Ukraine, Russia and Crimea situation

[Jonatron]

It's interesting to read the Russian bias at http://rt.com/ , as well as the Western bias at the BBC, Guardian, etc. If anyone knows where you can get unbiased news, let me know!

[Saracen]

What do you want me to concede? that people have a different point of view? Isn't the stating the obvious!

Different perspectives is one thing! but this is pretty black and white to me! It's an invasions and now he will kill Ukrainians on Ukrainian soil!

No point mediating, No point discussing, No point tying to talk about it to Vova Putin! He will attack! Putin does not care that he is lying to his own people to justify war! he no longer cares what the International community thinks.

The time for talk is over, the world must threaten war on Russia if they don't back down. He installed new Iskander missiles in December 2013 in Kalininggrad http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25407284 In the heart of the EU

He is not listening to any outside threats, he must be stopped !

Well, here's yet another perspective. The "world" threatening war with Russia? Who, exactly, is going to do that? The UK? First, we couidn't, by a VERY large margin, even if we wanted to. And my bet is that we don't. Government has already ruled it out, anyway.

The only people that, realistically, could get into a shooting war with Russia is the US, and my assessment of their apetite for that is about the same as ours, that being, zero. And certainly not taking on Russia on their own doorstep. Aside from anything else, I reckon it'd take months just to reposition enough forces to do it, seeing as the US has "pivoted" to the Pacific, and is still tied up in Afghanistan anyway. And even that is presuming that either public or political will exists in the US to do it. It doesn't.

And even if it did, the risk of a shooting war between the US and Russia is that, once these things start, they can get out of hand and go way beyond what was intended when you started, and that risks it ending up in a nuclear stand-off.

What I think you need to realise is that Putin has pulled a fait accompli. That's what I don't think you see. He's already done it. And forcing him out? Not, IMHO, going to happen. nobody that perhaps could, will, even assuming they could. He MIGHT be talked out of Ukraine, negotiated out if Ukraine, but removing him militarily? I see zero chance of anyone trying.

Diplomatic pressure, yes. Trade pressure and sanctions, yes. Direct military confrontation? I'm afraid it's a fantasy.

And if it were to happen, THAT would be perhaps the one thing to cause massive scale casualties in Crimea.

Even if the US were to decide to act, it'd involve huge airlift operations, get vast amounts of materiel into the area. It'd take months. Putin, on the hand, can roll what he needs down train tracks. By the time the US got there, Putin would be dug in tighter than a tic on a dog's rear end. After all, he's not going to spend several months sitting in his thumbs, while the US builds up. As like as not, as soon as he sees the US starting a build-up, he'll roll right over the rest of the Ukraine, and by the time the US got there, he'd have seized the lot. It could be years before we got him out, if ever.

Putin is not, IMHO, doing this lightly. THAT is the perspective. He isn't acting on a whim, or petulantly, but is deadly serious and isn't going to be threatened out, and certainly not either by the EU or US.

So, is it really a good idea for Ukrainians if the US and Russia do to Ukraine what Assad and his opponents have done to Syria? But on a far, far larger scale?

Like it or not, and like you I really don't like it, we are where we are, and the only way Russia is out of Crimea any time soon, and without massive loss of life, is if, under pressure, we negotiate him out.

War, IMHO, is simply not happening, with anyone that could be willing to do it. And so, we have to work towards getting the best possible outcome, with least possible loss of life, and have to accept that what's done is done. He's there, he's strengthening control daily, and by the time anyone could get there in force enough to kick him out, he'd be massively dug in.

And that means, we talk. We can exert all sorts of non-military pressure, but not provoking him to react even further, not taking even more under control is the best option, and even that relies on restraint from Putin. And that, of course, is why we need to see it from his perspective. It's not to somehow understand or condone the invasion. It's to try to do something about it without making it far, FAR worse in the process. And the West, and the US in particular, with it's patronisingly superior way of dealing with others, is demonstrably poor at doing it. Look at Iraq, which was a classic example of diplomats and politicians snatching defeat from a very clear military victory. Look at Afghanistan, and Abu Graib, Guantanamo, etc. The US could host a masterclass on "How to lose minds and alienate people".

