Page 2 of 6
Re: Putin moves troops into Crimea ...
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 8:44 am
by WestCoastJoe
Yet world markets seemed to recover from their fright over the situation in Ukraine, clawing back a large chunk of Monday's stock losses, while oil, gold, wheat and the Japanese yen gave back some of their gains.
"Confidence in equity markets has been restored as the standoff between Ukraine and Russia is no longer on red alert," David Madden, market analyst at IG, said Tuesday.
Read more:
http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/putin-russi ... z2v0sHtmDP
Down day Monday. Recovery Tuesday. The markets do not seem overly worried about this situation in Ukraine and Crimea.
Re: Putin moves troops into Crimea ...
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:09 pm
by WestCoastJoe
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/04/world/eur ... index.html
Opinion: A divided Ukraine? Think again
By Maia Mikhaluk, Special to CNN
Maia Mikhaluk is a freelance photographer and one of the protesters who has been documenting the unrest in Ukraine since February 18. In these photos, she offers us a glimpse of the faces inside Maidan, the central square in Kiev where the majority of the demonstrations took place.
Editor's note: Maia Mikhaluk is a freelance photographer and Christian ministry worker in Ukraine. She has been participating in protests in the country ever since former President Viktor Yanukovych reversed a decision to sign a trade deal with the European Union and instead turned toward Russia, a move that sparked mass demonstrations in the country's capital, Kiev. Her essay first appeared on CNN iReport and has been edited for length and clarity.
(CNN) -- I am a Russian-speaking Ukrainian. I am ethnically half-Russian, as my father was born in Siberia. I spent much of my life in Donetsk, a Russian-speaking area of Ukraine. Now I live in Kiev.
My kids speak Ukrainian in school and with many of their friends, and we speak Russian at home. When my son's fourth-grade teacher talks to me, she speaks Ukrainian. I respond in Russian. We don't even notice that our conversation is in two languages.
I understand Ukrainian but don't speak it as easily as I speak English. I just never had any pressure to learn it. In Lviv, in the western part of Ukraine, most speak primarily Ukrainian, but even there, I never had anybody look down on me for my Russian. In the eastern and southern regions, many people speak Russian, and there is absolutely no forced "Ukraineization."
You might be asking what all this fuss is about in Crimea, the autonomous region of eastern Ukraine with strong ties to Russia. Why are thousands coming to the streets with Russian flags? It's easy to explain.
Tracking the crisis in Ukraine as it unfolds
Many people in Crimea and eastern Ukraine don't want the protection of Russian President Vladimir Putin. But there are some who are afraid of forced Ukraineization because they have been fed propaganda by Russian TV channels for years. The purpose is to convince Ukrainians that we are divided, not one country, and that the safest course of action for Russian-speaking areas is to break away and join Russia.
These ideas have been cultivated since I was a child. I remember when I lived in Donetsk in the '90s, how scared we were that a candidate from western Ukraine would win an election and force us to speak Ukrainian. But when I moved out of the area of aggressive Russian information, I quickly realized I can speak Russian in Kiev or Lviv and no one will ever be upset with me!
Over our 22 years of Ukrainian independence, fears of language or ethnic persecution have never come true. But they were kept alive by Russian propaganda. We understand that Putin is trying to escalate tension and provoke civil war in Ukraine right now. He can't afford for a free Ukraine to succeed: His own people might get an idea that it's possible to overthrow a tyrant and build a prosperous country.
U.N. Security Council meets to discuss Ukraine crisis
Putin won't succeed. Ukrainians are wiser than that and won't kill each other over the nonexistent problem of language. To demonstrate that, last week, people in Lviv (traditionally Ukrainian-speaking) spoke only Russian all day, and in response, those in Donetsk (traditionally Russian-speaking) spoke Ukrainian!
No civil war in Ukraine, Mr. Putin! It must be getting harder to justify the presence of military force to "protect" people when nobody is in danger.
I just talked to my friends in Crimea.
Yuri in Simferopol told me that it's a handful of pro-Russian extremists in the streets trying to make a scene for Russian video cameras -- they are showing that these are the Russians who request protection!
Meanwhile, the rest of the city is terrified by the presence of Russian military forces and are evacuating their families to central or western Ukraine.
