nytimes.com:
SEVASTOPOL, Ukraine A year after its war with Georgia, Russia is engaging in an increasingly hostile standoff with another pro-Western neighbor, Ukraine.
Russia–Ukraine gas disputes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
World Briefing - Europe - Russia and Ukraine Trade Barbs - NYTimes.com
BBC NEWS | Europe | Russia accuses Ukraine on Georgia
BBC NEWS | Europe | Russia in Ukraine missile threat
Russia and Ukraine - History of Russia and Ukraine
Russia's Medvedev Attacks Ukraine's President In Videoblog
Russia, Ukraine Locked In New Gas War
Russia-Ukraine Gas Deal Fails Leaving Parts Of Europe Cold And Dark
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Our foolish reckless instance upon the expansion of NATO is a big factor in this brewing conflict..!
Here's Professor Stephen Cohen on this...
http://www.cupbog.org/?p=669
Article at the Daily Beast and a video of him on Charlie Rose...
Ukrainian joke:
— Куме, а коли ж нарештi Україна вступить в
НАТО?
— Не ранiше, нiж у Росiї закiнчаться газ та нафта!
Translation ( trying my best, don';t complain)
--Hey cousin, so when we gonna join NATO?
--Not before Russia runs out of gas and oil.
I live in Ukraine ... Crimea to be exact. What this article discusses happens every week in Sevastopol. Both navies (if you can call Ukraine a naval power) occupy the same general area and there is a perpetual pissing match between them. Russian navy conducts provocative exercises quite often. And some Russian politicians stir the ethnic pot whenever possible. This is not something to be taken lightly.
Crimea was part of Russia until Khrushchev gave it Ukraine in 1954. Most people here (in Crimea) are ethnic Russians and they have a very close affinity for their mother country. Given the chance, they would change to Russia but Ukraine will not allow this without force. Crimea is too important financially for that to happen.
The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is about influence and control. Ukraine has not been an independent country for centuries and Russia sees it as a natural part of their sphere of influence. The Russians are a paranoid people by their nature and they view the west (especially USA) with great suspicion. They see themselves surrounded on all sides by western alliances or by direct US presence. And the relationship with Bush only made the situation worse.
The election of Yanokovich will perhaps improve the relationship with Russia but will aggravate tensions between Russian and Ukrainian ethnic groups. It is not certain what will happen if Yoshenko or Temoshenko win ... it might be viewed as corruption and vote rigging by Russian side. There is no easy
As someone who understands the tragedy that is Russian history because I have White Russians in my extended family(descendants of Russians who fled the Bolshewist Revolution) , I completely empathize with your plight. Only I don't believe that the Russians, who are certainly a rough and tough lot, are more "paranoid" than any other nation.imho if they were so paranoid about it, they wouldn't have so given in to Ukraine back in 1991 and accepted that majority Russian Crimea and Eastern Ukraine belong to newly independent Ukraine.
What's preposterous in the whole story, it's that the West who wanted the new Russia liberated from soviet communism to acknowledge the borders created...by Stalin! the whole picture makes no sense whatsoever.
" .... because I have White Russians in my extended family" - are there any other kind?
America believes that by characterizing Russia as a menacing bogeyman at every opportunity, this will deflect the full impact of its worrisome domestic situation. Negative reporting on other countries is certainly not a new strategy. However, this trick can only work for so long before the true source of a nation’s malaise is rightly revealed. And at this point the United States will be forced to confront its domestic demons – unilaterally.
If America did not allow so many KGB agents in under the guise of religion, who have worked their way into the business world,we would not be having so many problems in our economy right now. Russians are a bogeyman, and our American businessmen and political leaders have been stupid and greedy.
If worse were to happen, which would be a Georgian style conflict, one needs to worry about Belarus siding with Russia and moving troops towards the boarder with the Ukraine , causing Poland and the Baltic states to mobilize increasing tension in a dangerous level, as well as problems in Moldova with the separatist region. It could brake NATO because one does not see Germany doing anything, most of the time Russian has been awarded with territory. Solution, hope to God there is no conflict.
