After I read your post, I went to see if something new had happened between Russia and Ukraine? Not that I can see,,, so no, it is not working, in fact,, they are still saying it will backfire.
To answer the question, it's necessary to be clear what "working" looks like. And different people will have conflicting ideas about what that should be. Examples:
* Russia says to Ukraine "OK, Crimea is yours" and slinks away with its tail between its legs
* Russia agrees to a Crimean settlement negotiation with Ukraine's present government
* Russia is deterred from military invasion of the rest of Ukraine
These are just a few examples. Note that none of them says anything about Russia continuing aggressive efforts to destabilize Ukraine (which it is obviously doing at present), or continuing to interfere in Ukrainian politics for the next 20 years.
I can tell what _I_ would wish for, but it's not likely to happen any nobody else cares anyway.
________________________
There's two other considerations to take into account. To the extent that "working" means deterrence, there will never be a definite answer because "Russia didn't invade yet" doesn't prove they won't invade tomorrow, and however long we wait for an answer, it's impossible to know whether they would have invaded without America's response.
The second is that economic sanctions (part, but certainly not all, of present US tactics) work over time -- months into years. It's hard to learn much about their effectiveness after a few days. That being said, I suspect that the pyschological effect on the targeted individuals, whether strong or weak, was probably felt within hours.
I heard today that Putin's forces claimed to be withdrawing from the Ukrainian border. Many don't believe it, with evidence. If he was going to invade, why has he not done so?
Yes Durak as you know I live out in middle of gas country, The deal was finalized China maybe a little skeptical still, maybe no money has changed hands yet. The Klintcher for deal is China is tired on States meddling to. Anyway I have this feeling This deal will bite Canada gas in the Ass. We are building gas lines to pipe gas to Pacific to supply China. So we wait to see who gets sanctioned in the ass again. Some of these former CCCP countries have had a history of these types of problems Ukraine faces now. I still feel Rather then alienate Russia we should have let them handle it, with our help, to keep things moving forward instead of back. People can call Putin what they want,at the end of the day he is a very shrewd business man, and a leader that looks after his country. If he was American he would be a very good President. Like it or not. The hole reason he became President is he took care of his city, better then Moscow. So Moscow said Hmm whats this man got going on, Lets see. Thats what Obama was doing in Europe with Harper At G7.
You know if these lines are not built proper, environmental effects, will hit us all, I hear more and more everyday how. Weather is changing,ice caps are melting at alarming rates. I think you are aware of EPA standards in these countries, They are far behind us, and we are not doing such a great job ourselves, So what do you think the quality of these new lines will be when he sell this stuff for cheap. Sorry I am just rambling right now, and a little P***ED. at the whole mess
I don't know the economics of petroleum production in any detail -- is ir realistic, that North America could sell gas to China by a fleet of LNG tankers across 6000 miles of ocean, cheaper than Russia via 2000 miles of pipeline?
I think a good case can be made that it was logical, and in the mutual interest of Russia and China, to make such an agreement. Except for giving gas away at a loss, how could the US have prevented it?
____________________________________________________________
"I f he [Putin] was American he would be a very good President." With respect, it seems to me that either you don't know this man, or you don't know America.
Putin has allowed, if not actively encouraged or directly ordered, severe violence against Russian journalists critical of himself and other Russian strong men. This has included numerous murders, suspicious "accidental" deaths, and beatings so severe that they resulted in loss of extremities and crippling brain damage. To my knowledge, there has never been a successful prosecution for ANY of these attacks. In America, this would not be considered good presidency.
Putin has destroyed Russia's court system as an instrument of justice. Corruption on scales unknown in America, and vast organized crime systems, operate smoothly without interference. When journalists critical of the powerful are savaged, there is no punishment (see above). Opponents of Putin are jailed on arbitrary or fictitious charges. The federal conviction rate is more than 99% -- think about that for a moment! Can their prosecutors be THAT good? Even in Stalin's "show trials," about 20% of defendants were able to clear their names. In some of Putin's prosecutions of political opponents, his "judges" have had awkward moments when their actions bore no relation to what was happening in the courtroom, presumably while they were awaiting direction from their political masters. In America, political subversion of the justice system is not considered good presidency.
Putin has progressively seized control of Russian news media, starting in the first months of his time in power (2000) and continuing with drastic steps during the past 12 months. Virtually all television in Russia, and the majority of Russian press, now parrot what the Kremlin tells them to say. Websites and blogs critical of Putin have recently been blocked from Russia's internet. Journalists critical of his regime have been killed or mutilated (see above). His strongest political rival (originally famous as a blogger) is under house arrest, forbidden to communicate with anyone in any form. In America, this would not be considered good presidency.