I got a similar report from Luda in Kharkov. She said that a large group of Russians were brought across the border by buses, and they were the ones inspiring and instigating unrest that resulted in putting a Russian flag on a municipal building.
The amount of propaganda Russia has poured onto Ukraine is hard to comprehend. Putting troops on Ukrainian land is going to bring the very opposite result from what Putin expected: I believe it's uniting Ukraine.
Meanwhile, Russia and Putin are getting into deeper isolation from the world as more and more countries are recalling their ambassadors from Russia and condemning the government's actions.
Good job, Mr. Putin! Thank you from all of us Ukrainians (Russian and Ukrainian-speaking) for uniting Ukraine against your military aggression.
Re: Putin moves troops into Crimea ...
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 2:31 pm
by Sir Purrcival
WestCoastJoe wrote:Yet world markets seemed to recover from their fright over the situation in Ukraine, clawing back a large chunk of Monday's stock losses, while oil, gold, wheat and the Japanese yen gave back some of their gains.
"Confidence in equity markets has been restored as the standoff between Ukraine and Russia is no longer on red alert," David Madden, market analyst at IG, said Tuesday.
Read more:
http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/putin-russi ... z2v0sHtmDP
Down day Monday. Recovery Tuesday. The markets do not seem overly worried about this situation in Ukraine and Crimea.
That is normal really, initial fears, followed by recovery. It was effective enough however to send a message that guns and tanks won't be the most effective weapons in this conflict. You can be very sure that the wealth in Russia won't be reluctant to communicate their unhappiness with Putin when the pocketbooks are taking big hits. Their big industry is Oil and Gas. I'm pretty sure that Europe won't be shutting off the demand for Russian oil and gas anytime soon but if Russia continues on an aggressive course, then it might well become worthwhile to get the required supplies elsewhere. Russia can ill afford to shoot itself in the foot economically. The issues in the Ukraine would pail in comparison to the issues of an economy crippled by economic sanctions. The nationalistic pride that comes with an event like the Olympics soon fades in the face of unemployment and shortages.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:00 am
by WestCoastJoe
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/06/world/eur ... ?hpt=hp_t1
Crimea lawmakers vote to leave Ukraine for Russia, set referendum date
By Laura Smith-Spark and Michael Holmes, CNN
updated 8:26 AM EST, Thu March 6, 2014
Kiev, Ukraine (CNN) -- Lawmakers in Ukraine's Crimea region voted Thursday in favor of leaving Ukraine for Russia, which already has the Black Sea peninsula under de facto control, and set a referendum on the move for 10 days' time.
Citizens of Crimea will face a simple choice: Stay in Ukraine or join Russia.
It's not clear how easily the region could split off if the referendum endorses the move.
The autonomous region has a 60% ethnic Russian population, having been part of Russia until it was ceded to Ukraine in 1954 by the Soviet Union.
But not everyone may be as keen on coming under Moscow's direct influence. A quarter of the peninsula's population is Ukrainian and about 12% Crimean Tatars, a predominantly Muslim group.
The parliament in Crimea installed a new, pro-Moscow government late last month. It had previously said a referendum would be held at the end of March on greater autonomy for Crimea.
Citizens will now be asked on March 16 if they want an autonomous republic of Crimea within Russia; or within Ukraine.
Michael Crawford, a former long-serving British ambassador in Eastern Europe, cautioned that whatever the result, it may be meaningless.
"It does not follow that if Crimea votes to join Russia, that anyone will accept it," he said.
"For Russia to start cherry-picking bits of the former Soviet Union, cranking up referenda in Kazakhstan or Latvia or wherever you like, to try to carve off bits, would be against international law, and it would be something Vladimir Putin has said he doesn't want to do."
Putin, the Russian President, has insisted Russia has the right to use military force in Ukraine if necessary to protect ethnic Russians.
But he has denied claims by Ukrainian officials and Western diplomats that Russia has sent thousands of troops into the region in recent days. Russia says the heavily armed troops, in uniforms without insignia, are local "self-defense" forces.
The deputy speaker of the Crimean parliament, Rustam Temirgaliev, said Thursday at a news conference that the only forces allowed in Crimea are the Russian military -- and that all others will be considered to be occupying forces.