Unless Belarus is not a puppet of Moscow anymore, the whole situation is dangerous.
Now, for my comment, don’t worry be happy, Russia has made some American Elites wealthy, ask the Romney family and friends, even though it has left America weakened.
our country per Russian view:
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/278761.php
"A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts."
e" predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong."
"He even suggested that "we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all." Panarin, 60, is a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has authored several books on information warfare."
comment below from the dumbhead who does not know the Romney families involved in making bucks and ties with the Russians.
“The bright side, of course, as I alluded to in the headline is that this does mean Mitt Romney is once again poised to take advantage of this in his Presidential bid, this time apparently as a Presidential candidate of the United Northern States and/or the Eastern United States, depending on how the boundaries are drawn. Doesn't that double his odds?”
No, dear it means Romneys are dangerous to this nation
Belarus is not a given for Russia. They have tensions too. Although Lukashenko (president and dictator for life by election fraud) would like to pal with Russia but it is not certain he would side with anyone. Better to be the spider patiently waiting until the battle is decided and then descend to feast on the carcass.
Ukraine is led by a blind man down a very, very dangerous road. Tymoshenko is a little better, but Viktor Yushchenko is an utter fooI.
Ukr. should bridges with Russia and the West simultaneously and remain neutral, Instead Vika and a few generals choose to bait Russia without end.
Choosing Saakashvilli (!) as a spiritual partner is silly beyond belief.
Points to consider; very large percentage of Ukrainians are of Russian heritage with little patience for the Ukranization of the country; Crimea and Pri-dnestreovye are anti-Ukrainian and are only waiting for some excuse ; Sevastopol and Odessa are as Russian as can possibly be.
Ukrainian leaders better sober up and quickly.
Baiting Russia is usually not a good idea and I really hope they don't think we're coming to their rescue if they miscalculate.
Agreed.
I can see Eastern Europe coming to their aid in some form.
True indeed, never pi$$ off the sleeping bear - Saakashvili from Georgia found out the hard way. Having said that, Russian hegemony in the region cannot be tolerated for too long - heaven knows, we're not in any position to divert our resources!
I saw a film last night on the Sundance Channel about a Russian orphanage and a little boy who tried to find his mother.
This film and the Siberian Railroad movie give some insight into how badly Mother Russia has done in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Some very similar scenes can be witnessed in Eastern Europe if you travel by train which I did recently.
Russians go by a "sphere of influence" theory of foreign relations. We go by what we can do (get) by agreements and color revolutions. These two systems are in conflict in the Ukraine and Georgia. Expect more Balkanization of many areas. Destabilization and terrorism are so closely linked that nobody can tell who the provocateurs are and who the "freedom fighters" are. Often, they are one and the same.
Divide and rule strategies using the principles of Julian the Apostate has traditionally enabled imperial powers to employ locals to stir things up and to conquer territories using minimal assets. Using wedge issues on the populace works in the US to get poor people to elect those who outsource their jobs.
Just what the truth is cannot be easily understood across the globe from where the conflicts lie. Just substitute the word "destabilize" for "terrorism." That type of analysis will often bring you closer to the truth than just accepting the corporate media's analysis.
It is a big problem left by Yeltsin that Russian Crimea was given to Ukraine when USSR collapsed. That was clearly a seed of future problems. To be precise, the Crimea was reassigned from Russia to Ukraine by Khrushchev, but when USSR is no more, by all logic Crimea should have had remained a Russian territory.
Now one probable scenario is that Ukraine may eventually split to Eastern (pro-Russia) and Western (pro-West) parts.
The Russians are working very hard to split Ukraine.
Yes, they do. That's in their interests.
And Ukraine worked and works very hard to keep Crimea.
Crimea is also full of Muslim Tatars. One can even see a drive towards Turkey. After all it was Ottoman for number of centuries.
