Ukraine Crisis

[Cory]

It's good to see the Ukrainian people standing up to Russian intimidation. Russia has always since 1991 tried to uphold the premise that all the former Soviet SSR's are inherently Russia's sphere of influence (sans the Baltic states, of course) and it's good to see Georgia and now the Ukrainians standing up to them.

The thing is in Eastern Ukraine there is a Russian preponderance with road signs in Russian, ect. so it's not going to be as clear cut.

I have always held that in the medium-term Russia is America's number one geo-political foe ( know, I know, I hate to sound like John Bolton) and think we should try to expand NATO membership to Georgia and work harder to undermine the regime in Belarus. I was quite disappointed when Democrats attacked Romney in 2012 for saying as much to be honest.

[Cory]

I appears things are escalating with state security services (?) storming the oppositions main offices.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/12/9/armed-men-storm-ukraineoppositionoffices.html

AL JAZEERA: Masked men with guns raided the Kiev party headquarters of Ukraine's jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko and took a computer server on Monday, spokeswoman Natalia Lysova said.

Lysova blamed police for the raid, but the police denied any involvement. Online newspaper Ukrainska Pravda said the raid was the work of the SBU state security service, which was unavailable for comment.

The raid occurred amid heightened tension in the Ukrainian capital after hundreds of thousands of people attended a protest rally on Sunday, which continued Monday, demanding the resignation of President Viktor Yanukovich, Tymoshenko's arch rival.

The protesters, gathered on Kiev's Independence Square, are furious with the Yanukovich government for its decision to ditch a landmark pact with the European Union in favor of a trade deal with Moscow, Ukraine's Soviet-era overlord. Scores of riot police were dispatched to the area on Monday, stoking fears of a crackdown.

Yanukovich subsequently agreed Monday to meet with the country's three former presidents to discuss how to end the political crisis. The president said the round table would take place Tuesday.

Tymoshenko, whose fiery rhetoric galvanized protesters in the Orange Revolution of 2004-05 that denied Yanukovich the presidency then, is serving a seven-year sentence for abuse of office in a case condemned by many in the West as politically motivated.

Ukraine's opposition leaders have called on pro-Europe demonstrators to pressure Yanukovich to sack his government and drop plans for closer ties with Russia.

The latest protests have escalated a weeks-long confrontation between authorities and protesters that has raised fears of political and economic instability in Ukraine, a former Soviet republic home to 46 million people.

----------------

[Cory]

They only intervened when the Georgian military acted aggressively towards people who had not been under Georgian authority for more than a decade and didn't wish to be.

I'm sure that was Putin's main concern....

[Cory]

Or maybe Russia is upholding the premise that a country can't join a free trade area with one trade block and expect to receive preferential treatment from a rival trade block. In fact, that pretty much what Barroso said earlier this year, though he meant it the other way around. And while an association with the far richer EU would be beneficial to the Ukraine, would it offset damages from worsened trade relations with Russia. Add the kind of conditions that Ukraine would probably have to accept from the IMF for a loan and the choice doesn't seem nearly as clearcut.

The long-term political situation makes alignment with the EU much better for Ukraine IMHO. Better to become part of the integrating European Community then a vassal of anachronistic and authoritarian Russia.

In a country as polarized as Ukraine, statements such as these are about as meaningful as "America stood behind Bush in 2004", ie not at all.

You know what I mean, stop hairsplitting.

As for Georgia, "standing up" against Russia resulted in hundreds of casualties and tens of thousands of people permanently expelled, so perhaps such actions, however brave they may seem viewed from 10 thousand km away, shouldn't be emulated so rashly.

Well I guess if the Russians are going to use force then everyone should just give them what they want. Not. Also it's highly unlikely Russia would invade Ukraine because doing so would almost certainly lead to open war with the EU nations.

And when Georgia demands that NATO fulfills their treaty obligations and remove the Russian occupying troops (in Georgia's view) from Abkhazia and South Ossetia, what will happen then?

They won't, that's just silly. The obligation to use force would only apply if Russia renewed offensive action. Technically speaking we would be obligated to retake South Ossetia but in real life it's a more complicated situation. The idea is that it would be a defensive alliance. The United States would be the senior partner and the Georgians would know better then to make ridiculous requests.

Also, Lukashenko being removed doesn't mean that Belarus will suddenly become a pro-Western country. Belarus is overwhelmingly Russian speaking, has little cultural differences with Russia and their national consciousness is fairly weak. So it's quite possible that Belarus might become even closer to Russia if Lukashenko is removed.

Good point. Perhaps Belarus is a good buffer state.

And Romney was right in the sense that if you want a country to be your foe, it will eventually become so. Why the US would want this to happen with Russia is another matter.

It's not a matter of "want". It's a matter of competing geo-political interests.

[Cory]

If this escalates into a virtual civil war, remember Hungary 1956.

I don't think the EU or NATO would allow a full-scale Russian invasion of the Ukraine.