If we're going to get the best possible out of a bad situation, we need to work on the possible, and not expect the US to sweep in like comic book superheroes and punish the arch-villain Putin, because, IMHO, it just won't happen.

So we can try to get the best solution we can, and without a bloodbath, or we can try to use force and watch the whole country go up in flames. The best way to do that is to try to see it as Putin does, which IMHO, is emphatically not as London, Paris, Berlin or Washington does.

It's not about understanding Putin, 'cos he's somehow a poor, lonely misunderstood guy that's good at heart, really, but because it's the best chance of getting the best result, instead of turning a bad situation into an absolute disaster. And note, I said best chance of that, not that it's certain we can. I'm sure Putin's got a bottom line. He's going to want something, going forward. And we don't know what that is. It might be a stable Kiev government, as he claims, and it might be commitments not to join the EU or NATO. Or it might be permanent annexation of Crimea, or more. The trick is to try to understand him to get the best we can, but it may not be what you want. That, sadly, is realpolitik. I don't like it either, but it is the case.

[Saracen]

j1979, I have not read through all the posts, but what's up with your Anti-Russian obsession ?

Immediate family in Crimea, and a very, VERY understandable fear for them. I'd be pooping red-hot boulders in his position, too. He's petrified for family, that's what.

[j1979]

j1979, I have not read through all the posts, but what's up with your Anti-Russian obsession ?

I love Russia, I hate Putin

My wife is a ethnic Russian, a Ukrainian citizen from Crimea, and I have very very close ties with Ukraine. I have visited many times to all areas of Ukraine and had some of the best times of my life in Ukraine. My wifes family live in Sevastopol, and they don't even realise that the whole region is on the brink of War. They think the Russians are just there to protect them from terrorists.

If you all reading this could read Russian or Ukrainian, were on vk.com, and have friends all over the country, you will see what i have suspected for a while. I wrote this thread in mid December after, I could get a sense of what is happening.

The possible real reason for the oncoming war is.

Russia has a base in Fleet base in Sevastopol, and an underground Submarine base in Balakava bay (I've been there). They have a lease there until 2047. but they need to ask permission to move military vehicles across Ukraine to the base. A pro-russian Yanukovych allowed this to happen with no-questions asked. but a pro EU government would possibly not allow Putin to move his weapons such frequency. Putin is quite possibly supplying Bashar-Al-Assad from Balaklava. He has been building a new submarine base in Novosibirsk but it's not ready yet.

Put simply If Putin loses Crimea or a government that will allow him move supplies to Balaklava the balance of power will change in Syria and the rebels will start to win.

It sure as hell is nothing to do with Putin protecting lives! Because there was no real threat, and Putin does not care 1 little bit about human life. All Russian wars are blood baths.

He is basing the invasion on a very stupid but non serous comment / threat by Dmitry Yarosh who is far right Ukrainian leader with no real power.

[j1979]

That's pretty naive; the world doesn't work like that. Did the British Government lose legitimacy in Northern Ireland when they killed 13 of it's own subjects? Did the Chinese, when they massacred its own in Tiananmen Square? Don't get me wrong, they are all reprehensible, but the killing of people by their own state does not, in the eyes of the international community at least, mean that a Government loses legitimacy per se.

I can't seem to find the English translation, so have no idea what the documents say. But to be honest, I was suspicious from the moment I read this: 'They had been thrown in the lake to destroy them as people were escaping the compound.'

Because the EU, UK and US recognise them, it means that it is legal? The UK and US deem the Iraq invasion to be legal, but there are other states, not to mention legal scholars, that do not. Since when did the EU, UK and US become the Attorney General of the planet?

the whole world has recognised the legality of the Government in Kiev apart from Russia / Belarus and China that remains silent.
Yanukovithc fled and was voted out by his his own parliament... the government is 100% legal.


