The Ukraine

[janaage]

I found it quite laughable that the biggest 'threats' have come from Canada and Australia. Like they really give two shits.

Bloody Aussies, beat England in the cricket, looking good in Saff Afrika, and they think they can take on the world!

[RobertT]

They both have large Ukrainian populations I think - need to keep those voters happy.

[Not that Nice If I'm Honest]

I think the big issue is the agreement that was signed a few years ago, to persuade (the) Ukraine to give up it's nuclear weapons (inherited from the old USSR).

Basically, (the) UK and (the) USA (along with Russia !!) signed an agreement to protect (the) Ukraine's borders, if they gave up the Nukes.

So if we are honourable people, then technically, it should be Armageddon.

Much as I hate the idea of global Nuclear catastrophe, if you sign up to an agreement, you kind of have to see it through

[Honkytonk]

I think the big issue is the agreement that was signed a few years ago, to persuade (the) Ukraine to give up it's nuclear weapons (inherited from the old USSR).

Basically, (the) UK and (the) USA (along with Russia !!) signed an agreement to protect (the) Ukraine's borders, if they gave up the Nukes.

So if we are honourable people, then technically, it should be Armageddon.

Much as I hate the idea of global Nuclear catastrophe, if you sign up to an agreement, you kind of have to see it through

I imagine Russia would argue that such an agreement is null and void as the prevous regime was 'forcibly removed' (after it shot protesters and turned peaceful protests into an armed revolt).

We should listen to the new Ukrainian government. They don't want boots on the ground, and there shouldn't be any. There ain't gonna be much of Ukraine (or indeed anywhere else) left otherwise.

[london_red]

Difficult situation. The people of the Crimean region are in the majority ethnically Russian from what I understand. They are semi autonomous, but had a pro-Moscow president in Kiev who was democratically elected and they seemed happy with.

Then unrest from the more EU friendly regions in the west of Ukraine depose the President and replace him with their own (unelected) bod.

Who should the international community be standing behind here?

Putin probably hasn't helped matters by sending troops in at such an early stage, but when he says he's trying to secure the safety of ethnic Russians who support the Moscow government, he's not wrong.

Imagine the end result of this will be Crimea seceding to Russia or becoming a fully independent state but there'll be plenty more muscle-flexing and international grandstanding before then no doubt.

[janaage]

Difficult situation. The people of the Crimean region are in the majority ethnically Russian from what I understand. They are semi autonomous, but had a pro-Moscow president in Kiev who was democratically elected and they seemed happy with.

Hang on though, the Crimea is only full of Ruskies because they were heavily encouraged to go there was Stalin had deported the 'native' Crimean tatars post second world war.   

Heavily caveated with - as far as I can tell from my reading on various sites, may be a load of ol' bs.

[pauld]

Difficult situation. The people of the Crimean region are in the majority ethnically Russian from what I understand.

Crimea is majority ethnically Russian but it's far from overwhelming - 40% are non-Russian, many of whom (e.g. the Tatars) have long memories of the brutal repression they suffered last time they were under direct rule from Moscow, and fear that if Crimea is reabsorbed into Russia, they'd suffer the backlash. They'd be unlikely to take that lying down.

They are semi autonomous, but had a pro-Moscow president in Kiev who was democratically elected and they seemed happy with

As I understand it, the pro-Russian Crimeans and Eastern Ukranians were in many regards just as unhappy with Wierd Al Yankovic as everyone else because he was corrupt, brutal and incompetent, but they did like that he was pro-Moscow and they like what he's been replaced with even less. Understandably so, the new Ukrainian government are an unappealing bunch.

Putin probably hasn't helped matters by sending troops in at such an early stage, but when he says he's trying to secure the safety of ethnic Russians who support the Moscow government, he's not wrong.

Putin's engineered most of the situation in the Crimea. There certainly is popular sentiment on the ground against what's happened in Kiev and much to be worried about, but this is no more a popular uprising of ethnic Russians welcoming in the troops who will protect them than was the case when Germany annexed Czechoslovakia in 1938 to "protect" the ethnic Germans of the Sudetenland. It's the same playbook, conveniently just after the Winter Olympics

Imagine the end result of this will be Crimea seceding to Russia or becoming a fully independent state but there'll be plenty more muscle-flexing and international grandstanding before then no doubt.

Bang on there. Most of it utterly ineffective and designed to be so - there's no way the West wants, or can afford, a war with Putin over Crimea, any more than we did with Germany over Czechoslovakia, Austria....

Of course if we did want to introduce some genuinely effective sanctions we could enforce the money laundering regulations against the billions of criminal Russian money floating around the City of London, forcing Putin's own gangster elites to turn against him. But if we did that the high-end London property market and banking sector would probably collapse, because we're as dependent on their gangsters as Putin is.

