Ukraine III: appropriate handling required

[KAH]

Regarding Russian gas, this has developed from a Europe-over-the-barrel situation into something resembling a game of chicken.

Yes, China could probably swallow Russia's entire gas supply and still ask for second helpings, but it's not a case of just sending it in the other direction. The contracts are not there, hence the infrastructure is not there, hence the redirection towards Asia will take several years. Any halting of the flow of gas to Europe will see an equal drop in Russian revenues, until those contracts and the necessary infrastructure to support those contracts are in place. And Putin's government has made itself very dependent on doling out petrodollars and petroeuro on patronage to keep the domestic elite and populace sufficiently docile. A cut in that flow is going to mean trouble.

OTOH, Europe is facing the same time lag in getting alternative flows to replace Russian gas. And eastern Europe is particularly dependent on that gas, they'll have to wait in line where richer nations like Germany takes presedence.

Which makes for a rather interesting trade-off for them - an energy famine that will be absolutely hell to go through, or a beliggerent Russia inching back towards their own borders through the (up to this point) nifty bufferzone that is Ukraine?

[snake]

According to the Guardian Germany is reluctant to kick Russia out of the G8 and with Russia a big market for some EU economies, plus their supplying of oil and gas to Europe, tough sanctions may be hard to get as well.

We will have to see how much of a hit some countries are willing to take to their economies in order to punish Russia.

[KAH]

There are shades of that, but also:

Hard to read that as a go-ahead for an outright annexation or any further Russian intervention on Ukrainian soil.

It's a long-standing position, which means China will sell it at a higher price than if it was not a long-standing position.

China does not see itself as dependent on the protection that the principle of non-intervention might provide; however, it still helps to hold that position in dealing with trade and military matters with nations that are dependent on that protection (read: most of the world excepting Russia, China and the NATO countries). OTOH, I believe China will increasingly find itself tempted to meddle themselves, which will curtail the usefulness of that position (probably not end it, but definitely limit it).

Frankly, I cannot see what Russia could offer that would meet China's price. There's gas and oil, but I think China would be hesitant to put all it's eggs in Russia's basket. Likely the Russians had to plead with them just to make China stick mostly to vague platitudes (for the time being, at least).

[broken one]

OTOH, Europe is facing the same time lag in getting alternative flows to replace Russian gas. And eastern Europe is particularly dependent on that gas, they'll have to wait in line where richer nations like Germany takes presedence.

Poland has some expectations of LNG terminal in Swinoujscie (under construction). It will be able to recieve 7,5 bilion m³ of liquefied gas per year (about 50% of Polands need), carried by tankers. I heard USA were going to change law and start to export fuels, so I think there is a chance the price of the gas will decrease.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Dicer,

The hypocrisy, it burns.

That is your entire argument over two threads. It boils down to "you can't use soft economic power against Russia for invading Ukraine without being hypocritical." Guess what when nations bargin Nukes out of the hands of their former possessions with security assurances and promises of respecting that former subjects territorial sovregeinty then ignore the earlier promises when its convienent you're going to get hypocritical pure power politics in response because the Russians have shown their repeated willingness to roll tanks to keep former Soviet states in their pockets.

If you play at realpoliick expect realpolitick in response to your game.

[Horza]

It's a long-standing position, which means China will sell it at a higher price than if it was not a long-standing position.

China does not see itself as dependent on the protection that the principle of non-intervention might provide; however, it still helps to hold that position in dealing with trade and military matters with nations that are dependent on that protection (read: most of the world excepting Russia, China and the NATO countries). OTOH, I believe China will increasingly find itself tempted to meddle themselves, which will curtail the usefulness of that position (probably not end it, but definitely limit it).

Frankly, I cannot see what Russia could offer that would meet China's price. There's gas and oil, but I think China would be hesitant to put all it's eggs in Russia's basket. Likely the Russians had to plead with them just to make China stick mostly to vague platitudes (for the time being, at least).

