I believe all nations have blood stains on their hands. But cynicism won't serve any good in the case of Ukraine. As far as I am concerned, politics and international diplomacy are both necessary evils. I am for a democratic, free and normalized Ukraine, maybe I won't see it happen, but I wish my kids' or their children will see it happen. In my lifetime, I (and my husband) witnessed 2 successful and relatively bloodless democratic transformations (Taiwan and Poland), it's not impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Mar 6, 2014 20:50:13 GMT
Tangent, economists and socio-politicians agree with your view on Putin's influence on the situation. Despite that, Russia has no right to invade a country under the guise of protecting it as it did. Technically, Russia hasn't invaded Crimea. Russia has a long-standing agreement with Ukraine to allow 25,000 troops to be stationed there and currently only has 15,000 troops. The provocative action that Russia has taken was to deploy them throughout the peninsular and the agreement did not allow them to do that. |
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 6, 2014 21:08:06 GMT
Steve, here is an article about the Black Sea Fleet agreement in Crimea: "Signed in 1997, the agreement was last amended in 2010, when ousted President Viktor Yanukovych extended the Russian fleet's lease in Crimea to at least 2042, in exchange for a modest 10 percent discount on Russian gas imports. Under the agreement, Russia can have up to 25,000 troops and personnel in Crimea, but there are plenty of conditions attached. In particular, only 1,987 members of the Russian military contingent can be marines and ground troops, according to Yevhen Perebyinis, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman. On March 3, during the United Nations Security Council session, Foreign Minister Andriy Deshchytsia also tweeted that Russian troops need to request permission from the Ukrainian authorities 10 days in advance to be able to leave their bases. “True, Russia can have up to 25,000 troops in Crimea, according to Black Sea Fleet agreements, but only on military bases and not around and armed with AKs,” the minister tweeted." Ukraine: Russia shows 'complete disregard' for Black Sea Fleet agreement in Crimea |
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Mar 6, 2014 21:14:56 GMT
I have never understood why territory matters that much - other than, I suppose, it is a genetic trait in us to want to own as much as possible and keep 'intruders' out. To me though what SHOULD matter is that human beings have certain basic freedoms and are happy. Why is it such a big deal whose flag flies on their walls?
|
|
|
|
Post by whollygoats on Mar 6, 2014 21:29:17 GMT
I have never understood why territory matters that much - other than, I suppose, it is a genetic trait in us to want to own as much as possible and keep 'intruders' out. To me though what SHOULD matter is that human beings have certain basic freedoms and are happy. Why is it such a big deal whose flag flies on their walls? Well...it's not much of a rationale in my book, but it is my understanding that much of conflict is also partially driven by 'ethnic differences' the Ukrainians and Russians being 'different peoples' with different languages and customs. I personally don't see it, but I do know that it has been cited as an element. Oh...on Belgium? What does happen when the Flemish and the Walloons decide that they can no longer share the same country? Would France and the Netherlands thereby gain those who would be repatriated, or would it just devolve to Wallonia and Flanders as independent nations? I understand that the Ukraine was said to be careening towards a civil war between the western oriented Ukrainians in the north and west and the Russian-oriented Russian-speaking populace in the Crimea and the SE region of the country. If that were a reality, could this move by Putin have potentially averted it? Perhaps, after all, it might actually be better that the Crimea be returned to Russia? |
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Mar 6, 2014 21:35:32 GMT
I still don't totally get it. Why can't people live by their own rules? That said I suppose it's not as simple as that - I would not, for instance, like to see British Muslims living under Sharia law (and I can't believe that most of them would either, no matter what some portions of the press might say)
|
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Mar 7, 2014 0:55:14 GMT
When you look at ancient maps of Eastern Europe, and not so ancient maps, territories have changed wildly. Take, for example Lithuania in 1387, which was vast, or Ukraine in 1654, which was tiny. People just don't know where they are or who they are. What is striking is how Ukraine has doubled in size under Russia's communist rule. The idea of sovereign territory has been somewhat fluid in the past.  Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1387 Ukraine's expansion from the orange area in 1654 to the present day
|
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Mar 7, 2014 1:12:17 GMT
but why does it MATTER? Surely all that matters is that human beings have basic freedoms?
|
|
|
|
Post by whollygoats on Mar 7, 2014 4:18:05 GMT
but why does it MATTER? Surely all that matters is that human beings have basic freedoms? No, Moose, that is not what has mattered, does matter, and, in all probability will matter at all; rather, it is control of resources. Those with the will and the way to control resources generally use them to obtain control of more resources and freedoms be damned. Freedoms are relatively recent inventions, actually. And many of them are fairly illusory, in my estimation. I do admit to cherishing my illusions, though. |
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 7, 2014 6:03:48 GMT
I hope I don't sound extremely petty and sour: many of you are born in powerful countries. I for one am originally from a 'country' that is not recognized by almost all other countries in the world. This fact doesn't matter much if I stay home all my life (under the condition that China doesn't care for us and let us be. But it does care a lot about Taiwan and still claim it's part of China). I have a strong position on territorial claim just because I know what it implies and I don't want my country to be part of the current communist, totalitarian China.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Mar 7, 2014 17:58:36 GMT
I agree, it does matter. We've drawn up borders for a reason. If we're going to redraw them, it should be because everyone involved agrees it's a good idea. I'm quite sure if the Netherlands decided to annex the UK and you should start learning Dutch because you're part of the Netherlands now, you would rebel as well.
Do you know how the current Belgium thing came to be? Because in 17 or 18-something some powerful countries decided it should be part of the Netherlands rather than part of France so the strong Netherlands could be a buffer against French expansion. It nearly lead to civil war, because part wanted to join France and the other part didn't but didn't want to be part of the Netherlands either. In the end borders were redrawn again et voilá we had Belgium back as it is now (on the understanding that it would act as a buffer though).
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvamiga on Mar 7, 2014 19:35:43 GMT
ON the plus side, we could be shot of Cameron and his goons!  |
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Mar 7, 2014 20:06:50 GMT
I don't think ours are a whole lot better, but in the light of the ridiculous laws and things that have been passed in the UK the last two years, you might be better off after all  |
|
|
|
Post by whollygoats on Mar 7, 2014 21:41:05 GMT
ON the plus side, we could be shot of Cameron and his goons! The the situation in Ukraine is not analogous to Nederlands invading the UK. It's more like Netherlands moving into Flanders and claiming it as part of Netherlands to protect the Dutch speakers in Belgium from the Walloons. The Russian speakers, with Russian culture, are already located in considerable concentrations (a la ethnic majorities in some political subdistricts) within Ukraine. There are evidently sufficient numbers who wish to return to Russian sovereignty and be shot of all the dramaz of Ukraine politics. At least that is the pretext. |
|
