What on Earth is going on in the world today? It's gone mad

[Murat B.]

Some are advocating a boycott of Russian vodka here in Canada...others are not so sure...:celeb:

 

[Kieran]

I see McDonald's have withdrawn from Crimea, which will unfortunately only make the Russian presence healthier...

 

[Kieran]

Well, it was said that Putin wouldn't go any further into Ukraine, but it's looking like he's not finished there... :nono

 

[TsarMatt]

Well, it was said that Putin wouldn't go any further into Ukraine, but it's looking like he's not finished there... :nono

I am expecting a Russian invasion within the next week.

 

[Kieran]

Exactly. They'll invade to "protect". Believe me, this guy is only starting. Ukraine is his testing ground, he will do worse...

 

[TsarMatt]

Exactly. They'll invade to "protect". Believe me, this guy is only starting. Ukraine is his testing ground, he will do worse...

One could actually argue they've already invaded eastern Ukraine. The pro-Russian forces are awfully well organised and adept in what they're doing. I think we're expected to believe they are merely 'protesters'.

When you say he'll do worse, what do you mean by that? What else could he grab? I think Putin understands anymore possible attempts at annexation outside of Ukraine will get NATO involved. And I don't think snatching eastern Ukraine is part of an imperialist agenda, but just something to protect his regional interests.

 

[Kieran]

I think that the agitations begun in the Baltic States will increase in volume once Ukraine is gobbled up and forgotten. These are already started as low-level but quite clearly heard rumblings, and they'll get worse. And I don't believe that NATO would go to war over Estonia or Latvia, although I seriously hope I'm wrong about this. Putin is exposing an immense lack of will and courage on the part of the career bureaucrats who now control the western states...

 

[TsarMatt]

I think that the agitations begun in the Baltic States will increase in volume once Ukraine is gobbled up and forgotten. These are already started as low-level but quite clearly heard rumblings, and they'll get worse. And I don't believe that NATO would go to war over Estonia or Latvia, although I seriously hope I'm wrong about this. Putin is exposing an immense lack of will and courage on the part of the career bureaucrats who now control the western states...

I personally don't think Putin will touch the Baltic states. But I do agree with you on one thing - Putin is not backing down, despite all the rhetoric from Western powers, and, to some extent, it is concerning. NATO never intervened in Chechnya, Georgia nor Ukraine (by the looks of things). Maybe Russia is starting to feel a bit empowered? Still, Putin is not dumb - he has spent numerous years rebuilding Russia's economy and he understands any attempts at annexing pro-Western states would be largely detrimental to the country. In all fairness, NATO, combined with the prodigious US military, would absolutely annihilate Russia is any form of conventional combat, and I think Putin knows this.

 

[Kieran]

They have to be willing to use it, Matt. It's like the match up issue in tennis: a man with a gun is a bad match up for a man with a knife, but if he's too nervous to pull the trigger, he's dying of stab wounds. The west would increase sanctions if the Baltics are further upset, but all-out war? It seems unlikely. It seems less unlikely that Putin would leave these states in peace.

My missus is Lithuanian and we're in constant touch with her family and friends, also friends in the other states, and they're all saying the same thing: they're nervous. They know men like Putin from yore, the history is too terrible to ignore and the patterns are far too familiar... :nono

 

[TsarMatt]

They have to be willing to use it, Matt. It's like the match up issue in tennis: a man with a gun is a bad match up for a man with a knife, but if he's too nervous to pull the trigger, he's dying of stab wounds. The west would increase sanctions if the Baltics are further upset, but all-out war? It seems unlikely. It seems less unlikely that Putin would leave these states in peace.

My missus is Lithuanian and we're in constant touch with her family and friends, also friends in the other states, and they're all saying the same thing: they're nervous. They know men like Putin from yore, the history is too terrible to ignore and the patterns are far too familiar... :nono

You raise some good points. I do know a lot of the Baltic states and even Poland are anxious about the events unfolding in Ukraine, although I do think, to some extent, NATO backing embeds a good degree of security in the states and they shouldn't be too worried. I just feel in this highly intricate, globalised world, large land annexation is becoming 'démodé', especially if the state doing it is not a superpower and not much of a vast threat to global instability.

I guess we'll see how it all develops. I think it is safe to say eastern Ukraine is with Russia now, despite the 'anti-terror' operation Kiev is implementing.