He said he'd advised Ukrainian troops to swear allegiance to the Russian army or leave Crimea under safe passage.
In the regional capital, Simferopol, residents have demonstrated this week against the interim government in Kiev, with crowds chanting in favor of Putin.
U.S. visa ban imposed
Amid the rapidly shifting diplomatic sands, European Union leaders are meeting in Brussels, Belgium, to discuss possible economic and diplomatic sanctions against Russia.
The U.S. State Department on Thursday imposed a visa ban on Russian and Ukrainian officials and individuals responsible for, or complicit in, threatening the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
President Barack Obama also signed an executive order laying the groundwork to impose sanctions against individuals and entities responsible for the crisis.
The impact of sanctions, if they were imposed, might be felt by other countries, too. Russian lawmakers are drafting a law that would allow the nation to confiscate assets belonging to U.S. and European companies if sanctions are slapped on Moscow, Russian state media reported Wednesday.
The Russian threat was not specific, but numerous large European and U.S. companies have interests in the region, and Russia is a major supplier of natural gas to Europe.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk called on Russia ahead of the talks to stop stoking tensions in his country, saying Moscow should embrace a political solution to the crisis.
Speaking alongside Martin Schulz, president of the EU Parliament, he accused Russia of further "provocations" in Crimea and urged it to pull back its forces.
"We must take into account that there is a real, dangerous and dramatic situation and tension," Schulz said.
At the same time, Schulz promised that Europe stood behind the new government in Kiev and a peaceful, democratic future for Ukraine. "We are behind you and your government, and we support you with all our means," he said.
Tensions remain high around military bases in Crimea, and there are concerns that violence may erupt as tempers fray.
Ukraine's Ministry of Defense said unidentified Russian forces had scuttled an old warship to block seven Ukrainian vessels in a Crimean harbor under cover of darkness Wednesday.
Meanwhile, riot police are in a standoff against pro-Russian demonstrators outside government buildings in Odessa, a port city in southern Ukraine.
And in the eastern city of Donetsk, protesters took over a local government building Wednesday as they called for a referendum on the region's status and greater autonomy, witnesses told CNN.
Russian criticism
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov earlier criticized the actions of NATO and a regional security bloc, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
Their actions "are not helping to create an atmosphere of dialogue and constructive cooperation" on Ukraine, he said.
The OSCE said Wednesday it had sent 35 unarmed military observers to Odessa in response to a request from Kiev.
Meanwhile, NATO warned it was reviewing its relationship with Russia and suspending some joint undertakings.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:08 am
by WestCoastJoe
So Putin says he has no desire to annex Crimea.
However, suddenly Crimean lawmakers vote to join Russia. Ukraine troops are given an ulitmatum: pledge allegiance to Russia or leave Crimea. Residents will vote soon on whether to stay in Ukraine or join Russia. 58% Russians in Crimea. We know how that vote will go, or appear to go.
No troops shooting at troops. Yet the net result of Putin's actions will seem pretty much like an invasion and takeover.
IMO his actions will hurt the long term interests of Russia. His actions will certainly demonize himself in the eyes of the rest of the world. Many Russian patriots will not like what they see happening. Russians in Crimea will not be unified in supporting Putin's actions.
After the breakup of the Soviet Union messy situations were bound to happen. This is just one.
............
Suggestions that Putin is out of his mind. Nah ... but he is getting carried away with self-glorification. Abuse of power. Not much doubt he is personally corrupt, as his cronies have gotten rich at the expense of the Russian people. Probably $40,000,000,000 graft from Sochi alone.
Awful for the people of Crimea and Ukraine, but it seems that the rest of the world will carry on, carry on ... No military intervention by Western powers. Lots of rhetoric. Minor sanctions.
..........