Listen! Please read this whole reply. and I promise you all the words I write are true, however hard it is for people in UK or US to believe what I am about to write.

You really don't understand Ukraine and Russia, until you understand this. This will be hard to swallow. it took me years to believe this fact. I laughed for years at this and did not believe anyone, but when 100's of people tell you it's true, it is true. and I finally saw it with my own eye. here is the fact about Ukraine / Russia / Belarus.....

10,000's of "protesters" are paid each year to march in crowds, protests and are paid to vote, such is the dire economic conditions outside of the city centers of a few cities! this happens all the time, my brother-in-law used to pay people to do this. Really it's true. It's the norm...this is so ingrained that many people in Sevastopol / Simferopol think the original maiden (protest camp) in Kiev was paid for by the EU. (acknowledgement that there may have been sponsorship from western sources)

This is difficult to swallow for anyone in the west to believe, but it's true. Paid protests tend to be no bigger than 100 people. They come in buses or trains paid for by who ever wants to make a point. The last one was today in Moscow, paid to support the war. The locals know it!

The maidan in Kiev was not paid for (the continuation may have has some sponsorship from outside Ukraine). But many people in far east and south Crimea find this almost impossible to swallow that it was not an outright EU conspiracy.

I know you won't believe me. But before you say it's not true... promise me this..


Look today on BBC news 24 today. There is a protest in Crimea, a woman holds up a Yellow and blue flag to the Camera. No one in the pro-russian protest reacts until about 10 seconds later. It's not a real protest, this is a paid example purely for the TV cameras.

[j1979]

http://radio24.ua/news/showSingleNews.do?objectId=14391

Radio24 in Crimea has stated to broadcast again, the only bit of good news so far from Crimea. However I must remain suspicious and that the Radio station may be used to broadcast more Putin propaganda / lies.

For example to broadcast "Ukrainian forces opened fire first" to justify an assault.

or

It could genuinely be the first sign so far of a de-escalation, and that the ruble drop / crash of the markets today has changed Putins course.

[j1979]

two more reasons to be tentatively more positive than a few hours ago.

1. Wives of Ukrainian troops sleep in front of the Miltary base in Crimea, a human shield of love!
They are not being moved on by the Russian troops, this really is another sign of the situation turning from the brink.


2.
Yanukovich sent letter to Putin asking for Russian military presence in Ukraine
Probably more fabrication, but It gives Putin a way back without losing too much face. Another good sign.

[opel80uk]

the whole world has recognised the legality of the Government in Kiev apart from Russia / Belarus and China that remains silent.
Yanukovithc fled and was voted out by his his own parliament... the government is 100% legal.

He fled under extraordinary pressure and mounting violence, and the vote made in his absence. At best the legality of the current Government is unclear, and continually quoting that other states recognise it does not make it legal per se. Guantanamo Bay is, by most international law standards, illegal, but the US and other states do not agree. States & their Governments, with their own interests at the forefront of virtually all their decisions, would be the last mechanism I would use for validating the legality of something.

Listen! Please read this whole reply. and I promise you all the words I write are true, however hard it is for people in UK or US to believe what I am about to write.

You really don't understand Ukraine and Russia, until you understand this. This will be hard to swallow. it took me years to believe this fact. I laughed for years at this and did not believe anyone, but when 100's of people tell you it's true, it is true. and I finally saw it with my own eye. here is the fact about Ukraine / Russia / Belarus.....

10,000's of "protesters" are paid each year to march in crowds, protests and are paid to vote, such is the dire economic conditions outside of the city centers of a few cities! this happens all the time, my brother-in-law used to pay people to do this. Really it's true. It's the norm...this is so ingrained that many people in Sevastopol / Simferopol think the original maiden (protest camp) in Kiev was paid for by the EU. (acknowledgement that there may have been sponsorship from western sources)

This is difficult to swallow for anyone in the west to believe, but it's true. Paid protests tend to be no bigger than 100 people. They come in buses or trains paid for by who ever wants to make a point. The last one was today in Moscow, paid to support the war. The locals know it!