 

[shawnbm]

It seems Putin is going to push through these organized protests against Kiev rule until Kiev and the pro-Ukrainian/anti-Muscovite forces fire shots, arrest and beat Russian sympathizers and then it will get really heated. How does one explain the Russian war jet buzzing a US Navy patrol? This is old world politics drenched in "sphere of influence" nostalgia. Putin is like Hitler and Obama is channeling the appeasers of that era because of being war weary. Of course, we are about to celebrate the centennial of the commencement of the Great War this summer and look how we find ourselves in a somewhat eerily similar predicament, what with all these connections and promises via NATO treaties?

 

[britbox]

Sorry shawnbm, the comparisons with Hitler are pretty lazy and steeped in western media propaganda.

Putin is defending Russian interests... That's what he is supposed to do.

People seem to be completely ignorant of the ethnic make-up of the Ukraine and the complexities of the situation.

First of all, it was the majority of the eastern states that put Viktor Yanukovych in power. He was deposed by force (despite a diplomatic agreement being reached a few days earlier). It was called a "popular uprising"... it might have been popular in Kiev, but it wasn't popular in the East. The new "unelected" government immediately banned "Russian" as an official language in the Ukraine.

Considering the huge number of ethnic Russians in the east... what are they expected to think? The leader they elected is overthrown and their language is banned... a cause for concern, one would think.

Crimea IS russian basically. The majority of people are russian, it's steeped in russian history and the economy is russian-dependent. As far as I'm aware it's also the only russian military base outside Russia. In comparison the US has over 900 military bases in 130 countries. Ask yourself why.

When the USSR broke up, the west said they would not integrate NATO into the ex-soviet blocks. They did.

The west is constantly dabbling in the foreign affairs of other countries - funding, arming and training localised agencies and militias they believe they can control. The Orange revolution in the Ukraine was largely western funded. The director of the CIA is in Kiev right now!

How many people died in the Crimea? None.

The Russians are agitating in the Eastern states... but they have a large minority supportive of their cause. It's not called a popular uprising here though... they are called terrorists and Putin is labelled as Hitler.

A Russian plane buzzed a US Navy ship! Heaven forbid. The US are drone striking half a dozen countries around the world killing people every week... and the US naval presence in the black sea has breached the treaties dictating the size of their presence and how long they are supposed to be there already. Funnily enough the treaty Russia signed about military numbers in the Crimea was never breached.

The US and the west is morally bankrupt when it comes to foreign policy. For people on the ground wanting military action... would you send your son there? and on what basis?

Seriously guys... vary your news sources and get a better overall picture.

 

[Kieran]

The US haven't invaded Ukraine, so let's look at Russia instead.

Firstly, Crimea, by all international legal conventions and by agreement TWICE with Russia, is part of Ukraine.

Secondly, the Ukrainian government was legally elected into power by parliament, which included the votes of the ex-PM's party.

Thirdly, it's their entitlement to enforce language and other restrictions if they feel the interests of their country are best served, or if they feel a minority maybe supported by a hostile superpower. Latvia did the same, far as I know, restricting the rights of Russians there because they destabilised the country - and they were planted there in the old days as a way of keeping control of the colonies. Now, the colonies are exercising their independence, which is understandable.

I agree, the Russians are agitating in the East, but the "minority that's supportive of their cause" have an option: if they feel Russian, they should go home to Russia. They shouldn't try make Russia their home when they're in the Baltic States, or Ukraine.

Where I agree most is on the west, but that doesn't justify Putin. Buddy, he's not "defending Russia's interests": he's annexing a neighbour.

On this issue, the comparisons with Hitler are spot on...

 

[britbox]

The US haven't invaded Ukraine, so let's look at Russia instead.

Firstly, Crimea, by all international legal conventions and by agreement TWICE with Russia, is part of Ukraine.

Secondly, the Ukrainian government was legally elected into power by parliament, which included the votes of the ex-PM's party.

Thirdly, it's their entitlement to enforce language and other restrictions if they feel the interests of their country are best served, or if they feel a minority maybe supported by a hostile superpower. Latvia did the same, far as I know, restricting the rights of Russians there because they destabilised the country - and they were planted there in the old days as a way of keeping control of the colonies. Now, the colonies are exercising their independence, which is understandable.

I agree, the Russians are agitating in the East, but the "minority that's supportive of their cause" have an option: if they feel Russian, they should go home to Russia. They shouldn't try make Russia their home when they're in the Baltic States, or Ukraine.