They are the wild card in all this. They are agitating for return of lands confiscated during purges of Stalin's time. But those lands are now held by Russians/Ukrainians. There were several dangerous confrontations last year between Tartars and the local militia which were never resolved and I know there is tension. They are being very patient but are working to actually buy back as much as they can. There were persistent rumors that Chechen fighters where around teaching them how to fight (never confirmed). There are also rumors that caches of weapons are already in place (also never confirmed). In any case, I would expect them to be active in any confrontation that might happen.
Actually, a very likely scenario. Crimea was part of Ukraine at the time the whole thing came apart and Ukraine didn't want to give it up. So the two parties created this lease in Sevastopol so Russia could keep their warm water fleet. However, it has become a severe irritant of late. Since I live only 40 miles from there, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that no one does anything stupid. However, these are Slavs and anything is possible.
As for a split, I would suggest it is the best solution but one that will not happen without a confrontation of some kind. Even the hint of Crimea returning to Russia causes severe vapors in Kiev. For one, the only gas in Ukraine lies off the west coast of Crimea in the Black Sea. Also, Crimea generates significant foreign exchange with its tourist traffic (many from Russia ... you should see all the Russian license plates around here).
I'm not sure what the future holds for Ukraine. This is a very poor country (the GDP is only 54 billion dollars for a country of 50 million people). The infrastructure is falling apart (water is a particularly difficult problem). They have unbelievable corruption at every level. It is doubtful that they will join either NATO or the EU any time soon. I think they will put off any attempt moving closer to the west and patch up the relationship with Moscow if only to keep the natural gas flowing in winter.
I agree with all your estimates. Except I'd stress again that it was only on paper that "Crimea was part of Ukraine at the time the whole thing came apart ", only as a gift of Khrushchev to Ukraine. At the time USSR split and ties between republics are no more, it was only logical to leave Crimea to Russia. As far as I know, even the Ukrainian would be government at 1992 did not expect such a 'generosity' as getting Crimea.
This is so not our problem, it's not even funny. That's why the world considers us meddlers because every time somebody sneezes, we get involved. Unless it's a genocide in Africa, in which case we don't give a damn.
They aren't comparable at all, but in the 1930's, most Americans didn't think European affairs were their problem at all. They wanted nothing to do with European wars, and Republicans led the charge to keep FDR from giving America's might to the allies.
Well, we all know how THAT turned out.
Saying again, this isn't comparable the situation back then, but the price of isolationism took it's toll on the US many decades ago. I agree the US meddles where it shouldn't, but security in Europe, especially in countries that border close allies, especially a country that is a potential member of NATO, should be a US priority. Your country has foreign obligations to speak out for what's right (not that it always does this) and you shouldn't clam up in a shell and ignore everyone else.
Well, I think right now we reached the other extreme, so I think a bit of more focus on internal affairs and less focus on external, apart from obvious threats, would be beneficial. There were countries before US who tried playing a world cop and eventually that didn't turn out well for them either. As far as Russia goes it is almost as far from Germany's might in the late 30-s as you can get. At this point they are just trying to preserve some national dignity by standing up for Russian ethnic groups abroad. Countries in Eastern Europe after all the years of Russian imperialism, understandably, hate Russians, and would like to assimilate the Russians left on their soil. And Russians don't like it. The root of the problem is both Eastern European dislike and distrust of Russians as well Russian extreme nationalism. And only time will cure that. The US policy should be determined by the following question: Do we try to undermine Russia and that would help while competing for world resources, or we work with them and benefit from their cooperation against common threats. Few people know it, but Russians were supporting the fight against Taliban before Americans knew what Taliban was.
This is just typical war-mongering by our right-wing Media, aka New York Times, etc.
After all this same NYT ran 99% of Articles before the Iraq war in support of the Iraq war with lies after lies.
It was only after the Iraq war have been started and 10s of 1000s of Iraqis killed that NYT started running 10% of the Articles critical of the war. And even then barely saying "This is a criminal unnecessary war lets end it now..", but "how the war was mismanaged.." etc.