The maidan in Kiev was not paid for (the continuation may have has some sponsorship from outside Ukraine). But many people in far east and south Crimea find this almost impossible to swallow that it was not an outright EU conspiracy.

I know you won't believe me. But before you say it's not true... promise me this..


Look today on BBC news 24 today. There is a protest in Crimea, a woman holds up a Yellow and blue flag to the Camera. No one in the pro-russian protest reacts until about 10 seconds later. It's not a real protest, this is a paid example purely for the TV cameras.

So on one hand you are criticising the previous Government (or Russian influence), for paying protestors, but on the other you acknowledge that there ‘may have been sponsorship from western sources’ for the others. Who were, let’s not forget, trying to remove a democratically elected Government? I’m sorry, I can understand why you don’t like Yanukovych, I don’t either, but it smacks of complete hypocrisy to complain about one side for their actions, and then seemingly support similar methods to remove them and install a Government you do support. You can’t have it both ways; advocating democracy, but ignoring it when it turns up with an result that you don’t like.

Unfortunately, I fear that the revolution has, from day 1, played directly into Putin’s hands. He effectively is the person pulling all the strings in the region now and, while he might have previously had an ally and close relationship with the Ukraine Government, I suspect when all this is done and dusted, part of Ukraine will now be little more than a puppet state of Russia.

[j1979]

He fled under extraordinary pressure and mounting violence, and the vote made in his absence. At best the legality of the current Government is unclear, and continually quoting that other states recognise it does not make it legal per se. Guantanamo Bay is, by most international law standards, illegal, but the US and other states do not agree. States & their Governments, with their own interests at the forefront of virtually all their decisions, would be the last mechanism I would use for validating the legality of something.

He fled after killing 88 people, and newly appointed officials had access to his governments accounts. For a politician that was paid less then £20,000 a year, he had accumulated over $100 billion. That's the extent of his corruption.

I have not met a single person that has stuck up for Yanukovych no matter what side they are on, his actions and his government is inexcusable. You will search for a long time to find a person anywhere in Ukraine that supports Yanukovich. To stick up for Yanukovych is one of the most unbelievable things I have read in this thread and really outlines that fact you understand very little about the situation.

So on one hand you are criticising the previous Government (or Russian influence), for paying protestors, but on the other you acknowledge that there ‘may have been sponsorship from western sources’ for the others. Who were, let’s not forget, trying to remove a democratically elected Government? I’m sorry, I can understand why you don’t like Yanukovych, I don’t either, but it smacks of complete hypocrisy to complain about one side for their actions, and then seemingly support similar methods to remove them and install a Government you do support. You can’t have it both ways; advocating democracy, but ignoring it when it turns up with an result that you don’t like.

Again, i'm not sure you understand enough about the country to comment. There is a huge difference between paid bus loads of protesters, and or thugs (Titushky) and an anti-government sponsor that pays for sweet tea, and soup for protesters, so that they are able to carry on the protest. As appose to those that protest and fight purely for money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titushky

Friends of mine have been confronted by these Titushky. Imagine a busload of paid thugs coming to you town to beat you up because your town is not pro-russian. If you don't understand why the people of Ukraine had, had enough then again it's another case of you talking about a subject with very little knowledge.

Here are the pro-russian protesters taking there payment after the protest. The brownish yellow/ black scarf identifies the group as pro-russian.

Unfortunately, I fear that the revolution has, from day 1, played directly into Putin’s hands. He effectively is the person pulling all the strings in the region now and, while he might have previously had an ally and close relationship with the Ukraine Government, I suspect when all this is done and dusted, part of Ukraine will now be little more than a puppet state of Russia.

