Ukraine 12: All Russia wants is a little "Жилая площадь"

[Darzin]

Is Putin just seeking to reassemble the Soviet Union?

If he could he would, but I think he'll settle for the Slavic parts.

Also there is quite a bit of nostalgia for the Soviet Union in CIS countries, I was living in Tajikistan for the past 9 months and people there reminisce about how things were better in Soviet times the economy was better things were less corrupt, education as better standards of living were higher ect. If you offered Tajiks a chance to restore the Soviet Union they would jump for it. One Tajik told me sure we have economic freedom now but what good is that? I am allowed to buy a Mercedes now sure but I don't have the money to and I have less money for everything else than in Soviet times. I doubt this is Putins goal but there is quite a bit of nostalgia to capitalize on if he tried.

[The Fallen]

This story is interesting. It seems that calling bullshit on Putin's propaganda is dangerous.

www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/30/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-funerals-idUSKBN0GU0B020140830

[The Marquis de Leech]

Should be noted that there is no "attempted" genocide: Trying to do any of the things listed with the intent specified is sufficient for being a full blown genocide.

Not quite true. A regime could intend genocide, but if they are so incompetent that they actually fail to kill anyone (or fulfil any of the other criteria for genocide under the Convention), I think you'd have a hard time arguing genocide. Not that that is anything more than a theoretical possibility.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Is Putin just seeking to reassemble the Soviet Union?

Wake me up if he starts talking about the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Or even Socialism.

[klemenko]

If he could he would, but I think he'll settle for the Slavic parts.

Also there is quite a bit of nostalgia for the Soviet Union in CIS countries, I was living in Tajikistan for the past 9 months and people there reminisce about how things were better in Soviet times the economy was better things were less corrupt, education as better standards of living were higher ect. If you offered Tajiks a chance to restore the Soviet Union they would jump for it.

Abkhazia and South Ossetia are not Slavic.

When it comes to Tajikistan, it is the poorest among ex-Soviet countries and it has been ruled by a bloody dictator for the last 20 years. Russia is way better off in terms of quality of life but also of civil liberties. No wonder so many people from that region migrated to Russia.

I think Putin is trying to restore the USSR in geopolitical, not ideological sense. Either way he should not be allowed to.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Putin's trump card in Ukraine: Winter is coming.

www.businessinsider.com/putins-ukraine-trump-card-winter-2014-8

[The Iceman of the North]

It's just to bolster NATO capabilities, it will not be deployed in Ukraine unless something changes drastically. And it isn't just made up of Russian Bordering countries.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/29/ukraine-crisis-nato-military-idUSL5N0QZ5KE20140829

It's poison. Full of scaremongering and barely concealed racism. The online version is even worse, a while ago it had 'articles' running simultaneously of about paedophiles and a countdown of famous girls who were soon 'turning legal.'

Thanks for the link. This article doesn't even insinuate it would be used in Ukraine at all. It sounds more like it will be used in defense of NATO partners. It's still an interesting development. Would like to know what Russia thinks about it.

So Daily Mail espouses what we would call right-wing rhetoric. It sounds like Fox News and the NY Post, just a little more low-class.

Just to clarify, this NATO Rapid Reaction Force have been talked about for years. The reason it's talked about now is that there's an upcoming NATO meeting where presumably this will be one of the topics. 12 months ago I guess this foce was believed to be used on the southern borders of NATO if ever. The events in Ukraine, together with increased nervousnes among the Baltic countires, may have forced the decision to finally form the force to this year's meeting, rather than some future meeting.

In other news, McDonald's is pulling out of Russia. For sure a move that would be popular by both sides.

[daskool]

Is Putin just seeking to reassemble the Soviet Union?

I think he's reacting to events rather than some preordained master plan for world domination.

If the United States had refrained from pumping billions of dollars into Ukraine to pay for the 'spontaneous peoples revolution' that overthrew the democratically elected government I doubt very much we'd see the mess we do now and thousands of people who're now dead would more than likely still be alive.

Did anyone really believe that Putin would roll over for Russia's only year round naval port being in possession of a prospective NATO member? That he'd abandon millions of ethnic Russians to a new government that had no shit Nazis in it's ministries and had mooted as a first act the abolition of the Russian language? Well apparently the State Department does contain such geniuses because clearly they thought Putin would take it without lube, and just as clearly they were wrong.

