Send Flowers to Russia, Ukraine and Worldwide with Cyber-Florist.com Fiance.com: Beautiful Russian brides
Home  |  About  |  Forum  |  User Blogs  |  Login  |  Register

	Create New Topic   My Posts   My forum buddies   Invite friends   Private messages Russian brides > Main Forum > What Will Happen to Ukraine and Russia? Author Post durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/2/2014 3:44:18 PM   I've been trying to distill in this forum, the information I've gathered up about the present crisis in Ukraine. Now, things have reached a possible "endgame" -- in particular, if the West sells out Ukraine, a "negotiated settlement" may be forced upon that country within a matter of days. The purpose of this thread, is not the reporting of events that have taken place, and their impact, but rather analysis of what is likely to happen, and the pressures that may lead to one outcome or another. I promise not to start any new threads about this crisis, unless events turn in a direction different from what we have seen so far. durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/2/2014 3:59:44 PM   THE CASE FOR A SETTLEMENT IN THE NEAR FUTURE Yesterday, I saw an interview on the PBS Newshour with a reporter for the Christian Science Monitor (if you don't know CSM, they have a strong reputation for unbiased reportage). http://tinyurl.com/qjcjyzb The essence of Mr. Weir's case, as I understood it: 1) Ukraine is broke, and can't afford to sustain anything. 2) With Russia marching into Ukraine, it is now impossible for Ukraine's military to regain full control of the "rebel" territories. The separatist occupation will stop when Russia decides to stop it, and not one day sooner. 3) At the meetings in Minsk, the "rebel leaders" are no longer demanding independence (the official division of Ukraine), but instead very comprehensive autonomy for the oblasts of Donetsk and Luhansk. Putin's new "compromise" would be a very bitter pill for Ukraine to swallow, but easier to live with than loss of the eastern territory -- and continued fighting is economically impossible. ________________________ If Mr. Weir's analysis is correct (and I don't see any particular error in it), then an agreement along such lines might be reached within a matter of days. durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/2/2014 4:25:50 PM   A STARK OPINION PIECE: "Arm Ukraine or Surrender" BY BEN JUDAH From Sunday's New York Times: http://tinyurl.com/ntfdz62 If you don't know Mr. Judah, he is a British Kremlin-watcher. And he doesn't mince words. He argues that Ukraine's military can't defeat Russia's -- and who would argue otherwise? If the West allows Ukraine to continue its losing fight, the already terrible devastation to Ukraine will increase to catastrophic proportions: "Ukraine will become a ravaged conflict zone: a European Syria, or a hideously enlarged Bosnia." Accordingly, Mr. Judah argues that the West can't afford to allow Ukraine to continue this losing war. The West must either furnish Ukraine with enough strength to really resist Russia's armed might, or force Ukraine to surrender. "If we believe that Ukraine will one day become a member of the European Union and NATO, then we should be ready to arm it. We must face the fact that the costs of unlimited European Union and NATO expansion have meant war with Russia by proxy — and then fight the war." If the West is not prepared for such a grim engagement, "then we must force the Ukrainians to abandon their deadly delusion. It would be up to us to prevent Russia from slaughtering Ukrainian conscripts in vain. The only way to achieve this is for the West to oblige Ukraine to surrender. Ukraine is completely dependent on the International Monetary Fund, which is Western money. We must tell Kiev to accept as a fait accompli that Russia has carved out a South Ossetia in the east — or we turn the money off. We can console them: Being another Georgia is not the worst thing in the world." ________________________ Mr. Judah's perspective is an enormously sobering one. If the situation is as binary as he proposes, that the West must choose between hot war and surrender ... both ways are full of foreboding. In the case of intensified war, "No question, this path involves enormous risks. Russia will throw its might into Ukraine. American and British special forces should be dispatched to plant the flag and protect the airports of Kiev and Odessa. But Mr. Putin may call our bluff: Russian forces might — in an echo of the 1999 Kosovo war — encircle them." I really can't imagine, from today's perspective, that the West will take such risks. But here is Mr. Judah's assessment of the cost of surrender: "it would be a crushing defeat for the West. Russia would have restored itself as an empire ... The West would ... concede ... that Russia may invade or annex any [former Soviet] territories as it pleases. And in these lands, the appeasers would flourish, and democracy wilt." "Russia would have triumphed over the world order imposed by the West after the Soviet Union lost the Cold War. This would mean the destruction of American geopolitical deterrence. America’s enemies, from China to