Yes that's what i said back in December. If the maidan failed, Putin wins, if it succeeds then there will be possible war and every measure taken to screw Ukraine.

As for Crimea being a puppet state of Russia, that's not something the Turks will stand for. they are relatively quiet at the moment but should Russia release statements to the effect of a annexing Crimea permanently, there will no doubt be an incident. Putin is funding and supplying a war on Turkeys doorstep probably via Crimea. The Turks still have a valid claim to Crimea, they didn't want to upset the apple cart when Ukraine became independent, but that could change if Crimea is annexed by Russia.

At the very least Turkey could blockade the Bosporus strait, and force Russia to really show it's hand.

Under those circumstances and if Russia don't back off their poorly trained 800k troops start to look less effective next to the well trained Turks and the equally well trained Ukrainians.

Don't expect the Ukrainians to fold, they won't.

[j1979]

And just one more point to this argument and why Putin is a complete donut.


He does not recognise the new "illegal" government in Kiev.

But he does recognise the new "legal" government in Simferopol, Crimea.

[cptwhite_uk]

Is anyone else getting the sense the mood is changing somewhat. I suspect Putin is currently re-considering the non-military affect the world can have on Russia. He's already ruled out invading eastern Ukraine proper, I suspect based on the effect the test invasion and subsequent impact of invading Crimea has had.

The challenge now is to deflate the situation without Putin loosing face (and I suspect the West could even be in-directly in dialogue with the Russians to resolve this).

The future of the Crimea is still uncertain, but I can't see continued occupation being an acceptable long term outcome for the rest of the region, maybe a limited span occupation till the Russians can say security has been restored but they haven't done what is necessary to make Crimea part of Russia proper, maybe they'll push for autonomy for the region?

[kalniel]

Is anyone else getting the sense the mood is changing somewhat. I suspect Putin is currently re-considering the non-military affect the world can have on Russia.

Which is no effect at all surely? Putin's happy to call US bluffs, and the EU don't want to take any action. China is apparently at ease.

The future of the Crimea is still uncertain, but I can't see continued occupation being an acceptable long term outcome for the rest of the region, maybe a limited span occupation till the Russians can say security has been restored but they haven't done what is necessary to make Crimea part of Russia proper, maybe they'll push for autonomy for the region?

Crimea is strategically important to Russia. They'd either like it back, or at least have the freedom to use it strategically.

[cptwhite_uk]

Crimea will never be Russia proper through these actions, for a start the majority of the world wouldn't recognise it as such?

[j1979]

Is anyone else getting the sense the mood is changing somewhat. I suspect Putin is currently re-considering the non-military affect the world can have on Russia. He's already ruled out invading eastern Ukraine proper, I suspect based on the effect the test invasion and subsequent impact of invading Crimea has had.

The challenge now is to deflate the situation without Putin loosing face (and I suspect the West could even be in-directly in dialogue with the Russians to resolve this).

The future of the Crimea is still uncertain, but I can't see continued occupation being an acceptable long term outcome for the rest of the region, maybe a limited span occupation till the Russians can say security has been restored but they haven't done what is necessary to make Crimea part of Russia proper, maybe they'll push for autonomy for the region?

Yes. I posted about it yesterday. I think the "Yanukovych asked for troops" statement, is Putins way to back out without looking weak. His ego is so large though that it's a big ask

Crimea was already and autonomous region of Ukraine, there are plenty of people that want to see it stay that way. If a referendum happens it must be conducted by some third party, not under Russian occupation.

I suspect he wants to keep a grip on Crimea until he can compete his new submarine base in Novorossiysk, once that's complete he can supply Bashar-Al-Assad from there.

[opel80uk]

He fled after killing 88 people, and newly appointed officials had access to his governments accounts. For a politician that was paid less then £20,000 a year, he had accumulated over $100 billion. That's the extent of his corruption.