Is it possible that no military fighting will take place? I think so. It seems like Ukraine is compromised and uncertain. The West will not get involved with troops, ships or aircraft.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:28 pm
by Sir Purrcival
We'll find out. With western financial backing of 15 billion pledged to the Ukraine, they may be feeling a bit more secure. Ultimately, if they are smart, they won't fire the first shot of any conflict. If Russia is the first to fire, then they will really be pariah's and pretty much loose what little credibility they still have. The sad thing is that is that for all intents and purposes, the Ukraine wasn't trying to sever ties with Russia. They appeared quite content that Russia was and is their neighbour and that it would be in everybody's best interests to maintain good relations. The issue really appears to be a case of Russia wanting the Ukraine to be the beholden cousin which greater ties with the west would have threatened.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 7:48 pm
by WestCoastJoe
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/06/world/eur ... ?hpt=hp_c2
Ukraine PM: Crimea 'was, is and will be an integral part of Ukraine'
By Chelsea J. Carter. Laura Smith-Spark and Michael Holmes, CNN
Kiev, Ukraine (CNN) -- We're leaving. No, you're not.
That's where the crisis in Ukraine stood Thursday after lawmakers in Crimea voted in favor of leaving the country for Russia and putting it to a regional vote in 10 days.
This act drew widespread condemnation, with Ukrainian interim Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk calling such a referendum "an illegitimate decision."
"Crimea was, is and will be an integral part of Ukraine," he said.
It was a sentiment echoed by several world leaders, who called the scheduled vote and possible pullout violations of Ukrainian and international law.
"Any discussion about the future of Ukraine must include the legitimate government of Ukraine," said U.S. President Barack Obama. "In 2014, we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders."
It's not clear how easily the region could split off from Ukraine even if the referendum endorses the move.
The developments came at a dizzying pace Thursday as Yatsenyuk joined emergency talks in Brussels, Belgium, called by leaders of the European Union who support the Kiev government and want to de-escalate the crisis.
The EU and the United States announced plans to freeze the assets of Viktor Yanukovych, who was ousted as Ukraine's president after he turned his back on a trade deal with the EU in favor of one with Russia.
The rejected trade deal prompted months of protests that culminated in February with bloody street clashes that left dozens dead and Yanukovych out of office.
Interpol said it is reviewing a request by Ukrainian authorities that would allow for the arrest of Yanukovych on charges of abuse of power and murder, an allegation tied to the death of protesters.
Moscow has denounced the events that led to Yanukovych's ouster as an illegitimate coup and has refused to recognize the new Ukrainian authorities, putting the two countries on a collision course over control of the Crimea, a peninsula on the Black Sea that has long ties to Russia and has thousands of Russian troops stationed there.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has insisted he has the right to use military force in Ukraine if necessary to protect ethnic Russians under threat in Crimea. Ukrainian officials say no such threat exists and say Putin is using it as a pretext to control the region.
As the standoff continued, Ukrainian authorities announced the arrest Thursday of a leader of a pro-Russian movement in the eastern city of Donetsk. Authorities said he is a Ukrainian national named Pavlo Gubarev, a self-proclaimed governor of Donetsk.
In Crimea, worlds collide
Growing divide
The crisis threatens to not only divide Ukraine, but Russia and the West. Those two sides have exchanged barbs and threatened punitive measures against each other in recent days, all while offering divergent views on the situation in Crimea.
Two diplomats at the center of the crisis -- U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov -- met face-to-face on Thursday. They agreed to continue talking "over the course of the next hours, the next days'' to try to find a political solution to end the crisis, Kerry told reporters following the meeting.
The diplomats' bosses, Obama and Putin, talked for an hour Thursday afternoon, with the U.S. president stating "Russia's actions are in violation of Ukraine's sovereignty" and that there is a diplomatic way out, according to the White House.
Putin's office said the call -- initiated by Obama -- "revealed differences in approaches and assessments of the causes of the crisis and the current situation." He also voiced Russia's view it "cannot ignore calls for help" from eastern and southeastern Ukraine, before concluding that Lavrov and Kerry "will continue intensive contacts."
Such conversations haven't stopped either side from taking action.
EU nations, for instance, announced Thursday they will suspend bilateral talks with Russia on visa matters and have threatened travel bans, asset freezes and cancellation of the EU-Russia summit.
"Any further steps by the Russian Federation to destabilize the situation in Ukraine would lead to additional and far reaching consequences for relations in a broad range of economic areas," EU leaders said, having also threatened travels bans on certain Russians and the freezing of some assets.
The United States has taken action. The State Department has imposed a visa ban on Russian and Ukrainian officials and others that it says are responsible for, or complicit in, threatening Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Obama signed an executive order laying the groundwork for sanctions against individuals and entities responsible for the crisis.