Iran, would see this as an invitation to establish their own spheres of influence amid the wreckage." Russia would not stop there. ... the smell of weakness would tempt [Putin] further. It would be merely a matter of time before Moscow exploited the Russians in the Baltic States to manufacture new 'frozen conflicts.'" ________________________ Personally, I'm suspicious of any analysis based on the premise "there are only two options." However, I don't have an argument in hand to show that Ben Judah is wrong about this. I hope that the NATO leaders now meeting in Wales have all read Judah's analysis, of the shattering costs of surrender. durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/2/2014 4:39:37 PM   LEST WE FORGET CRIMEA... As a reminder in these discussions of negotiated settlement, or outright surrender: If Ukraine accepts Putin's "compromise" in Minsk, or if the West presses Ukraine to give up on armed resistance, then any hopes of restoring Crimea to the control of its lawful national government in Kyiv will be lost. The world will have acquiesced to "might makes right," that any state can used armed might to seize territory occupied by a substantial percentage of people with "national identification." A British commentator noted that by this principle, London could rule the largest country on Earth (i.e., by annexation of all countries with large English-speaking populations). ________________________ Many are still repeating the Kremlin propaganda about the "referendum" in Crimea, with its supposed 96% vote for union with the Russian Federation. If you wish to respond to anyone citing this fable, you might wish to ask whether one of the choices on the "referendum" ballots was to remain part of Ukraine. Obviously, a vote on the political future of a territory that omits this option is clearly, absolutely and unambiguously invalid. By the best available polling data, between 50% and 60% of Crimean residents wanted their territory to remain Ukrainian. ragingbull Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/2/2014 7:47:49 PM   I feel so helpless. I can argue here and on comments of news stories against the Russians and their sympathizers. But what has that done? durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/2/2014 7:55:10 PM   LESSONS FROM FINLAND A very interesting piece by a former ambassador from Finland: http://tinyurl.com/ltmoecg If you've been closely following discussions about the Ukraine crisis, you have probably heard the term "Finlandization" bandied about as a solution. The idea behind this, is that Finland (a far-north country bordering Russia) was far too weak to defend itself against the Soviet Union, and had to come up with a modus vivendi that allowed it to live between the USSR and the West. This editorial explains that the Finland model doesn't mean capitulation. Some great quotes: "Russia has grabbed Crimea and destabilized Eastern Ukraine — but it has lost the Ukrainians. In a globalized world, Russia cannot prosper as an angry island, however large it may be." "... Russia is pivoting toward China. But this does nothing to diminish Russia’s isolation; the role of a junior partner to the Middle Kingdom isn’t an enviable one." "Russia’s inability to deal with its neighbors is its predicament. The maxim of defining security by total control of its perimeter and attempting to direct the policies of its neighbors by diktat is no solution to modern Europe’s problems. It provides neither security nor stability." ________________________ Ambassador Nyberg says that so far, Poroshenko is going in the right direction, if he wants to profit from Finland's example. Of course, Finland could not have prevented the USSR from invading. But part of Finland's policy was to maintain a sufficiently strong military, to assure Moscow that the cost of invasion would be painful. I remember reading (in the 1980s) a detailed article on Finland's air defenses. Finland understood that should war break out between the USSR and the West, their tiny military would play but little part. Even so, their intention was to destroy as many Soviet aircraft violating Finnish airspace, as they could possibly manage. ________________________ On CSPAN, I recently saw a little panel discussion sponsored by "The National Interest," a foreign-policy quarterly. One of the two featured speakers was a Kremlin mouthpiece whom I found particularly repulsive. After one of his eruptions of lies, the moderator invited a Finnish diplomat (Ritva Koukku-Ronde, Finland's first woman ambassador to the US) to respond. Like ambassador Nyberg in the editorial, she pointed out the a crucial difference between Finland and Ukraine (or other former Soviet republics) is that since its independence alomst 100 years ago, Finland was never under foreign occupation. She also responded to a suggestion that Finland (or Europe in general) was "bailing" on Ukraine, by stating very clearly and precisely that the European Union is committed to the sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence and unity of Ukraine. I wanted to kiss her through my TV screen :) durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/5/2014 