Where I agree most is on the west, but that doesn't justify Putin. Buddy, he's not "defending Russia's interests": he's annexing a neighbour.

On this issue, the comparisons with Hitler are spot on...

There's also international conventions on self-determination... but everyone cherry picks which international conventions they adhere to. Drone striking in foreign sovereign states also breaches international conventions. I don't see much of an outcry about that on here.

As for the "they should go home to Russia" comment - clearly you have little comprehension on how closely these two states are intertwined. What next mate? Black civil rights leader should have "gone home to Africa" if they have grievances? Seriously...

Your point on "colonies" etc... is well made. But it makes your views on the autonomous region of Crimea choosing their own path seem rather odd.

The president was deposed by force my friend - no two ways about it. As for the parliaments of the Ukraine, I hope you enjoyed the mass brawl that was televised within those historic chambers.

He hasn't annexed a neighbour... and he won't annexe the Ukraine. Crimea was effectively russian and self-determining. The Russians have stated over and over they don't want to annexe those eastern regions. Their end game is a federal Ukraine with autonomous regions that will act as a buffer state between east and west.

 

[shawnbm]

You have misunderstood me, BB. I am aware of the difference between Putin and Hitler. It is not that I am saying he is a Communist or a Fascist who is hell bent on grabbing territory to instill the Russian hegemony simply because he believes they are the ones to inherit the earth and to rid Europe or other parts of Jews, NATO or Westerners generally. I have no issue with Crimea--it was historically Russian and it was re-taken without an invasion or bloodshed (although I do believe one Ukrainian soldier was shot and killed). I also don't think a military engagement is warranted now over East Ukraine, if the majority of the people secede from Kiev and decide to go back to Russia for whatever ethnic or religious reasons there might be. What I am saying is that there are violations of treaties Russia has agreed to in regards to both areas and the failure to strictly enforce remedies available to Obama and his NATO allies BEFORE it all went down after the Olympics is what has permitted Putin to come in and respond, by propaganda and social unrest/political agitation, to the (in his mind illegitimate) removal of a pro-Moscow leader in Kiev that was someone he felt he could rely on and utilize to further Russian interests.

Obama's drone policy is fair game, as is the NSA spying on our allies and whatnot. I do not believe the USA is in breach of any treaty regarding the size of its presence in the Black Sea in light of the world's condemnation of Russian action in Crimea (itself a breach of international law) and, increasingly, in eastern Ukraine. The buzzing is just an example of Putin's brazenness in this area. But, the West must be realistic, and, of course, this action is understandable from the standpoint of this country. Crimea and even eastern Ukraine are not world hot spots and should not turn into same. I know where Biden and the CIA director are and they will get nowhere. You know that I have been opposed to Obama and the West's funding of the terrorist rebels in Syria--there are a number of foreign affair mishaps my nation has made I am not proud of (Guatemala in the 1950s being one of too many). But, that being said, Putin is no fool and he will take what he can get to enhance Russian influence and power. My reference to WWI has to do with the West and NATO not being silly with defending interests that are not really worth the fighting for and certainly not worth any unnecessary escalation (so, I would not want my children sent there to answer your questions). Calling the USA and the West generally morally bankrupt does not get you anywhere. LORD knows the Russians and Soviets before had that rightly proclaimed about them as well, as one can say about Saddam Hussein, the Ottoman Turks, the Nazis and Castro in Cuba. We all have blood on our hands, even the third world nations with their despots and slave trades, ethic violence, etc.

 

[Kieran]

Crimea didn't "choose their own path." They had a plebiscite forced on them - illegally, according to their own constitution - and there were two options on it: to join Russia, or to be independent, with a view to joining Russia in the future. :nono

As for the "go back home" comment, you're obviously not familiar with the ex-USSR states which have huge Russian populations in them, population movement that was designed to suppress rather than nurture. Now, the USSR is gone, and these people are fairly citizens of the Baltic States, Ukraine, etc. But as you yourself put it, "the Russians are agitating in the eastern states."

That's not only in Ukraine, but it's the Baltic States too. And what is the purpose of this, if not Putin to come riding in to "protect" his Russians? This is the fear in these countries, and it's why they joined NATO - and (reluctantly, for the main part, since they'd only recently overthrown one corrupt union of nations), the EU. It was even long before the Russians invaded Ukraine that Latvia made its stand on language. I know that in Estonia there is a huge fear/resentment of the Russians living there, because the Russian population would be more leaning towards Putin than their own parliament. I know this one, because my own masseuse is a Russian Estonian.