Despite such pressure, Russia hasn't budged, even refusing to engage in direct talks with the new Ukrainian authorities in Kiev. As his office noted after the Obama call, Putin believes this government "is a result of an unconstitutional revolution" and imposed "illegitimate decisions."
The dispute has threatened to boil into a military conflict.
Putin has denied claims by Ukrainian officials and Western diplomats that Russia has sent thousands of troops into the region in recent days. Moscow says the heavily armed troops, who are in uniforms without insignia and who have reportedly encircled Ukrainian bases, are local "self-defense" forces.
Meanwhile, Russia has begun an air defense drill 280 miles (450 kilometers) from Ukraine's border, reports Russian state-run news agency RIA Novosti. A military spokesman called it "the largest-ever exercise held by air defense units" in the region.
Russian authorities said the drills are part of a regular combat training cycle, according to the news agency. But the move comes a day after the U.S. military announced it was beefing up the number of fighter jets in the Baltics, adding six F-15s to the four participating in a NATO mission in the region.
Five possible ways to end the crisis
Voting for Russia or Ukraine?
Amid all the diplomatic wrangling, it is Ukrainians who are most directly affected. And they hardly are speaking with one voice.
Furor in the western part of the country over Yanukovych, his powers and his bringing Ukraine closer to Russia led to his ouster. Now, most people here support the new government and oppose Russian intervention, as well as the prospect of Crimea becoming part of Russia.
The sentiment tends to be very different in Crimea -- which was part of Russia until being given to Ukraine in 1954 by Soviet leader Nikita Kruschev -- and other parts of southern and eastern Ukraine.
Late last month, the parliament in Crimea installed a new, pro-Moscow government late last month -- as armed, pro-Russian men besieged the parliament building -- and does not recognize the authorities in Kiev.
Citizens will be allowed to vote on March 16 on whether they want an autonomous republic of Crimea within Russia; or within Ukraine.
The autonomous region has a 60% ethnic Russian population, having been part of Russia until it was ceded to Ukraine in 1954 by the Soviet Union. But not everyone may be as keen on coming under Moscow's direct influence. About 25% of the peninsula's population is Ukrainian and about 12% is Crimean Tatar, a predominantly Muslim group.
As riot police looked on, hundreds gathered Thursday in the southern port city of Odessa under the flag of the former Soviet Union calling for unity with Russia.
"We are all standing here for Russia," one masked protester told CNN's Matthew Chance. "None of us wants to be part of the European Union."
Late Thursday, the management of the hotel in the Crimean capital of Simferopol where CNN has been based told the network to stop broadcasting from there. Other media outlets got the same message, and no reason was given.
Not everyone in this region wants to become part of Russia. Protesters, including one topless woman who was dragged away screaming, railed against the Crimean parliament vote and Putin. But they were drowned out by a heckling, pro-Russian crowd.
Alex Shiroki, from Yalta, said that his boss asked him, point-blank, "Are you for Ukraine or for Russia?" While his boss favors the latter, Shiroki does not, saying he'd probably leave if Crimea ends up splitting from Ukraine.
U.S. paves way for sanctions on Russians, Ukrainians over Crimea
Michael Crawford, a former British ambassador in Eastern Europe, said that may not happen -- at least easily or peacefully -- even if voters support such a split in the upcoming referendum.
"For Russia to start cherry-picking bits of the former Soviet Union, cranking up referenda in Kazakhstan or Latvia or wherever you like, to try to carve off bits, would be against international law," Crawford said, "And it would be something Vladimir Putin has said he doesn't want to do."
Yatsenyuk said that if Ukraine is broken up, the world will have trouble ever getting another country to give up its nuclear weapons program.
Why? In 1994, Ukraine agreed to give up its Soviet-era nuclear arsenal in return for guarantees -- signed by the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia -- of its territorial integrity and independence.
What happens now to Ukraine "will have an impact on nuclear nonproliferation programs," Yatsenyuk said.
Live updates of the crisis in Ukraine
U.N. envoy to CNN: Situation in Crimea 'dangerous'
Anchor quits: I can't be part of network 'that whitewashes' Putin's actions
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 7:52 pm
by WestCoastJoe
Kiev, Ukraine (CNN) -- We're leaving. No, you're not.