12:41:00 PM   HE CEASE-FIRE (FRIDAY 5 SEPTEMBER) My personal attempt to make sense of this news. It's not easy, with all of the anguish I am feeling. ______________________________________________________________ __ 1. Is it real? Russia's attack on Mariupol reportedly continued after the time of the agreed cease-fire. Of course, if fighting doesn't really stop, then the only result will be more Western distrust and hostility toward Russia. _______________________________________________________________ _ 2. Cease-fire terms, and what they mean to Ukraine Apparently, the cease-fire is under terms dictated by Putin earlier this week. Practically, this would mean surrender: Ukraine would be required to evacuate its armed forces from its own sovereign territory, which would remain under Russian control, occupied by Russian regular troops, special forces, and other mercenaries. __________________________________________________________ ______ 3. If it is surrender, why did Poroshenko agree? Putin can dictate terms, because he controls the battlefield. Ukraine, acting without substantive aid from other countries, failed to muster sufficient military strength to repel Russia's army. Russia's new thrust along the Sea of Azov is progressing westward: without a cease-fire, Russia's "land bridge" to Crimea might have been completed in a matter of days. Poroshenko probably faced these alternatives: a battlefield defeat that would be disastrous for Ukraine; or a surrender that (for now, at least) limits the territory under Russia's control to Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk. ______________________________________________________________ __ 4. What is the future for territories under Russian control? For the near term, at least (months to perhaps a few years), they are likely to remain under Putin's authority. So far, the Russian Federation has never left a "zone of occupation". Almost certainly, the only way Putin would agree to remove his armed forces from Donbass, would be if Ukraine submitted to Putin's concept of "federalization," which almost amounts to giving Donbass to Russia anyway. Since Ukraine is unlikely to agree to this, I expect that Donbass will remain a zone of Russian dominance and terror (to any poor Ukrainians who dare to disagree with their Kremlin overlords). In other words, Ukraine will have permanently occupied zones like Georgia has had since 2008. ________________________________________________________________ 5. What will be the political fallout in Ukraine? Here, the picture grows even murkier to my eyes. In the Ukrainian population, those who are battle-weary (reportedly, a large percentage) or relatively "pro-Russian" will probably be resigned to accept this de facto partition of their country, however bitterly. On the other side, Ukraine's patriots and nationalists may strongly resist this cease-fire as a sell-out of the 2014 Maidan revolution, and of Ukraine's generations-long struggle for independence. Ukraine will have a parliamentary election in a few weeks. If the cease-fire holds, public reaction to it will show strongly in this election. An interesting question will be how the election is run in occupied Donbass (of course, Ukrainians will not be able to participate in Crimea). One grim possibility, is that today's surrender will lead to a very extreme rift in Ukraine's politics, including rapidly growing support for the extremist ultra-nationalist parties. For months, some have been predicting that Ukraine could fail after the fashion of Yugoslavia, with a real civil war (as distinct from the foreign invasion some have been calling "civil war"). At the least, I think a re-occupation of Maidan is likely (the tents and barricades were actually cleared during the last few weeks). _______________________________________________________________ _ 6. Humanitarian relief You guys can see how depressed I am about the situation. However, it is very important to keep in mind, that if the cease-fire holds, the bloodshed will stop (recently, deaths per day have been in the dozens). Healing and repair can begin. Ukrainian citizens who have suffered extremely during these months of combat will have some opportunity to resume civilized life. They may be deprived of their precious liberty, but at least will have the chance to preserve life and limb. ________________________________________________________________ 7. Is there any hope for Ukraine? If Ukraine ends up like Georgia -- that will be the end of Ukraine's dream to be a "real country" (as Putin insists it is not), and the end of Ukrainian citizens deciding the future of their country. Probably, it would also be the death of Ukraine's hopes for real economic progress. But it would not be end of the world -- life would go on, for most not much worse than before. In an extreme case (this is pure fantasy, which I wrote about previously on the forum), Ukraine could make an offer to Russia: get the hell out, and we'll never join NATO; or if you refuse to leave, we'll cede Crimea and Donbass, and join NATO as soon as humanly possible, with permanent land, sea and air bases. More realistically, I think that (after a long, slow