Which they'd probably be happy to do, as they're not exactly thrilled with what happened in Kiev. In Xi's mind pretty much everything that's happened in Ukraine will have served to vindicate his domestic policies of tightening up the public sphere and cracking down on official malfeasance. Unfortunately, when it comes to China's view of cultural autonomy and self-determination it's likely also going to militate against any efforts to resolve the Tibet and Xinjiang disputes.

And who knows what lessons coming events are going to have for China's Nine Dash Line and Senkaku/Diaoyu policies...

[baxus]

Was this when NATO was taking military action against a country that had spent most of the prior decade destablising all of central and eastern Europe, slaughtering unarmed civilians and carrying out ethnic cleansing (and yes, maybe the other sides did it as well, but to nowhere near the same extent, not for as long, and stopped long before)?

well, that is definitely the version they used to excuse their actions.

it appears that it worked, at least in your case.

and while we're on the subject of ethnic cleansing, i'm very curious what's you explanation on why non-albanian population in kosovo and serb population in croatia are pretty much non-existent at the moment?

i'm guessing it's probably along the lines of "well, they didn't like the weather and decided to move on".

Yes, it is. If you look at the history of Russian imperialism, commencing wars of aggression and interfering with the internal affairs of sovereign nations on the feeble grounds that those countries used to be ruled by it decades ago, against NATO's history of self-defence, there is no equivalence whatsoever.

yes, nato members invaded both afghanistan and iraq in self defence.

i mean, there were evidence of afghanistan harbouring bin laden and iraq's WMDs...

it is a hipocrisy of the worst kind to chalk that up as "history of self-defence".

[Horza]

Ah, clarification:

BEIJING, March 3 (Xinhua) -- China's stance on the current situation in Ukraine is objective, just, fair and peaceful, Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said on Monday.

Phew.

"China upholds its own diplomatic principles and the basic codes for international relations, which have also been implied on the Ukraine issue," Qin said when asked for comments on Russia's actions. "Meanwhile, we have also taken the historical and contemporary factors of the Ukraine issue into consideration."

The comments came as a clarification of Qin's Sunday briefing, in which he urged all sides involved in the Ukraine situation to comply with international law and seek a political solution to their disputes through dialogue and negotiations.

On Sunday, the spokesman said China always sticks to the principle of non-interference in any country's internal affairs and respects the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.

"There are reasons for today's situation in Ukraine," Qin added on Monday.

He urged efforts from involved parties to prevent escalating the situation and jointly safeguard the regional peace and stability.

Or in other words they're telling Russia "Ok, ok, NATO/EU/NWO/KRS-ONE conspiracy, Crimea loves you, we get it" while still not actually taking a stand one way or the other.

[Gorn]

Werthead,

Regarding Kosovo, you also said that "NATO has only ever acted in defence of NATO member countries or their direct interests" in the previous thread. No amount of rhetorical acrobatics can turn Kosovo intervention into a defensive action by NATO.

The fact remains that NATO has performed a hostile, offensive action against another democratic country which ended up forcibly carving a new state out of its internationally recognized borders. This has opened the entire "redrawing the borders by force" can of worms and set the precedent for Russia's actions with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. As long as Russia stops short of outright annexation of Crimea, the same precedent will be valid here as well.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Baxus,

NATO was not involved in Iraq. Individual member states were but not NATO. The Taliban regime in Afganistan provided support and shelter for the organization that attacked the US on 9/11/2001. The US invoked article IV of the NATO charter and yes invaded Afganistan in response. Do you think the invasion was inappropriate? Not the nation building that followed on the invasion because rhe two phases of the Afgan war are distinct.

[broken one]

As far as I know enemies of Serbia paid a lot for good PR, so I would be very cautious comparing who did more war crime etc. It does not make much sense anyway.

I am not sure what the deeds of "the prior decade" had to do with the operation. I thought it was all about Kosowo (NATO's biggest mistake imho, but thats another story).