[The Fallen]

Sounds like you're talking about a Russian province, not an independent country.

[daskool]

Sounds like you're talking about a Russian province, not an independent country.

Ukraine is made up, in part, of territory handed over to it by a totalitarian dictatorship. Perhaps you'd like to give some rational explanation as to why people who have lived in that region for many centuries as Russians and as part of Russia don't have a case for returning back to that state of affairs? Beyond 'well Stalin handed you over to Kiev and we can't change that now' I don't see the rationale?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Daskool,

Now, you want to say "well Novorussyia has only been part of Ukraine for 86 years"? Is that really your argument for the validity of Putin's invasion of Ukraine?

Most of Russia is made up of Territory conqured by a variety of "totolitatian dictatorships". Is Russia's vast territory invalid as a result?

[Jon AS]

I think he's reacting to events rather than some preordained master plan for world domination.

If the United States had refrained from pumping billions of dollars into Ukraine to pay for the 'spontaneous peoples revolution' that overthrew the democratically elected government I doubt very much we'd see the mess we do now and thousands of people who're now dead would more than likely still be alive.

Actually the events unfolded a bit differently. It started when, following some choice comments and not-so-veiled threats from Russia, the Yanukovych government scuppered a treaty with the EU at the last minute.

This was followed by massive protests that went on for several months. The protesters got some support from western governments and contained some radical Ukrainian nationalist elements, just as counter-protesters and the Yanukovych government got support from Russia and radical Russian nationalist elements over the course of the events.

Yanukovych and the opposition ultimately reached an agreement which, amongst other things, stipulated a return to the 2004 constitution. Instead of signing the deal, Yanukovych left Kiev in secret, leaving behind a leaderless government. The Ukrainian parliament ultimately decided to go ahead and run things as they would have been under the 2004 constitution and replaced Yanukovych under the rules of succession stated there.

Russia invaded and annexed Crimea as well as supporting (and possibly fomenting) secessionist/Russian nationalist movements in eastern Ukraine.

The Kiev government in the meantime first held presidential elections and is now preparing for parliamentary ones in October.

Basically one side currently at least looks like it's trying to get out of this mess by allowing the people of Ukraine to decide who should run their country, the other has invaded a sovereign nation, annexed part of its territory and appears to be trying to grab even more.

Beyond 'well Stalin handed you over to Kiev and we can't change that now' I don't see the rationale?

Khrushchev, actually.

And one reason why Russia invading and annexing the territory was rather impolite, beyond the self-evident thing that invading and annexing territories of sovereign nations is kind of frowned upon these days, is that Russia (as well as the other nuclear powers) has signed a treaty giving security guarantees to Ukraine in exchange for the Ukrainians not holding on to their nuclear arsenal.

[daskool]

Daskool,

Now, you want to say "well Novorussyia has only been part of Ukraine for 86 years"? Is that really your argument for the validity of Putin's invasion of Ukraine?

Most of Russia is made up of Territory conqured by a variety of "totolitatian dictatorships". Is Russia's vast territory invalid as a result?

I dispute the term invasion. Facilitating or even directly providing munitions and men to the rebels is not invading the Ukraine. If the Ukrainian gov thinks differently then they should say so and declare war against the Russian Federation.

As to Putin's justifications, I think to start he was being reactive, there was no great overreaching plan, just a desire to protect Russian interests as he sees them. The Russians would have been happy with commitments from the Ukraine guaranteeing ethnic Russians rights, some autonomy and a commitment no to join NATO. Now that has changed and he's becoming more maximalist with time.

[daskool]

Actually the events unfolded a bit differently. It started when, following some choice comments and not-so-veiled threats from Russia, the Yanukovych government scuppered a treaty with the EU at the last minute.

This was followed by massive protests that went on for several months. The protesters got some support from western governments and contained some radical Ukrainian nationalist elements, just as counter-protesters and the Yanukovych government got support from Russia and radical Russian nationalist elements over the course of the events.

Yanukovych and the opposition ultimately reached an agreement which, amongst other things, stipulated a return to the 2004 constitution. Instead of signing the deal, Yanukovych left Kiev in secret, leaving behind a leaderless government. The Ukrainian parliament ultimately decided to go ahead and run things as they would have been under the 2004 constitution and replaced Yanukovych under the rules of succession stated there.

