Ukraine VI: Crimea in the Center (AKA Putin's) pocket

[Clueless Northman]

There was a legal government in Belgrade when Kosovo unilaterally declared independence, and Russia isn't going to recognize Kosovo as long legal government in Belgrade doesn't. On the other hand, there was no legal government in Kiev when Crimea unilaterally declared independence.

Somehow, I doubt that Putin will give Crimea back to Ukraine when they get a new legitimate government.

But don't forget: we don't actually believe in hypocrisy because nations run based on amoral self-interest and anyone who thinks otherwise is a wide-eyed idealist.

Yet most if not all US/Western interventions are officially not made because of self-interest but because of morals, high values, human rights and the like. And actually this might be taken into account in a few cases.

Still, often, it's purely self-interest, labelled as philanthropy and defending the poors and oppressed.

All this is quite ironical, though, because in the very long run, it's in both Western countries' and Russia' interest and benefit to collaborate and work together - because there are and will be rising powers elsewhere, and if West and Russia are at each other's throats, it will only weaken them. In fact, if I wanted to do some Realpolitik, I'd go as far as saying that if they were cold-blooded bastards, they'd ally to bring down emerging powers and contain China the way NATO wants to contain Russia.

[broken one]

Libya and Syria say hi. Based on your previous comment about Ukraine not involving Russia, I suggest you read http://www.dw.de/ukraine-and-russias-sibling-rivalry/a-17499961

Kiev (capital of Ukraine) is the cradle of Russian civilization...

Russian civilisation? And what the hell is this? Kiev is also the cradle of Ukrainian and Belarusian "civilization". And to some extent - also Polish "civilization". I feel connected by bounds of blood to Grand Duchy of Lithuania much more than to ethnical Poland (like 3:1). GLD consisted mostly of Ruthenian territory and Ruthenian people. Its official language was old Belarusian. Many, many Poles have their roots on the Eastern bank of Bug river. Maybe we should claim Kiev too?

I think we should also demand Magdeburg from Germany as it is mother of Polish towns. Municpal culture and law in Old Poland came from Magdeburg. Via adoption or not - mother is mother!

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I'm sure China is not displeased at the rift between Russia and the West.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

Iraq and the South American countries were a mess long before the USA invaded precisely because of Western imperialistic ambitions. So it's okay for western countries to mess with countries in other parts of the world and leave behind a wreck, but western security and peace is paramount according to you? Don't those lives count for anything? Is the life of an Iraqi less than the life of a British/American/Ukrainian citizen for some reason?

Only in part. The various Arab nationalist dictatorships that sprung up in the Middle East following their independences were not western creations. If they were they wouldn't have attacked Israel again and again, for example. South America is also much more complicated than the west being responsible for everything bad there.

Look, I'm not saying those actions were justified either, but i'ts worse to do it against fully functional and peaceful societies and states than against places that would be about as messed up if you didn't do it as if you did, which Iraq is an excellent example of. The day Svoboda-Ukraine starts bombing their ethnic Russian communities with poison gas or invades Poland for being Catholic then they'd be similar to Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Putin has also not murdered children using drones unlike Obama. So I think he is much better, yes. And he diffused the situation when Obama wanted war with Syria. Putin >>>> Obama for me. Of course if you are American or from the west, you are going to think Obama is great unlike Putin who is the devil. His actions support American hegemony around the world and continue to make the west rich. Who cares if children die in Pakistan and Yemen right? As long as America and the west is safe and secure. And apparently Putin is the number one threat to western security.

How ignorant are you? There were no combat drones during the Second Chechen War because they didn't yet exist then, but many children died there.

[Horza]

I'm sure Putin and many Russians feel that way, but this rhetoric about Kievan Rus is implicitly delegitimising a Ukrainian national identity on anything but Moscow's terms.

[broken one]

There were no combat drones during the Second Chechen War because they didn't yet exist then, but many children died there.

Yeah, killing with drones is immoral (like with crossbow) while killing with regular airplane is ok (like slaying with sword). Its a maaaans thing to murder openly :idea:

[Linsox]

feel connected by bounds of blood to Grand Duchy of Lithuania much more than to ethnical Poland (like 3:1).

Thank you for making my point for me. I likewise feel closer to Russia than Poland.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Linsox,

The Grand Duchy of Warsaw (Poland) was part of imperial Russia does that mean Putin can claim Poland for Russia?

[broken one]

Thank you for making my point for me. I likewise feel closer to Russia than Poland.

Not sure if you got this. I was talking about ethnical Poland - territory of so called Crown between Odra and Bug, inhabited by Western Slavs speaking Lechitic language, not about the modern state.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

Yeah, killing with drones is immoral (like with crossbow) while killing with regular airplane is ok (like slaying with sword). Its a maaaans thing to murder openly :idea:

Obama is no true knight.