Moreover US is a poor miserable 3rd World country with the World number 1 Military, as you can see from how much better European economies are doing compared to US economy as evident by:
1- Euro being so much more valuable than US Dollar
2- Avg homes in Europe being much more valuable than avg homes in US and not falling in 99% of Europe
3- NO banks having failed in Europe except those that bought US mortgage backed securities or
securities issued by Lehman Brothers or deposits made with Madoff's, etc. US misery.
etc. etc.
So US should be worrying about its own affairs and how much poorer it is compared to Europeans rather Russia & Ukraine.
Your...post...is...stupid!!!
This is nonsense, NYT is a very liberal newspaper.
I would love to see serious pressure applied on Russia to straighten things up and put totalitarian countries like Russia, Iran and China where they belong.
But from the other side in the long run Russia is (almost) done
Where they "belong"? Judging by the amount of money we owe to Chinese, it's us who "belong" to them.
NYT liberal?!?! HAR! "Very" liberal? ... You live on a different planet!
News Flash: The NYT is quite conservative and a pawn of elite interests, which are, by the way, essentially the definition of "conservative."
You also have a belicose tone in your post and I suspect that you are an ULTRA right wingnuter for whom even normally conservative viewpoints are "liberal."
.
Just Putin flexing his muscles once again.
mindless nonsense.
Actually, there is a component of truth in this. There is a great deal of nationalism in Russia and Putin stokes it when necessary. The whole issue in Georgia was just as much Putin/Medvedev stoking as it was the Georgian's being stupid. In the months leading up to the war, Russia was issuing Russian passports to all the residents of those regions ... a clear violation of any neutrality they might have professed. And it was no accident that a large contingent of Russian military were just over the border when the war broke out. Russia is not blameless in this ... they did everything to provoke the conflict. The Georgian's were just stupid to take the bait.
It IS our problem! We were so much into our own problems that missed a moment when a Lernaean hydra of commies was able to regrow its heads. And it gets more and more aggressive, I will explain why.
In reality Russia is a total mess. Their infrastructure is crumbling. They haven't even invested into their lifeblood - oil production. Their population is shrinking thanks to the alcohol consumption and abandonment of the socialized medicine. They cannot make anything but obsolete half-functional products, their science and education is no longer good thanks to the budget cuts and mass immigration of decent scientists and engineers.
This creates a problem for Russian powers how to control population. They desperately need the "national idea" and the common enemy to blame for their problems. Many people at power in Russia are looking to restore "Russian Empire". Many of them feel bad about the fact that Russia lost many territories it conquered over the last three hundred years. It is much easier to distract people of Russia by presenting Ukrainians and Georgians as their enemies than to fix the economy. And of course, we are their enemy number one.
If we will not stop Russian leaders now their rhetoric and aggressiveness will creep up and they will start snatching Europians countries which once were part of soviet block - Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Bulgaria, etc.
How do you snatch members of NATO? Try thinking.
The first capital of Russia was Great Novgorod. Later the capital was moved to Kiev. In middle ages Kiev and Novgorod joined the Western World: Kiev became a part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Republic of Novgorod was its ally.
Unfortunately, a former Mongol colony named Moscow managed to conquer first Novgorod (1478) and then Kiev (1686).
The only way to protect European Civilisation from Asian conquest is to keep Moscow far from Kiev. Novgorod is unfortunately lost, since St. Petersburg was built nearby.
Psya krev,, what mindless stuff. Takes a Polish thinker, of one of the least successful state in history of Europe to propose a grand strategy on contain the Russian Bear.
Poles are still chafing at the loss opportunity to convert Ukrainians wholesale into Catholicism. Waht Poles used to call Ukranians--schismatics?
Give it a rest, pan.
what would it be like if Ukraine ran Russia, instead of the other way around?
Everything would be exactly the same as it is now.
Not our problem.
What? Watch and mark my words... we will all be Ukrainians soon... that is, when and if the neo-cons re-take power in the 25th century.
Neocons didn't do much for Georgia.
Loading comments…
First Posted: 08-28-09 08:07 AM | Updated: 08-28-09 08:37 AM