Putin has ended representative democracy (at least at the federal level) in his country. He did this several ways, including turning the legislature into a "rubber stamp," raising extreme barriers to other political parties, seizing control of Russian media (see above), outlawing most forms of political protest, outlawing certain types of politically motivated speech, and imprisoning political opponents (see above). In America, this would not be considered good presidency.
Putin has exploited his office to divert billions of dollars -- likely tens of billions -- to his personal fortune. Ironically, the main vehicle for this has probably been Ukrainian natural gas contracts. Because this is done in secret, using large numbers of intermediary shell companies, the total amounts remain mysterious. All the while, he claims a net worth less than one million dollars. In America, this would not be considered good presidency.
Ok what about the president before Obama? and the whole mess he created,, Why is Putin still so popular in Russia? and yes our Gas industry has been gearing up to ship to China new pipeline is going to Kitimat Just for that purpose. We also supply coal our coal is of the highest grade. I am sure the shipping industry would have got quite a boost as well. Along with many other industries. On both sides of the border. So are sanctions working no they back fire like crazy. I am not the only person that feels this way, People who live in glass houses should be careful throwing stones they say. You know if he was born in States he would play by States rules. And States has had a fair share of questionable presidents. People do remember the Cold War years. Our country was to be your battle field. I just don't want the memories of States and Russia going at it again. When Berlin wall came tumbling down Joy came to the world. investors from the west headed to these former CCCP countries, knowing it would take a while to get a strong economy going there. There would be many hurdles on the way. How long has it been maybe 30 years now it is still a very short time. How long has it taken us and yes there is still problems.
Stevc,, I’ve got to go with durak on this one. Putin is only looking out for himself and a few others close to him that he is able to control. Putin doesn’t look after the people in his country,, but tries to put on a front that Russia is a world leader. The Sochi Olympics were all for show,, just think how that money could have been put to better use? Parts of Russia have lower living standards than my farm animals have.
Putin is out to control energy and resources,,, take it from others then make them buy it back. He is a threat to Canada too,,, he is after the fuel in the artic. A couple of years ago, Russia made the claim that the continental plates from Europe and/or Asia went beyond the north pole,,,,, there for belonged to Russia?! They dropped marker beacons with the Russian flag on them under the ice in Canadian territory.
Putin is on the move now, because the west has been sleeping , and will be playing catch-up for the next few years. Canada started making warships because of this.
Obama isn’t any better. I still believe that he belongs in GITMO. Not because he is black or a liberal or democrat, or incompetent,,,, but because he IS the enemy. A one man wrecking machine.
Obama botched the Keystone pipeline,,, and countless other things,,, too many to remember!
Sanctions: When a state takes actions that are dangerous and destructive, the main options of response for other states are:
* impotently saying "we don't like that"
* economic (and other non-military) sanctions
* military intervention
I've just handed you King Solomon's crown. You're in charge of Western foreign policy. What would YOU do?
Probably our biggest disagreement is about my premise (dangerous and destructive actions). From reading comments you've made on this forum since March, my impression is that you don't think Russia's intervention in Ukraine is such a big deal. On that point, you and I part company.
I don't see that you answered the question about economics. Are Russia's gas fields so expensive to operate, that shipping LNG halfway around the world is cheaper? Maybe that's so, I just don't have any data on that. But in any case, I wouldn't be surprised if China ends up buying North American LNG as well as Russian pipeline gas.
China is very concerned to get the best deal, but even if they didn't care about price, it makes very good sense for them to have diversity of supply. China has policy tensions with both the US and Russian Federation, that could flare up into tensions resulting in sanctions or even warfare.
If China is getting its energy from all over the world, it can manage a shut-off from one particular supplier. The Russian gas deal simply made sense, and I don't see that anybody in the West could have changed that.
____________________________________
Like a great many people around the world, you know that your prosperity is connected to the petroleum industry, so it's completely understandable that you're more focused on how events affect that industry, than what is happening in foreign relations.
Well, here's something that petroleum guys should understand. Since Putin took power, Russia has repeatedly used its control of gas supplier as lever of extortion against Ukraine. Gas has been a gangster-style weapon against Ukraine's autonomy and independence. But the Black Sea is believed to have very large gas reserves. In the next few years, Ukraine had the potential to become energy independent: no more petro-extortion from Russia!
But now, Russia claims almost all of Ukraine's gas reserves as territorial waters of Crimea. Russia has stolen countless billions in natural gas, and taken away Ukraine's energy "escape hatch," wanting to keep Ukraine as a helpless victim. Russia stole Crimea by brute military force -- LIKE SADDAM STOLE KUWAIT FOR ITS PETROLEUM.