But I knew it from about ten years ago too, because one of our pals on the retreats we go to is Estonian, but not of the Russian variety. talking to people like this gives an exact picture of how people feel in the east. My own father-in-law lived in Siberia until he was twelve. That wasn't an episode of Hi-De-Hi, lemme tell ye.

If people don't feel they belong in a new place, they have the right to return to where they're from. I've said this to my wife's pals when they come here to live and spend their time moaning about Ireland: if you don't like it, you shoulda bought a return ticket. Nobody is forcing them to stay in Ireland. Likewise, when I hear of Muslim communities agitating to have Sharia law brought in, hate clerics from the Middle East claiming asylum and causing trouble, and you know this is a problem not only in the UK.

The Russian communities in eastern European countries are welcome to stay, they are citizens in those countries, providing, of course, they meet the criteria.

As for drone striking, I expect little more from the useless Obama. I'm not a supporter of western foreign policy, my friend, because as you can see with regards to Ukraine, it's frequently cackhanded...

 

[britbox]

You have misunderstood me, BB. I am aware of the difference between Putin and Hitler. It is not that I am saying he is a Communist or a Fascist who is hell bent on grabbing territory to instill the Russian hegemony simply because he believes they are the ones to inherit the earth and to rid Europe or other parts of Jews, NATO or Westerners generally. I have no issue with Crimea--it was historically Russian and it was re-taken without an invasion or bloodshed (although I do believe one Ukrainian soldier was shot and killed). I also don't think a military engagement is warranted now over East Ukraine, if the majority of the people secede from Kiev and decide to go back to Russia for whatever ethnic or religious reasons there might be. What I am saying is that there are violations of treaties Russia has agreed to in regards to both areas and the failure to strictly enforce remedies available to Obama and his NATO allies BEFORE it all went down after the Olympics is what has permitted Putin to come in and respond, by propaganda and social unrest/political agitation, to the (in his mind illegitimate) removal of a pro-Moscow leader in Kiev that was someone he felt he could rely on and utilize to further Russian interests.

Obama's drone policy is fair game, as is the NSA spying on our allies and whatnot. I do not believe the USA is in breach of any treaty regarding the size of its presence in the Black Sea in light of the world's condemnation of Russian action in Crimea (itself a breach of international law) and, increasingly, in eastern Ukraine. The buzzing is just an example of Putin's brazenness in this area. But, the West must be realistic, and, of course, this action is understandable from the standpoint of this country. Crimea and even eastern Ukraine are not world hot spots and should not turn into same. I know where Biden and the CIA director are and they will get nowhere. You know that I have been opposed to Obama and the West's funding of the terrorist rebels in Syria--there are a number of foreign affair mishaps my nation has made I am not proud of (Guatemala in the 1950s being one of too many). But, that being said, Putin is no fool and he will take what he can get to enhance Russian influence and power. My reference to WWI has to do with the West and NATO not being silly with defending interests that are not really worth the fighting for and certainly not worth any unnecessary escalation (so, I would not want my children sent there to answer your questions). Calling the USA and the West generally morally bankrupt does not get you anywhere. LORD knows the Russians and Soviets before had that rightly proclaimed about them as well, as one can say about Saddam Hussein, the Ottoman Turks, the Nazis and Castro in Cuba. We all have blood on our hands, even the third world nations with their despots and slave trades, ethic violence, etc.

shawnbm,

Thanks for the well considered reply. I find the comparisons with Hitler particularly annoying because Putin is nothing like Hitler in the great scheme of things.... even if it is recognised that he annexed the Crimea. If you compare their overall vision and actions, they have very little in common... hence the "lazy" media remark. The first rule of propaganda is to demonize a leader rather than a nation.

You mention breaking treaties but also recognise the Crimea's right to self-determination... so they cancel each other out... no?


I know you aren't an Obama fan... so I would ask you what you would have him do?

Calling the US and west morally bankrupt isn't a dig at US Citizens, who I have no issue with. I'm British and a westerner also. I'm talking strictly about governments and the corporations who influence their decision making.

Their is no "good" and "evil" in geopolitics... it's about different groups defending and furthering their own interests.