wake-up) the West is now pretty alert to the awful dangers of Putinism. Even if Ukraine is forced by Russia's battlefield superiority to surrender, that doesn't mean that the West will passively accept the status quo. Just yesterday, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO's Secretary General (and, in my opinion, a very cool and very smart guy) said (on behalf of NATO), "We call on Russia to end its illegal and self-declared annexation of Crimea." No country in the West thinks that Russia's stealing territory by force is not a very serious danger (even durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/5/2014 12:41:56 PM   though some idiots on this forum think it's just fine). If the West DOES keep up the pressure, over time there may be hope for better outcomes in Ukraine -- though years may pass before we see progress. kaiserdag Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/5/2014 3:55:08 PM   The NATO summit at Wales was all talk. NATO rather bomb ISIS and armed Kurdish forces than face Russia...Business and tourism was as usual during my field trip last weekend at Vilnius, LT. Only Ukrainians are feeling the pain of this conflict. Water and electricity disruption. Russia's game continuous regardless of sanctions while western countries seeing positive gains in their economy... Since WWII, we have been avoiding confrontation which could lead to hot war...sorry UA but NATO will not can the rescue. RodanTsunami Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/6/2014 7:59:06 PM   Seeing as how N.A.T.O. hasn't got the will to go it alone, maybe they should make a deal with the Chinese and give the Russians some sickle and hammer action on 2 fronts with the spoils of the east going to the Chinese. China is just itching for some imperialistic action too. Let the whole world go back to the early part of the last century. poppy Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/6/2014 9:17:08 PM   cant see why putin doesn't just dig up georgia and make a land bridge to crimea . that's what I would do poppy Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/7/2014 2:49:27 AM   be good if putin goes in and smashes the Ukraine rebels and takes over the occupied citys . that would fix the whole problem DBHundertmark Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/9/2014 6:04:32 AM   butt Danni mei deer brodder,,, pooten ez elping da urainian webbels he shood leeve okupied sitties aloan durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/11/2014 4:02:36 PM   A SOBER ASSESSMENT OF POROSHENKO'S SURRENDER From The Economist: http://goo.gl/OLy2MT The cease-fire turns Ukraine's recent military losses into a lasting battlefield victory for Putin. durak Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/14/2014 3:38:57 PM   UKRAINE'S MOST DANGEROUS ENEMY IS INTERNAL From Canada's Globe & Mail: http://goo.gl/WbhL6Q The article is titled "Why we aren’t arming Ukraine". One of the major obstacles to sending military aid to Ukraine, is Western awareness of the effects of corruption. From the article: "When the United States gave 300,000 meals of MRE rations to the Ukrainian military in April, it immediately found them being sold by Kiev businessmen on eBay-type auction sites." ________________________ Just to be clear: corruption in Ukraine is not significantly worse than in Russia. With the exception of the Baltic states, the former Soviet Republics are hideous stinking sewers of corruption -- Ukraine is probably about average, certainly not among the worst. The difference in Ukraine, is that they just underwent a revolution against corruption -- that is what Euromaidan was truly about. Many millions of Ukrainians want to climb out of the sewer, in which most Russians are so happy to wallow. If Ukraine succeeds conquering its own corruption, it will be a great success no matter what Russia does. If Ukraine fails to conquer its own corruption, it is doomed, no matter what Russia does. RodanTsunami Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/14/2014 8:08:13 PM   You are correct Durak in your assessment of corruption. You also know the severity in punishment needed to stop it in the institutions. It is why Poroshenko has an better position to lead. He has wealth and has the ability to be less tempted less to put his hand in the cookie jar. RodanTsunami Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/14/2014 8:17:26 PM   You are correct Durak in your assessment of corruption. You also know the severity in punishment needed to stop it in the institutions. It is why Poroshenko has an better position to lead. He has wealth and has the ability to be less tempted less to put his hand in the cookie jar. RodanTsunami Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 9/17/2014 2:25:07 PM   Today Russia has arrested a business man for 2 things talking smack about Putin's policies and making a profit when the rest of the Russian economy is crashing. It's a redo of the "no child left behind" policy in the U.S. Your Reply: Your name:   New Registration Password:   Forgot password?   refresh Code:   Russian brides > Main Forum > What Will Happen to Ukraine and Russia?
	Pages: 1