That's where the crisis in Ukraine stood Thursday after lawmakers in Crimea voted in favor of leaving the country for Russia and putting it to a regional vote in 10 days.
This act drew widespread condemnation, with Ukrainian interim Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk calling such a referendum "an illegitimate decision."
"Crimea was, is and will be an integral part of Ukraine," he said.
It was a sentiment echoed by several world leaders, who called the scheduled vote and possible pullout violations of Ukrainian and international law.
"Any discussion about the future of Ukraine must include the legitimate government of Ukraine," said U.S. President Barack Obama. "In 2014, we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders."
It's not clear how easily the region could split off from Ukraine even if the referendum endorses the move.
I expect the vote will take place. I expect it will favour joining Russia.
It seems to me Putin has let his emotions and ego rule his brain on this one. Better for him if the vote says stay in Ukraine. Whatever, he has made the problem worse. And he can wear the result.
Hopefully there will be no troops shooting at each other.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 7:53 pm
by Toppy Vann
I don't know the Ukraine situation if the vote is legal or note.
But as noted by someone I just here on CNN but didn't get the name the issue got rolling in November when the West demanded the country choose the West or Russia. This was to move NATO's influence and reach right to Russia's borders and as he noted it was for some 45 years in Berlin where the divide between NATO was during the Cold War.
His take was why did the west force this country to choose when it is one country and at least two people (those with Russian backgrounds and ties and those without who are more to the west). This forcing of the choice is what he is saying led Putin right or wrong to do something as he doesn't want NATO right next door.
He also noted that Putin thinks Obama is weak and he can't trust him (very true as he says one thing and does another and he cannot control the agenda in the USA like other leaders can). Putin trusts Merkl and there is the hope for the situation to ramp down.
I was surprised that this guy was on CNN with Cooper as I usually see this analysts with real critical views of the west or the USA on CCTV America - China's version of CBC except that the PRC control the message. I like to watch that channel as it is clear if they say something that it is their gov't policy.
Today CCTV had commentators from the west on that say the US strident position that has softened a bit is not held by the UK and Europe as they are in business and economic relationships with relationships and they use lots of Russia natural gas. The US is too strident and not realistic here as so much is for home consumption and local US politics.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:46 pm
by South Pender
I heard a foreign-policy expert on the PBS Newshour mention that Putin had declared years ago that he would someday retake Crimea for Russia (Russia had given Crimea to the Ukraine in 1954). So it would seem that Putin was just waiting for his chance, and it came when Yanukovych was run out of Kiev.
I think Putin is correct in seeing Obama as weak with regard to getting the US involved in any more international conflicts. My reading of the US response to events in Crimea is that they have been comparatively mute (mainly just the usual boilerplate)--at least compared to what we might have heard from the neo-cons in the previous administration. (However, remember that George W. Bush said of Putin, "I looked in his eyes and saw his soul," this being an endorsement of Putin's honesty and reasonableness!) As Sir Purrcival notes, $15B has been pledged to Ukraine, but that is entirely from the EU. So far, the US has, I believe, pledged just $1B. So one thing that they can do is match the European largesse. Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk has said that Ukraine needs help to the tune of $35B to make it through the next two years. I think the West would be wise to see he gets that, or close to it. I think that with that kind of support from the West, Russia would likely not invade any more of Eastern Ukraine.
One strategy would be to try to get Ukraine into NATO, but that would seem risky and provocative to Russia. John McCain has been saying for years now that NATO should admit Georgia (after the similar invasion of Russian troops there in 2008).
I think the view that the West forced Ukraine to choose between the EU or Russia is exaggerated. That choice has been available for some time to Ukraine, and the majority of Ukrainians would prefer to become part of Europe, rather than of a greater Russian sphere of influence. That's essentially the reason Yanukovych was booted.