Without the British colonial past I wouldn't have enjoyed the lifestyle and country I grew up in. I've never apologised for it and never will.... but I'm well aware wars aren't fought on the grounds of "goodies" and "baddies" - they are always fought for resources, power and furthering of a country's strategic interests. I object to media and propaganda taking us all for fools. It is what it is.

 

[britbox]

Crimea didn't "choose their own path." They had a plebiscite forced on them - illegally, according to their own constitution - and there were two options on it: to join Russia, or to be independent, with a view to joining Russia in the future. :nono

As for the "go back home" comment, you're obviously not familiar with the ex-USSR states which have huge Russian populations in them, population movement that was designed to suppress rather than nurture. Now, the USSR is gone, and these people are fairly citizens of the Baltic States, Ukraine, etc. But as you yourself put it, "the Russians are agitating in the eastern states."

That's not only in Ukraine, but it's the Baltic States too. And what is the purpose of this, if not Putin to come riding in to "protect" his Russians? This is the fear in these countries, and it's why they joined NATO - and (reluctantly, for the main part, since they'd only recently overthrown one corrupt union of nations), the EU. It was even long before the Russians invaded Ukraine that Latvia made its stand on language. I know that in Estonia there is a huge fear/resentment of the Russians living there, because the Russian population would be more leaning towards Putin than their own parliament. I know this one, because my own masseuse is a Russian Estonian.

But I knew it from about ten years ago too, because one of our pals on the retreats we go to is Estonian, but not of the Russian variety. talking to people like this gives an exact picture of how people feel in the east. My own father-in-law lived in Siberia until he was twelve. That wasn't an episode of Hi-De-Hi, lemme tell ye.

If people don't feel they belong in a new place, they have the right to return to where they're from. I've said this to my wife's pals when they come here to live and spend their time moaning about Ireland: if you don't like it, you shoulda bought a return ticket. Nobody is forcing them to stay in Ireland. Likewise, when I hear of Muslim communities agitating to have Sharia law brought in, hate clerics from the Middle East claiming asylum and causing trouble, and you know this is a problem not only in the UK.

The Russian communities in eastern European countries are welcome to stay, they are citizens in those countries, providing, of course, they meet the criteria.

As for drone striking, I expect little more from the useless Obama. I'm not a supporter of western foreign policy, my friend, because as you can see with regards to Ukraine, it's frequently cackhanded...

I don't think you can compare Muslims and Sharia Law with the situation because you're are talking about a situation where two different civilizations collide.

The situation in the Ukraine would be more akin to something like a break up of the United Kingdom. .. an intertwined history of the member states and something far more complex.

If for instance, Scotland voted for independence (unlikely, but assume they did) and Newcastle was "given away" at the whim of an English dictator... would you insist they had to remain part of Scotland despite being inherently English if they had the chance to revert back 20 years later... or would you insist they remained part of Scotland?

 

[Kieran]

We had that in Ireland, a whimsical and arbitrary border based solely upon ethinicity and religion. They didn't only split the country, the actually split the province of Ulster. Since we're all sophisticated Europeans now, it's no problem any more. The British government have even allowed murderous thugs terrorists to walk free with a pat on the back. My own country is no better: we elected Gerry Adams to parliament and allowed Martin McGuinness to run for president. :nono

The situation in Ukraine wasn't akin to the UK breaking up because no foreign invader came in and demanded Scotland. Let's be clear: Ukraine is troubled, but a huge part of the trouble is Putin's imperial agenda. Your hypothesis is false as well because Crimea wasn't given away at the whim of a dictator, it was given to Ukraine by the same authority that ruled that region.

And democratic Russia rubber-stamped this in 1991 (or was it 1992?). This is the sticking block: it wasn't only Kruschev who gave Crimea away, it was further ratified by post-Soviet Russia. You may not think Kruschev's act was binding (although internationally and according to the USSR, it was), but what about the history since?

 

[britbox]

The biggest problem with the Ukraine has not been Putin - it's been the Ukrainian government... over the last 20 years. Point the blame where it belongs my friend. Absolute corruption and it includes pretty much everyone who has been charged with governing the country since day one.

The custodians of the Ukraine have let the people down and caused this mess. Pro-Russians, anti-Russians, Capitalists, Communists... ALL of them.

The torchpaper was lit upon political wranglings on who was going to bail them out.