[ghanimah]

Putin's engineered most of the situation in the Crimea. There certainly is popular sentiment on the ground against what's happened in Kiev and much to be worried about, but this is no more a popular uprising of ethnic Russians welcoming in the troops who will protect them than was the case when Germany annexed Czechoslovakia in 1938 to "protect" the ethnic Germans of the Sudetenland. It's the same playbook, conveniently just after the Winter Olympics

I would argue that the crisis has come about due to provocation. If we remember it began last November when the Ukrainian government dramatically rejected the Association Agreement with the EU. Billed as a “trade agreement” it was in fact far more than that, it was the first steps in making the Ukraine a fully fledged member. The EU said the Association Agreement “"will significantly deepen Ukraine's political association and economic integration with the EU". It’s the same process Bulgaria and Romania went through.

Even as far back as 2007, we can see the process of integrating Ukraine was in progress: “The EU is seeking an increasingly close relationship with Ukraine, going beyond mere bilateral co-operation, to gradual economic integration and a deepening of political co-operation.”

With many bitter memories of being invaded on its western front, Russia has long been eyeing the increasing encroachment and influence over former Soviet states nervously. Ukraine was always a step too far. That was parking tanks firmly on Putin's lawn. There is no way for historical, military and political reasons that any Russian leader, not just Putin, was going to allow Ukraine to leave its sphere of influence and attach itself to the Western bloc.

What we’re seeing is what happens when you poke a big bear with a stick; the only real surprise is why it took Putin so long.

[DMR]

This international dilemma could be solved by someone doing the world a favour and simply shooting Putin in the face.

That is all.

[pauld]

I would argue that the crisis has come about due to provocation. If we remember it began last November when the Ukrainian government dramatically rejected the Association Agreement with the EU. Billed as a “trade agreement” it was in fact far more than that, it was the first steps in making the Ukraine a fully fledged member. The EU said the Association Agreement “"will significantly deepen Ukraine's political association and economic integration with the EU". It’s the same process Bulgaria and Romania went through.

Even as far back as 2007, we can see the process of integrating Ukraine was in progress: “The EU is seeking an increasingly close relationship with Ukraine, going beyond mere bilateral co-operation, to gradual economic integration and a deepening of political co-operation.”

With many bitter memories of being invaded on its western front, Russia has long been eyeing the increasing encroachment and influence over former Soviet states nervously. Ukraine was always a step too far. That was parking tanks firmly on Putin's lawn. There is no way for historical, military and political reasons that any Russian leader, not just Putin, was going to allow Ukraine to leave its sphere of influence and attach itself to the Western bloc.

What we’re seeing is what happens when you poke a big bear with a stick; the only real surprise is why it took Putin so long.

If you think that allowing an independent state to determine it's own future is provocation, then yes you're perfectly correct. I'm a little surprised to see you swallow Putin's logic so completely whole though.

One area where I think we agree was why it took Putin (or any Russian leader) so long to start clawing back some of the satellite states that gained their independence in the aftermath of the breakup of the USSR almost by accident.

[pauld]

This international dilemma could be solved by someone doing the world a favour and simply shooting Putin in the face.

He'd simply be replaced by someone else, quite possibly someone worse. Russia is a gangster state and has been since the fall of communism. Putin's a scumbag, but the problems run far deeper than just him

[Pete]

This international dilemma could be solved by someone doing the world a favour and simply shooting Putin in the face.

That is all.

[Honkytonk]

This international dilemma could be solved by someone doing the world a favour and simply shooting Putin in the face.

That is all.

For once, to my shock, I agree with you.

Russia is a corrupt dictatorship, as bad as any, at least 20 years behind the rest of the world regarding civil rights, and Putin is the main reason this has stayed the same.

A bunch of right-wing homophobic white supremacists with multiple criminal connections waving guns around to get their way and a would be seen as a danger to the peace even in the Southern States of the US.

Russia is essentially a country run by these people.

[Flashheart]

I've met a lot of Russians. I've never met one that wasn't shifty.

[ghanimah]

If you think that allowing an independent state to determine it's own future is provocation, then yes you're perfectly correct. I'm a little surprised to see you swallow Putin's logic so completely whole though.

One area where I think we agree was why it took Putin (or any Russian leader) so long to start clawing back some of the satellite states that gained their independence in the aftermath of the breakup of the USSR almost by accident.

It's not provocation for an independent state to try to decide it's own future I agree, but it is for the EU, western powers and the US to actively encourage that move. As an example I give you Cameron's deeply provacative speech of "Let’s extend the EU towards Asia" made last year.

I'm not trying to jusity Putin's current actions, just that we cannot ignore the EU's complicity in this. A point Mark Mardell from the BBC has made.