[Cory]

Did we slap sanctions on Bahrain when they murdered protesters? Oh wait no, they're our ally so it's okay.

Well of course. It would be stupid to make foreign policy solely on humanitarian grounds. The goal is to gain influence and power, not to be nice and moral.

The reason I think the West should support the "rebels" in this case is almost solely to undermine Russia.

[Cory]

This thread reminds me for some reason of what a joke network Russia Today is, and how it's frustrating that so many people think they are being "alternative" by watching it.

[Cory]

Go meddle in your own f**king hemisphere, please.

Our interests expand beyond our own hemisphere, sorry.

[Cory]

Well, if you think that by getting involved in the way you spoke of now, and totally destablizing Central Europe when the peaceful resolutuion is still possible, you're going to advance the U.S. interest, then you're just naive. If only it will make Putin very happy.

The idea isn't to prevent a peaceful resolution, it is to make sure that said resolution is in favor of the faction which benefits our interests. The idea is to bring Ukraine close to the EU in the long-term. This is a chance to peel a vassal away from Russia.

[Cory]

A lot of unconfirmed reports that Yanukovych and some of his top allies have either fled by air to Kharkiv or from Kharkiv to Russia.

Great news!

[Cory]

Who cares about the Ukranian people, right, as long as it serves American interests.

Welcome to geo-politics.

[Cory]

1989 called. They want their approach to foreign policy back (duh-dum-ching).

It's not a Cold War thing. This is how it's always been done. It's like does anyone really think the UK went to war with Germany in 1914 because they were just "so concerned" about poor little Belgium. No, they went to war to stop Germany from becoming the dominant European power generally. Belgium was just a casus belli.

It's the same now as it ever was. The United States has global interests and they will be upheld, although sometimes a humanitarian mask is necessary (ala Libya 2011).

[Cory]

So we should just embrace geopolitical sociopathy instead of backing away from it?

If only life were that simple. "Geo-political sociopathy" is geo-politics. Not to say there isn't room for humanitarianism (for example I think we should've intervened in Rwanda) but at the end of the day we have to do what is necessary lest our enemies gain the upper hand.

[Cory]

So we should just embrace geopolitical sociopathy instead of backing away from it?

If only life were that simple. "Geo-political sociopathy" is geo-politics. Not to say there isn't room for humanitarianism (for example I think we should've intervened in Rwanda) but at the end of the day we have to do what is necessary lest our enemies gain the upper hand.

Spoken like a true HP. Congratulations.

Sorry real life is to "mean" for your tastes.

So does anybody have any factual disagreements with my assertion?

[Cory]

You misunderstand me. I'm not commenting on what may or may not influence American foreign policy. Rather, I'm personally identifying you as an HP, the reasons for which you've demonstrated quite well in this thread. I imagine you won't have the slightest idea why, but that's ok.

I'm sorry if the type of cynicism that's required to make foreign policy for a major power is too much for you to understand. This isn't exactly anything new.

And of course you haven't demonstrated actual factual reasons to disagree with my assertion so whatever.

[Cory]

I mind you being an HP. I mind that your conception of reality is very unrealistic.

The opposite is true. The fact that self-interest dominates international relations is backed up by almost all of human history.

[Cory]

Unsuprisingly you're missing the point.

You and Franzl keep saying vague things like this, but have yet to provide any supporting logic whatsoever.

[Cory]

Cory, while you might think Ukraine to be a good case for a seminar on "Basics of Geopolitics", there are actually some here who know, and are concerned about, real people living there. Just imagine for a moment we wouldn't be talking Ukraine but Canada or Cuba instead, and consider whether in that case you would still stick to your statements.

Of course I would, and even more so as the stakes for America would be higher.

[Cory]

Russian news apparently reporting that he's seeking asylum there.

Where do you keep getting this? RT says the President isn't leaving and I haven't heard/seen any substantiation by major media outlets (Al-Jazeera/France 24/ect.).

[Cory]

It is the year 14. I would not discard that possibility, actually.

Wouldn't it just be the damnedest irony....

[Cory]

The Russian parliament has approved the use of force in the Ukraine.

[Cory]

Putin is scary...

Vladmir Putin doesn't care about international law or the national sovereignty of other countres.

He does what he does simply because he can. And because he thinks he'll get away with it.

Nor does any leader with a modicum of international self-interest and power.

[Cory]

In other words, if Putin didn't hasn't fell in megalomaniac dementia, I think that Crimea will be his last adventure for the moment. There are treaties, I know, but I can't see "Americans", Europeans and Western Ukrainians going to a complete war against a superpower for a peninsula that should have never left Russia, both by population and geopolitical balance.

Well, IIRC he did say his inspiration in life was Napoleon Bonaparte. He might see the Western leadership as weak and consider this "his moment" to consolidate his legacy as a "great leader" for Russia.

[Cory]

The West and Russia both seem to support self-determination when it's convenient and oppose it when it isn't.

Deep.

[Cory]

Kinda ironic coming from you.

Let the butthurt flow through you....