I have not met a single person that has stuck up for Yanukovych no matter what side they are on, his actions and his government is inexcusable. You will search for a long time to find a person anywhere in Ukraine that supports Yanukovich. To stick up for Yanukovych is one of the most unbelievable things I have read in this thread and really outlines that fact you understand very little about the situation.

Not once, anywhere, have I stuck up for him. I previously stated that I would rather Yanukovych had not won the election, and in my last post said that I did not like him. What I did say was that he was an elected official, and that as part of Democracy, people have to accept that there will be times when people are in power that we would rather not be. That is entirely different from ‘supporting Yanukovich’, as you claim I am doing. Claiming that anyone who disagrees with you is supporting Yanukovych makes it sound like you are ranting, and not listening to reasoned debate, TBH. I understand that you have people you are concerned about in the Ukraine, but the childlike painting of the sides as goodies and baddies is precisely what strengthens Putin’s hand.

With regards to him being corrupt, there are politicians all over the world, across every political spectrum, that you could label the same. From the US alone:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States

Again, i'm not sure you understand enough about the country to comment. There is a huge difference between paid bus loads of protesters, and or thugs (Titushky) and an anti-government sponsor that pays for sweet tea, and soup for protesters, so that they are able to carry on the protest. As appose to those that protest and fight purely for money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titushky

Friends of mine have been confronted by these Titushky. Imagine a busload of paid thugs coming to you town to beat you up because your town is not pro-russian. If you don't understand why the people of Ukraine had, had enough then again it's another case of you talking about a subject with very little knowledge.

Here are the pro-russian protesters taking there payment after the protest. The brownish yellow/ black scarf identifies the group as pro-russian.

I’m sorry, whilst you are right that I am not on the ground there, I find it incredibly naïve to believe that all Western sponsors are doing is providing sweet tea to protesters, especially when there are confirmed right wing extremists playing a huge role in the protests, and now have members in the Interim Government. And I can fully understand why the people of Ukraine have had enough and are reacting the way they are, but it appears you also want me to say that I can’t understand why Russia and the pro Russians are reacting the way they are as well. Yet I can fully understand why a pro-Russian person in Ukraine would feel the way they do at the moment. The interim Government didn’t exactly try to allay any fears that section had by immediately removing Russian as a state language.

Yes that's what i said back in December. If the maidan failed, Putin wins, if it succeeds then there will be possible war and every measure taken to screw Ukraine.

As for Crimea being a puppet state of Russia, that's not something the Turks will stand for. they are relatively quiet at the moment but should Russia release statements to the effect of a annexing Crimea permanently, there will no doubt be an incident. Putin is funding and supplying a war on Turkeys doorstep probably via Crimea. The Turks still have a valid claim to Crimea, they didn't want to upset the apple cart when Ukraine became independent, but that could change if Crimea is annexed by Russia.

At the very least Turkey could blockade the Bosporus strait, and force Russia to really show it's hand.

Under those circumstances and if Russia don't back off their poorly trained 800k troops start to look less effective next to the well trained Turks and the equally well trained Ukrainians.

Don't expect the Ukrainians to fold, they won't.

I’m sorry, but if you anticipate that Turkey are going to do anything other than try to bring the Russians and Ukrainians round the table to help broker peace, you’re likely to be sorely disappointed IMO. Turkey will not get involved militarily (or even sanctions wise), and with Crimera being overwhelmingly ethnic Russian, and being of huge strategic importance to Russia, I think most people can see what the (best possible) end game here is for Ukraine.

And it’s not about folding, it’s about being pragmatic. If Ukraine wants to avoid bloodshed, they will have to recognise this. The International Community didn’t come to Georgia’s help (when it was arguably more clear cut than this issue), and won’t come to the Ukraine’s should any fighting break out. Most importantly, Russia knows this too.

[kalniel]

Crimea will never be Russia proper through these actions, for a start the majority of the world wouldn't recognise it as such?

South Ossetia? Falklands? West Bank settlement?

Nothing is ever exactly the same, but there are plenty of territories not recognised by other countries that none-the-less carry on regardless.