Ukraine

There is a more mundane reason why sanctions against Russia won't work. There is a global market in Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), which Russia can trade through neutral third countries (India for example) with the company in that third country taking a cut in the profit. The LNG tanker doesn't even have to go anywhere near that third country. For example, an LNG tanker, under the ownership and flying the flag of the third country leaves a Russian port. Companies in several different European countries bid, without breaking sanctions, for this LNG, which will then end up in one of their ports.

Every country, including those in the EU will want to guarantee its own energy security. As 'Europe', the EU, is not a nation, you can forget about any solidarity when push comes to shove. Russia, by contrast is a nation, whose people are more used to enduring hardship than Europeans are. Sanctions will hurt those companies which rely on exports to Russia, British car manufacturers for example, for whom Russia is an important market, far more than they will hurt Russia.

The USA, if it has a President with any sense, will keep well out of it all and respect the old Cold War practice with Russia of not interfering in each other's sphere of influence.
 
I don't understand why so much of the anti-imperialist crowd (e.g. alternet, counterpunch, rainforests1) seems to be keen on defending Russia here.
 
cornsail said:
I don't understand why so much of the anti-imperialist crowd (e.g. alternet, counterpunch, rainforests1) seems to be keen on defending Russia here.
Click to expand...

Because Russia is acting in defensive mode. The EU is the aggressor, interfering in the affairs of Ukraine in the hope of absorbing it and expanding 'Europe' almost as far east as the Third Reich did at its peak. Putin and his inner circle may well be crooks, but the same can be said for the pro-EU government of Ukraine, which was not democratically elected by any stretch of the imagination.
 
cornsail said:
I don't understand why so much of the anti-imperialist crowd (e.g. alternet, counterpunch, rainforests1) seems to be keen on defending Russia here.
Click to expand...
I believe in self-determination(which should apply to the people of Crimea as well) and, as an American, I believe in a neutral foreign policy. I am not a fan of Russia's government and don't feel I'm defending them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yokel
Yokel said:
Because Russia is acting in defensive mode. The EU is the aggressor, interfering in the affairs of Ukraine in the hope of absorbing it and expanding 'Europe' almost as far east as the Third Reich did at its peak. Putin and his inner circle may well be crooks, but the same can be said for the pro-EU government of Ukraine, which was not democratically elected by any stretch of the imagination.
Click to expand...

So Russia was forced to invade Ukraine and annex part of it to prevent Ukrainians from acting contrary to Russia's interests?

Wasn't this the same logic that the CIA used when it overthrew democratically elected leaders to setup US-friendly despots? I guess the CIA are the good guys as well, huh? And all this time I was thinking they were illegally and immorally interfering with the self-determination and integrity of other countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Second Summer
das_nut said:
So Russia was forced to invade Ukraine and annex part of it to prevent Ukrainians from acting contrary to Russia's interests?
Click to expand...

Russia has 'annexed' the part of Ukraine which is majority Russian and which should have been incorporated into Russia when the Soviet Union split up. The Russians justifiably feel threatened by the imperialist behaviour of the EU, which backed the coup in Ukraine, because the EU wants to run Ukraine as it now runs the majority of the former Soviet Bloc in Eastern Europe.
 
Yokel said:
Russia has 'annexed' the part of Ukraine which is majority Russian and which should have been incorporated into Russia when the Soviet Union split up.
Click to expand...

Just like the Sudetenland!

This is an old playbook that Putin is using. Here's another page: "To avert a revolution, we need a small victorious war." That's directly from Russian history, and applies very well to Putin's appeal to extremist nationalism to shore up his power and deflect the very real complaints about Russia's stagnating economy and corruption.

Too bad that short victorious war the quote is referring to was not. It's going to be scary if a nuclear Russia ends up facing the same situation.
 
In Odessa, two Ukrainians of Russian descent are talking.

The first proclaims "I've stopped speaking Russian."

The second asks, "Are you afraid that the Ukrainians will beat you?"

"No," replies the first, "I'm afraid the Russians will come to protect me."
 
Mischief said:
Exactly what I was thinking.
Click to expand...

History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes.

I really do fear that Putin's motivations will result in more border conflicts until someone bites back. And that can go to hell in a handbasket fast.
 
I don't believe the main reason for the Crimea annexation had to do with diverting attention from domestic problems. Putin acted at a time that was the most favourable while Ukraine was in chaos after ousting their government, pro-Russia sentiment was high in Crimea, and nationalist sentiment was high in Russia. Besides, control of Crimea is important for military reasons, and Ukraine was about to align itself with the West. As a bonus, Putin's domestic popularity is now higher than in a long time.

I think the best Russian argument for taking over Crimea is that it was originally part of Russia, but was in 1956 given to Ukraine by the Soviet leader at the time, who incidentally happened to be himself a Ukrainian. And also that a clear majority of the Crimean population is ethnically / linguistically Russian, and favoured ceding the territory to Russia.

Of course, we can criticize the way the annexation happened and how it was in breach of international law. And I do think other countries in Russia's "backyard" are right to be particularly suspicious and careful these days.
 
As far as das_nut is concerned, Hitler is still alive. If something bad happens sometime soon that somehow causes a Depression, maybe they can move on and focus on current people.
 
As I said, history rhymes. South Ossetia. The Crimea. Now Russian troops are massing on the rest of Ukraine's borders.

This melody seems familiar.
 
As I said, history rhymes. South Ossetia. The Crimea. Now Russian troops are massing on the rest of Ukraine's borders.

This melody seems familiar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ledboots
Best thing to do would be to invade Russia just before winter sets in.

Technicaly it was a disaster every time that has been attempted before.

It would be different if we did it this year though as the date won't be the same.
 
das_nut said:
Probably made sense in the 1930s as well...
Click to expand...
Syndicated columnist Richard Cohen brings up Hitler probably more than 50% of his columns. The two of you should have a conversation. There are some of us who live in 2014 and don't want to hear about the 1930's very much considering the circumstances are much different(nuclear war heads, for instance).
 
Top Bottom
Back