Speaking about murder of innocents though, Putin may well be a literal one. He did work as a KGB agent in the Soviet Union for much of his life. It's not impossible that he handled some executions.

[Miodrag]

If you don't like being called a hypocrite, then perhaps you should stop with the hypocrisy. For starters, stop ignoring the elephant in the room - the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty committed by US&EU.

- US&EU diplomats were attending and openly supporting a large-scale anti-government protests in a sovereign country. That was interfering with internal business of a sovereign nation that never happened before.

- State Department official was recorded while instructing US ambassador on how the future government of a sovereign nation should look like. The recording was neither denied nor properly explained by the State Department (except for an apology to EU!), so it is nothing else but an interfering with the most important internal issues of a sovereign country. You may claim officials of other countries do the same, but you have zero proof for that. Nobody ever was caught in the deed as Nuland was in this case.

- While the most radical among protesters were already occupying government buildings, US&EU demanded from Kiev to withdraw police from the streets. They threatened Kiev with sanctions unless it succumbs to their demands. That was clearly interfering with the most important internal security issues of a sovereign country. Keep in mind that in that moment, nobody was killed in the protests.

- Ten days before the actual coup, in a TV interview, a senior EU diplomat announced something drastic - something that will show how EU deals with irresponsible political elite - is about to happen in Ukraine in a week or two.

- The coup took place indeed, elected President fled the country, and the capital city - along with authority - was given to a coalition that includes open Nazis and thugs nobody voted for. The 'impeachment' was without legality or legitimacy. The country is in a complete mess, just like it most often is the case with coups, but the new regime doesn't try to clear the mess and ease the tensions. On the contrary, right from the very start their rule is characterized by various violent actions, and symbolic hostile gestures toward strong Russian minority in the country. US&EU rush to recognize the new regime as legitimate, without so much as noticing all the signs of violent radicalism by at least some elements of the new regime (elements that are given control over nothing less but Ministry of defense).

Shy from actual military interventions, I don't know of any more flagrant example of a violation of anyone's sovereignty. And what did Russia do all that time? Nothing. All of that happened before Russian decided to invade Crimea. But, many of you here simply ignore all that. As if it never happened. And you hate when called hypocrites?!

[Miodrag]

Somehow, I doubt that Putin will give Crimea back to Ukraine when they get a new legitimate government.

That's a pure speculation at this point, because no legal Ukrainian government is on sight. From what we know, Russia showed no intention of annexing Crimea while there was a legal government in Ukraine, even though some Ukrainian governments were not so friendly (nor hostile, of course) to Kremlin.

Also, I don't remember Ukraine offering Crimea back to Russia once USSR dissolved. It's funny how, when socialist federations like USSR or former Yugoslavia were dissolved, the only thing that was respected were internal borders of those federations. Constitutions weren't respected (at least in Yugoslavia, where it was violated severely even though it allowed any republic to leave the federation if it follows a certain procedure), but borders were, even though those borders were administrative, and not reflecting borders of those countries before the union. That is, even those borders were eventually violated in case of Serbia, and I suspect the same would happen to Russia (Chechnya) if Russia didn't prevent it.

[Jackson5tributeband]

Linsox,

The Grand Duchy of Warsaw (Poland) was part of imperial Russia does that mean Putin can claim Poland for Russia?

Has Putin claimed Ukraine? Crimea is historically Russian, most of it's people are Russian and the only reason it's not part of Russia is because a brutal, unelected, communist dictator decided to hand it over to Ukraine (for administrative purposes) and this became written in stone when the USSR broke apart. Putin does have a case, to deny that is silly.

[3CityApache]

Why are the most of the people in Yorkshire English? Is this a trick question?

Seriously? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars It's never too late to learn it seems.

[DanteGabriel]

Western powers shouldn't have meddled in the Maidan protests. Putin shouldn't have invaded Crimea. All states pursue their own self-interest, often contrary to the principles they purport to cherish.

These are not contradictory statements. I don't understand why believing all three of them makes me a hypocrite.

[Jackson5tributeband]

Seriously? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars It's never too late to learn it seems.

What? That I didn't know about Crimean Tartars? Really? That's your response? Are the majority in Crimea Russian? Yes they are. Do the majority wish to join Russia? Yes. Had Crimea, up until the 1950's, been part of Russia? Yes. By your logic the Americans should immediately handover the South West back to Mexico.