Russia invaded and annexed Crimea as well as supporting (and possibly fomenting) secessionist/Russian nationalist movements in eastern Ukraine.

The Kiev government in the meantime first held presidential elections and is now preparing for parliamentary ones in October.

Basically one side currently at least looks like it's trying to get out of this mess by allowing the people of Ukraine to decide who should run their country, the other has invaded a sovereign nation, annexed part of its territory and appears to be trying to grab even more.

Khrushchev, actually.

And one reason why Russia invading and annexing the territory was rather impolite, beyond the self-evident thing that invading and annexing territories of sovereign nations is kind of frowned upon these days, is that Russia (as well as the other nuclear powers) has signed a treaty giving security guarantees to Ukraine in exchange for the Ukrainians not holding on to their nuclear arsenal.

Do you think there's any legitimate means for the people of eastern Ukraine to achieve independence or even re-unification with Russia, or are they welded onto the Ukraine like say England and Scotland?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Daskool,

So, I'm to assume that Putin will be very receptive to other minorities inside the Russian Federation seeking greater autonomy for their distinct non-Russian languages and cultures where they are concentrated. After all, Putin really cares about those minority cultures, right?

[The Iceman of the North]

I dispute the term invasion. Facilitating or even directly providing munitions and men to the rebels is not invading the Ukraine. If the Ukrainian gov thinks differently then they should say so and declare war against the Russian Federation.

Really? Sending Russian troops into Ukraine is not invading? I'd like to buy a copy of that weird dictionary of yours.

[Jon AS]

Do you think there's any legitimate means for the people of eastern Ukraine to achieve independence or even re-unification with Russia, or are they welded onto the Ukraine like say England and Scotland?

Well, Scotland is holding a referendum that might become the first step in dissolving that particular union very, very soon.

I don't know what, if any, means there are under Ukarinian law for a region to declare itself independent from the rest of the state, but I'm reasonably sure that armed rebellion is not the legally prescribed way of doing it.

[klemenko]

If the United States had refrained from pumping billions of dollars into Ukraine to pay for the 'spontaneous peoples revolution' that overthrew the democratically elected government I doubt very much we'd see the mess we do now and thousands of people who're now dead would more than likely still be alive.

Did anyone really believe that Putin would roll over for Russia's only year round naval port being in possession of a prospective NATO member? That he'd abandon millions of ethnic Russians to a new government that had no shit Nazis in it's ministries and had mooted as a first act the abolition of the Russian language?

Say they are pumping trillions - sounds better, same lie. As for the port - Sevastopol is not in Russia and not Putin's to take. And name at least one Nazi in the government of Ukraine.

[Galactus]

Really? Sending Russian troops into Ukraine is not invading? I'd like to buy a copy of that weird dictionary of yours.

I think you can argue about the semantics of sending "volunteers" (IE: not explicitly organized units of your army) counts as "invading", but the Crimea was definitely one.

[TerraPrime]

Re: daskool

As to Putin's justifications, I think to start he was being reactive, there was no great overreaching plan, just a desire to protect Russian interests as he sees them. The Russians would have been happy with commitments from the Ukraine guaranteeing ethnic Russians rights, some autonomy and a commitment no to join NATO. Now that has changed and he's becoming more maximalist with time.

Russia is free to protect her national interests, but she cannot invade her neighbor to do so. It beggars imagination to consider just what type of international law would permit such a thing.

Did anyone really believe that Putin would roll over for Russia's only year round naval port being in possession of a prospective NATO member?

I asked in a previous post but you didn't answer. By what authority does Russia claim control of Ukrain's land and foreign policy? Yes, Ukrain joining NATO will indeed be disadvantageous to Russia. That gives Russia the right to invade? Is that your logic? So if Mexico allows Russia to set up a sea port in Tijuana the U.S. government can legitimately invade Mexico?

That he'd abandon millions of ethnic Russians to a new government that had no shit Nazis in it's ministries and had mooted as a first act the abolition of the Russian language? Well apparently the State Department does contain such geniuses because clearly they thought Putin would take it without lube, and just as clearly they were wrong.

There have been no credible reports of ethnic cleansing from Kiev against ethnic Russians.

And even if there had been ethnic cleansing, the proper reaction would certainly look very different from what took place in Crimea and now in western Ukrain, which look more like land grab than protecting ethnic Russians.