Do you actually believe that the best response from the rest of the world is, "never mind, it's just a squabble among Slavs?"
steve asked, "Why is Putin still so popular in Russia?"
This is a very important question, that will determine Russia's future.
I think an important answer is that politically, most Russians are like little children. I don't mean this to disparage them as a people -- rather, it takes a lot of time and a lot of sacrifice for ANY culture to develop the muscles needed for self-government.
One of the stupidest myths in my country (USA) is that we somehow invented democracy. The founders of the United States benefited from centuries of British history with self-government. Rule by the people was already "in the DNA" of the earliest settlers from England. Their ancestors had paid for self-government by rivers of blood (England put three of its kings to death before the monarchy finally accepted its place BEHIND parliament). And then Americans paid with more rivers of blood for their extension of self-government.
On the other side, consider Russia: centuries of rule by autocrats, a gap of about 12 years with some attempt at self-government, and then almost 75 years of 20th-century totalitarianism. When the Soviet Union ended, Russia had established no tradition of self-government. And Russia paid very little for its new democracy: the ability to have real elections was "dumped in the lap" of ordinary Russians after a quick, and nearly bloodless, transition.
Now, it's a fact of human nature that people tend to value what the worked for, much more than what is given to them without effort. Democracy seems to work this way. At the end of the Great War in 1918, Germans had instant democratic government. There were severe economic hardships, violently competing factions and general disorder. Within 15 years the German people thoughtlessly destroyed their democracy at the voting booth, literally anointing their new Chancellor as dictator.
I don't see Russians as much different from Germans in this respect. One morning, they woke up and got the message, "here, you are a democracy." Not many years later, the majority of Russians have accepted a dictator who delivers order, and gradually increasing prosperity.
__________________________________
There's another facet to this that is specifically Russian: I remember at grade school, in the "social studies" class, learning that Russians are terrified of disorder (in other words, of themselves), and for that reason have a long tradition of accepting rule by brutal strong men. Better the tyrant, the Russian thinks, than chaos.
As a rule, I am skeptical of such simple-sounding explanations that tar an entire people with one brush. But I have to admit, that the past five centuries of Russia's history are completely consistent with this theory.
One of my Ukrainian friends recently startled me by referring to this "Russian strong man" theory. Her point was, that is a RUSSIAN tradition, NOT a Ukrainian tradition. Ukrainians value freedom and independence in ways that Russians don't. You only need to compare Moscow to Kyiv, to find evidence that confirms this. The courage Ukrainians showed this year on the Maidan has no counterpart in 21st century Russia.
i'm playing on my memory here, this reminds me of a interview with a russian woman reporter a year or two ago while she was visiting NZ.
her name?? i cannot remember, but well known internationally.
she is one of putons so called enemys of the state,, in a sense.
it was a interesting watch her been interviewed by one of ours.
she was asked what was putons personality like as a man, to talk to.
she told how she got a exclusive interview with him without he or his croneys realizing who she actually was at the time,, it was at some state get together in moscow..
she said chuckling they are not the smartest people but one had to be a little careful around them of cause,,,, i guess they never thought "an unliked reporter as her" would try this sort of stunt at the time...
her reflections of the interview was of a man who had no substance charm or charisma compared to most men who are of great.
there was nothing to this man that gave her any inkling of intelligence.
her thoughts on his presidency seat was his days were numbered and she was adamant of this, but as the tyrant he is he will not leave without Russia's people taking a serious hit.
she basically said Russia is very much at the end of the rope with this guy, but sadly the people that surrounds his position are (as we all know) deep rooted powerful corrupt people.
his wealth was also questioned,, possibly one of the richest men in the world today she said, in capital that is.
when his cards start to fall, her thoughts were he would loose much of this wealth due to the wolves who hold it all together taking pieces themselves, basically he would have trouble cashing it in when his croney's desert him,, and they will "eventually" she said,,, that honor(sarcastic here) amongst thieves sort of thing coming into play..
now along comes Ukraine's carry on.
that interview feels like a long time ago, i see less momentum in putons demise through the media.
or is he and croneys better at shutting down the protests and media play there once was.
i see little of anything coming out of russia now in protest, other then a few months back a small piece involving the activist group pussy riot.
so maybe he really is not comfortable and Moscow (puton&co) are applying much pressure on its people to hold ground.
maybe the Kremlins tulips aren't so rosy as they once were.
i think its worth pointing out one should never point the finger at Russia in our distaste when accusing this country of no good,, everything should really be angled at Moscow itself (as Russians do) the Kremlin or puton & co.