[Solmyr]

I am rather distressed by the fact that both sides of the ongoing debate (pro-Russian and pro-Western) seem to be more fond of discussing anything but what's actually happening in Ukraine - the country the thread (and its previous editions) are about. News, such as the actions of the Svoboda party, are not commented at all (except by the description of the poster), beyond vague allegations that the RT is once again concocting propaganda; then when the news are confirmed by other sources, the RT-bashers remain strangely silent. I understand that pro-Westerners might feel abashed when they are presented with proof that some of RT's news are not vile Soviet propaganda, but utterly ignoring such news and instead continuing the endless debate as to who's the bigger hypocrite in realpolitik is at the very least disrespectful to the people of Ukraine, who are the real victims of this geopolitical struggle.

There are bad things happening in Ukraine right now. Little of it is reported, but what comes out is really scary. Do you think hypothetical debates about what Turkey might do, based on nothing but speculation of the interpretation of international law by a country, which is not even involved in the conflict at present, are more important than what's happening to real people in Ukraine today?

[TheKitttenGuard]

This is 2014, not 2042. It is a little curious to preempt a situation which might be possible in 2042 but could be avoided by maintaining reasonably friendly diplomatic relations by dramatic means now, unless the entire purpose of the exercise was to have the drama. What if Ukraine were to become a member of NATO? I wonder what kind of international event might prompt it to seek NATO membership? Perhaps a foreign power moving into its territory and hosting a referendum for that territory to join the foreign power?

What enemy in Russia's backyard? Now that there is a threat to the territorial integrity of the Ukraine is an unfriendly government in Kiev more or less likely do you think? Is any new government in Ukraine going to be more relaxed about Russian interests or will it be keener to improve defences and look to other countries for potential support against Russia?

And who cares. The enemy is in Russia's backyard, if one wants to take that kind of view of it. Has been for a long time. Russia actually shares a common border with Norway, Estonia and Latvia all NATO members. And it is still formally at war with Japan with whom it has an unresolved territorial dispute, an ally of the USA. The degree of threat and terror must be either overwhelming, or alternatively it is a normal situation and doesn't impinge on Russia or prevent it from pursuing its inter

- Lummel

Russia view it does not want to chance on anything concerning it Interest that it has in Crimea. A treaty can be broken and Russia can find it self without a Interest. Why wait until they break the treaty and move to give this strategic port to NATO?

You are really making a huge discount into the events of past 200 years. The main factor that saved Russia from Napoleon and Nazi is that it had depth. Ukraine (and Belarus) were important to that depth. So Russia what to maintain that since it is how Russia was protected before. Regardless of opinion of the action their is a clear history behind it.

No what Russia did in Crimea does not help with Kiev. The action that helps more the Fascists that are in the new government since it produce the environment were they can thrive since yes their territorial integrity was violated and you have the possibility of other area in the East Ukraine that want to do the same which is an existential threat. I do think Putin will have a responsibility if the Fascists gain greater power in the country. This is provoking an Existential crisis in Ukraine and the most extreme elements thrive in those events and should be a consideration.

The stated countries you mention were not part of Soviet Union, particularly pre-Sept. 1939. Also Russia was not happy with NATO expansion with Poland and the Baltic states since it violated what it view as a agreement that NATO will not if Russia dissolved the Warsaw Pact. Many Western nation see it as something just had to accept it.

Ukraine in the end it much more the Russian psyche than Poland and those Baltic states will be. Now with moves into area that were critical to Russia survival and Russia decided that it need to secure it Vital interest.

Russia understand the fine point of Japan that has no historical record of being a existential threat with Russia. What going on its doorstep can be.

On Crimea Tartars:

1. This group does have the most legitimate grievance and concern in Crimea. Russia has inherited itself a responsibility on safeguarding their rights and a political autonomy that do deserve.

2. Watch a show on Al-Jazeera that was discussing modern Tartars in Crimea now and related to their forced removal. The piece mention that both Russian and Ukrainians were shipped in to Crimea. So a good amount of Ukrainians in Crimea got their through the same bloody program and Ukrainians are not some protector of this oppressed group anymore than the Russian (and Stalin was Georgian),

[3CityApache]

What? That I didn't know about Crimean Tartars? Really? That's your response? Are the majority in Crimea Russian? Yes they are. Do the majority wish to join Russia? Yes. Had Crimea, up until the 1950's, been part of Russia? Yes. By your logic the Americans should immediately handover the South West back to Mexico.

What the hell are you talking about? The question was WHY were Russians a majority in Crimea. The answer is: because they replaced hundreds of thousands of Crimean Tatars deported from Crimea by Stalin. Stating a fact, simple as that. What logic would that be you're implying I'm using?

[Suttree]

Some of the mental gymnastic on this topic are a sight to behold. It's like were watching the second coming of Nikolai Andrianov.