[Horza]

In other news, it looks like Donetsk Regional government just passed a resolution calling for a referendum on the protection of the Russian language, preservation of social benefits and the formation of self defence groups.

How much this decision has to do with the pro-Russian demonstrators occupying parts of their building is unclear.

[Disturber of Peace]

I liked the Romans so i like the US too.

If Russia were to become most dominant maybe they would have more chance to be nice too.

But i am reluctant. I'd stick to the evil i know in this case.

Maybe China finally realises that a Capitalist never pays his debts and joins a more socialist EU as leaders of the free world. That would be a nice plot twist.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Is anyone surprised to see hypocrisy when the Realpolitick game has been turned up to 11 by Russian actions? As such is the cry of "hypocrisy!" In any way relevant to this discussion?

[Clueless Northman]

First of all - why would Canada even consider such an alliance? You put the cart before the horse.

You don't get it.

My point isn't that Canada has any reason to do it. My point is that people should think before acting and should try to wonder how the other guy will react.

If this happened, US would be pissed off and would freak out big time.

Is it any wonder that Russia is angry and reacts violently, as if a little bit scared?

I don't say it's right or wrong, I just say it was to be expected. If people who decided to push for greater integration Eastwards didn't think it was, then they're incompetent fools. Our hope now seems to be that Russia isn't led by incompetent fools either, and I'm not totally sure we can rely on that.

It's also worth remembering that after the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO and Russia entered into a joint partnership and cooperation programme designed to move on from the old tensions, which clearly hasn't worked out so well because Putin is incapable of moving on from the 1980s.

Maybe, if Nato had stayed where it was and didn't expand East, this would have worked out better. Just saying.

[Disturber of Peace]

I see where this leads.

As i do not drink, i will go buy much candy and have a peace for each appeal to hypocrisy.

[ljkeane]

Regarding Russian gas, this has developed from a Europe-over-the-barrel situation into something resembling a game of chicken.

Yeah, my friend who works on the gas trading desk for a major energy company thinks all the talk of Russia holding the whip hand in any situation were trade with Russia breaks down is decidedly overstated.

Apparently there's a lot more flexibility in global gas markets than people think. There was a lot of infrastructure for shipping gas which was built in anticipation of exporting to the US built up prior to the US domestic gas boom which could relatively easily be used to ship to Europe from the Middle East and potentially the US. So while it would certainly result in a bump in energy prices which is less than ideal Western Europe does have viable alternatives to Russian gas. Russia on the other hand, while China would certainly be happy to buy it's gas, doesn't currently have the capability to get it's gas to China in anything like the volumes it's selling to Europe so it's economy would be in deep shit. The issue is that the market likely to miss out in the medium term might be China so they might not be too happy with it playing out that way.

[polishgenius]

Maybe, if Nato had stayed where it was and didn't expand East, this would have worked out better. Just saying.

You really don't understand how Russia works, do you?

[Hereward]

Maybe, if Nato had stayed where it was and didn't expand East, this would have worked out better. Just saying.

I think it more likely that Russia would have seen this as a coded signal that they were entitled to maintain their sphere of influence and do exactly this kind of thing.

[broken one]

You don't get it.

My point isn't that Canada has any reason to do it. My point is that people should think before acting and should try to wonder how the other guy will react.

If this happened, US would be pissed off and would freak out big time.

Is it any wonder that Russia is angry and reacts violently, as if a little bit scared?

I don't say it's right or wrong, I just say it was to be expected. If people who decided to push for greater integration Eastwards didn't think it was, then they're incompetent fools. Our hope now seems to be that Russia isn't led by incompetent fools either, and I'm not totally sure we can rely on that.

Mkay, and my point is that Russia is the reason why its neighbours want to join NATO, so Russia should not be suprised. The attitude of an innocent, surrounded by bunch of aggressive criminals is hilarious.