But there's certainly more to come. If the vote by Crimeans to secede from Ukraine and re-join Russia goes ahead and results in the decision to secede, then the West has to think carefully about what to do. As foreign-affairs experts from different quarters have noted, if we let Russia do this in Crimea, have we opened the door to Putin to move into any country in Eastern Europe that it wants to annex under the pretense that it is protecting an ethnic Russian minority living there? To open the door for Putin to try to reconstitute some of the former Soviet Union? It's clear that that is precisely what Putin would like to do, and there are Russian ethnic minorities in many countries in the region--many of which were former Soviet republics. Fortunately, many of the nearby countries are already NATO members: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, the Baltic States, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia (this cribbed from a NATO webpage), and thus would be safe against this Russian expansionism, but there are other vulnerable countries there. The upcoming Crimean vote could become a tipping point.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:55 pm
by Sir Purrcival
I have to agree with the idea that the West didn't force the Ukraine to chose between them and Russia. There is a lots of bitter history between Russia and the western half of the Ukraine. They have long wanted greater ties to the west and it was only when their "elected" representatives decided to shoot down the western economic package that civil disobedience took place. There was no armed insurrection until the much endangered "ethnic Russians" started occupying buildings, until "unmarked" Russian soldiers started encircling Ukrainian bases and so on. As it stands right now, I have not heard of one "ethnic" Russian who has been threatened or intimidated by Ukrainians.
I think the real danger in this situation now is that if Putin gets his way and it certainly looks like he will, it will be the second time that Russia has invaded a neighbour with relative impunity. At least in the case of Georgia, there were some military issues taking place within Georgia where you could find some grains of truth in Russian justifications. Not so here. This appears to be a purely punitive set of measures aimed at not just at the Ukraine but any other neighbouring states that may not want to be as close to Russia. It will be equally challenging to negotiate with Russia in any reasonable way. Their success in these manoeuvres have emboldened them. They are committed now and cannot withdraw without losing face nor would they in anyway want to see their strategic interests in the Crimea's sea port threatened. As history has shown, they will boldly pronounce a set of circumstances as justification even if what they are saying makes them look like liars and frauds. They know that whatever they say, that the West is not going to go to war with them over the Crimea.
I predict the Russians are there to stay, that other non ethnic Russians in the area are going to be in for a hard time and that relations between East and West have taken a major step back to "Cold War" levels
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:23 pm
by KnowItAll
so, if crimea votes to join Russia and the rest of the world says it is illegal, will they also do the same if Quebec ever votes to separate???
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 11:08 am
by Sir Purrcival
I suspect any such vote in Quebec will be conducted with a little more credibility than this one. However, if I recall, there was some issues with the question posed in the last referendum. It wasn't something simple like "Do you want to separate from Canada?" There is a part of me that would not be sad to see Quebec go. I think that many are just tired of the ongoing saga that is Quebec. Even as part of Canada right now, I can't say that I get the feeling that I as an Anglophone feel particularly comfortable or welcome in "La Belle Provence". I guess they feel the same about the rest of Canada. I recently came back from the Dominican where a lot of Quebecer's go for holidays. When I travel, I usually ask locals a little bit about their country and culture and how visitors are when coming through. When I asked about who are the worst visitors this time around, I got the following, Germans and Quebecer's. Both being described as demanding and rude. As an RV'r, I also hear a lot of questions re: snowbirders and again, coming from the East, the overwhelming number of complaints are about RV's with Quebec plates. So maybe it is time to just let things take their course. If they think their culture is going to be more secure on their own, so be it. French is actually the 12th most spoken language in the world right now and slowing losing ground. If being like Fort Apache surrounded by English speaking regions is going help them (without all those Federal dollars to prop it up) then have at it. They can find ways to employ their young people, figure out how to convince manufacturer's that it is worthwhile putting French on labels for products going to an even smaller market in Quebec and so on.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:01 pm
by WestCoastJoe
Sir Purrcival wrote:I suspect any such vote in Quebec will be conducted with a little more credibility than this one. However, if I recall, there was some issues with the question posed in the last referendum. It wasn't something simple like "Do you want to separate from Canada?" There is a part of me that would not be sad to see Quebec go. I think that many are just tired of the ongoing saga that is Quebec. Even as part of Canada right now, I can't say that I get the feeling that I as an Anglophone feel particularly comfortable or welcome in "La Belle Provence". I guess they feel the same about the rest of Canada. I recently came back from the Dominican where a lot of Quebecer's go for holidays. When I travel, I usually ask locals a little bit about their country and culture and how visitors are when coming through. When I asked about who are the worst visitors this time around, I got the following, Germans and Quebecer's. Both being described as demanding and rude. As an RV'r, I also hear a lot of questions re: snowbirders and again, coming from the East, the overwhelming number of complaints are about RV's with Quebec plates. So maybe it is time to just let things take their course. If they think their culture is going to be more secure on their own, so be it. French is actually the 12th most spoken language in the world right now and slowing losing ground. If being like Fort Apache surrounded by English speaking regions is going help them (without all those Federal dollars to prop it up) then have at it. They can find ways to employ their young people, figure out how to convince manufacturer's that it is worthwhile putting French on labels for products going to an even smaller market in Quebec and so on.
Somewhere on this site I previously stated my position on Quebec separation.
Some of the aspects were like this ...
Last time they tried to separate the Separatists were surprised that non-French (Canadian born and immigrants) favoured staying in Canada. Those of Greek ethnicity, et cetera, felt they would get a better deal in Canada than in a separate Quebec. Jacques Parizeau blamed "those damn ethnics" for the vote failure. OUI to separate. NON to stay in Canada.
Well, I gather the non-French population is growing faster in Quebec than the French. So I fully suspect that any future referendum would also fail.
This conforms with my preference. I do not want Quebec to separate. Messy stuff (One of the bigger issues would be the isolation of the Maritimes from the rest of Canada. Join Quebec? Join the USA? We would no longer be "from sea to shining sea"). Although IMO if Quebec did separate, it would be pretty much business as usual. People would cross the border. Goods and services would cross the border. Quebec might get its own currency. Big deal. Quebec would suffer in that it would not be subsidized by Canada in any serious way. Pensions would be a problem for Quebec.
I see the separation issue as mostly a matter of French pride and some disaffection for the English language itself.
I used to be somewhat concerned about Separation, but after that last vote, I am no longer personally concerned. And I would be surprised if it even comes up for a vote again.
Just IMO ...
......................
The 1980 Referendum and the 1995 Referendum for Quebec Sovereignty are discussed in this Wikipedia article ... (which I will read later)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_sov ... y_movement
............
Would Canada act militarily to prevent Quebec separation? LOL ... Nah. If the votes went that way, there would be no military intervention.
And I do not think the USA would want that separation.
A vastly different situation than Crimea.
Re: Crimea votes: Stay in Ukraine or Join Russia
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:24 pm
by South Pender
There are very significant differences between the possibility of Crimea seceding from the Ukraine and joining Russia, on the one hand, and Quebec seceding from Canada and going it on its own, on the other. Whether or not the international community considers any vote by Crimea as legal is pretty irrelevant, I think, since it looks as though Russia will bully this through and get away with it. In all likelihood, such a vote is illegal from the viewpoint of international law because Crimea does not have the authority to make this kind of international decision, being a part of a larger national entity (Ukraine). But when we're dealing with thugs like Putin, these details, that decent countries respect, are completely irrelevant.
I can't really claim to know much about the culture in the region or many of the critical details, so may be dead wrong when saying this, but it seems to me that Ukraine might be better off (and have a better chance to succeed as a European country) if Crimea left. It's a tiny part of the country (a little over 4% of the land area and also of the population) that is close to 60% ethnically Russian. In Ukraine as a whole, there are only 17% ethnic Russians. That may be simplistic thinking on my part, so someone correct me if this is so.
The situation in Quebec and Canada is much more complicated because the rule of law actually applies here. Any separation from Canada would be messy. There are questions about whether Quebec, if it voted to separate, would be able to force that decision on the anglophone population, particularly a large part of Montreal. Then there's the whole issue of whether the First Nations in the province would go along with this without a lot of challenges, court battles, and possibly even bloodshed. There would have to be Canadian corridor established--that would create all kinds of disputes--to connect the rest of Canada to the west to the Maritimes. There would be many disputes, such as whether Canadian Government buildings belonged to the new country of Quebec, whether financial issues could be resolved, and on and on. Any separation process would go on, I think, for a number of years before the dust settled, and the now-two countries began to function in their new forms.
Edit: I didn't see WCJ's response when I was writing this, but do agree with him that separation seems unlikely for the forseeable future. Polls taken over the past few years have shown low support for separation. I don't see Madame Marois overcoming this, even with a new majority government that is seeming more and more likely.