Ukraine Protests

Status
Not open for further replies.
BREAKING NEWS Ukraine's ousted President Viktor Yanukovych has written to Russian President Vladimir Putin asking him to use military force in Ukraine, says Russia's envoy to the UN, Vitaly Churkin.

The headlines are getting hot and heavy now. Just out from Bloomberg:

UKRAINE CRISIS 'BREEDING VERY SERIOUS RISKS FOR RUSSIA':CHURKIN
RADICAL EXTREMISTS TRYING TO TAKE CONTROL IN UKRAINE: CHURKIN
And Reuters with the punchline from Reuters:

RUSSIAN U.N. ENVOY CHURKIN SAYS UKRAINE'S OUSTED PRESIDENT YANUKOVICH HAS SENT LETTER TO PUTIN ASKING HIM TO USE RUSSIAN MILITARY FORCE IN UKRAINE
 
BREAKING NEWS Ukraine's ousted President Viktor Yanukovych has written to Russian President Vladimir Putin asking him to use military force in Ukraine, says Russia's envoy to the UN, Vitaly Churkin.

The headlines are getting hot and heavy now. Just out from Bloomberg:

UKRAINE CRISIS 'BREEDING VERY SERIOUS RISKS FOR RUSSIA':CHURKIN
RADICAL EXTREMISTS TRYING TO TAKE CONTROL IN UKRAINE: CHURKIN
And Reuters with the punchline from Reuters:

RUSSIAN U.N. ENVOY CHURKIN SAYS UKRAINE'S OUSTED PRESIDENT YANUKOVICH HAS SENT LETTER TO PUTIN ASKING HIM TO USE RUSSIAN MILITARY FORCE IN UKRAINE

So the real question will end up being whether or not Russia recognizes the legitimacy of the Ukraine Parliament in removing Yanukovych from power.
 
So the real question will end up being whether or not Russia recognizes the legitimacy of the Ukraine Parliament in removing Yanukovych from power.

My understanding is that he is still technically their president. He was not removed per the laws of their constitution and has to stand trial before being removed for office.

This is tricky.
 
BREAKING NEWS Ukraine's ousted President Viktor Yanukovych has written to Russian President Vladimir Putin asking him to use military force in Ukraine, says Russia's envoy to the UN, Vitaly Churkin.

The headlines are getting hot and heavy now. Just out from Bloomberg:

UKRAINE CRISIS 'BREEDING VERY SERIOUS RISKS FOR RUSSIA':CHURKIN
RADICAL EXTREMISTS TRYING TO TAKE CONTROL IN UKRAINE: CHURKIN
And Reuters with the punchline from Reuters:

RUSSIAN U.N. ENVOY CHURKIN SAYS UKRAINE'S OUSTED PRESIDENT YANUKOVICH HAS SENT LETTER TO PUTIN ASKING HIM TO USE RUSSIAN MILITARY FORCE IN UKRAINE

We'll see what happens, but you have to feel very bad for ethnic, pro-European Ukrainians right now. What a mess!
 
US calling for dialog between Russia and the official government of Ukraine. And calls for a UN peacekeeping force to be deployed into the Ukraine as observers.

A bit of calling Putin's bluff that his troops are there to protect Russians in UKr.

I'll give Obama credit for this one but doubt Putin will go for it.
 
Bh1PXKeCEAEqzYh.png
 
A bit of calling Putin's bluff that his troops are there to protect Russians in UKr.

I'll give Obama credit for this one but doubt Putin will go for it.

Agree. But whether the Security Council goes for it is another matter. Russia will vote no, US will vote yes.

Which in turn goes back to the Gazprom comment earlier. The UK can meet it's domestic need for natural gas through domestic production for the most part. France...not so much. China being a wild card and the rest of the rotating members could be split.

And there is still the undecided issue of whether Russia accepts the Ukrainian Parliament's decision to remove Yanukovych which might or might not be in accordance with their Constitution as Amended, and Amendments which Yanukovych didn't sign which would have made the removal legal.

As Obsessed said, it's a mess.
 
Yes, absolutely. And furthermore, the fact that there really wasn't an "invasion" of sorts since the Russians were already there as peacekeepers.

But no matter what, introducing US forces into the country was never an option. Bush had less than six months left in office and any unilateral action on his part would have significantly degraded McCain in the polls (more than he was already). Plus Congress would never have approved of yet another foreign entanglement. Anything Bush suggested was going to be denied by Congress.


Surely you are not suggesting that Bush would have done anything about Georgia had it been the third month of his presidency and Congress loved him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I might have missed it in the clutter (which yes, I'm partially responsible for as well)



So what specifically do you attribute his ability to be a major player on the world stage in regards to the fairly recent situations? For at least fifteen years after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russians took more of a back seat in the world political scene. What changed the paradigm?

Not a troll post, I'm curious as to your response.

Oh, I don't take it as a troll post. Just a legitimate question. To be clear though, I disagree with this whole model of international politics, regardless if it actually increases a nation's power or standing. The nation-state model to international diplomacy creates more problems than it solves,in my opinion. And the US has been as equally culpable in serving this model as Russia.

To the point of your question though, I'm no expert in Russian politics, but here's how I read Putin's rise: I see Putin as a neo-czarist autocrat. That is to say, he's extremely nationalist and has co-opted oligarchic capitalism (read aristocracy). With the help of these individuals, I think he's been able to consolidate power, renew nationalist zeal, and enable the Russian economy, for better or worse. And anytime such a model becomes intertwined with nationalism, you can create a moment of increased national power. The question is how long such a moment will last. There are suggestions that it may not last very long, but Putin can stall the inevitable with his vast natural resources, particularly oil and natural gas.

Honestly, I've been debating over and over in my head whether or not Putin is a neo-czarist autocrat as I suggested earlier or if he's some sort of bizarre neo-fascist. He's certainly not a communist, although he does project the nationalism of the Soviet model, but these sentiments were in place before the Soviets. Hell, the Soviets should have been internationalists, rather than nationalists.

And here is the BBC article. Brief and not very analytical, but certainly suggests that Putin's approach has some serious flaws. Will he fix them or be able to overcome them? We'll see.

BBC News - Russian rouble hits new low against the dollar and euro
 
Surely you are not suggesting that Bush would have done anything about Georgia had it been the third month of his presidency and Congress loved him.

Be careful, LG. Actually, there's no telling what Bush would have done. Colin Powell might have gone before the house council to present a sterling case on how Russia had weapons of mass destruction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
China weighs in:

Then, late today (China time), came what might seem like a word-salad of a statement from official spokesman Qin Gang elaborating on the one from Sunday. “China upholds its own diplomatic principles and the basic codes for international relations, which have also been implied on the Ukraine issue,” Qin said when asked for comments on Russia’s actions. “Meanwhile, we have also taken the historical and contemporary factors of the Ukraine issue into consideration.”

Perhaps the meaning got lost in translation.
 
Surely you are not suggesting that Bush would have done anything about Georgia had it been the third month of his presidency and Congress loved him.

Potentially. They supported him in Iraq in 2003. So there is a possibility he could have garnered the support needed.

But let's face it, anything suggested by Bush when it came to foreign policy was pure political plutonium after early 2007. Congress didn't even support the surge in Iraq, but of course didn't vote to defund the actions.
 
I find it comical that people referring to what W did or didn't/would or wouldn't do as cover for Obama. W was horrible at FP.
 
Potentially. They supported him in Iraq in 2003. So there is a possibility he could have garnered the support needed.

But let's face it, anything suggested by Bush when it came to foreign policy was pure political plutonium after early 2007. Congress didn't even support the surge in Iraq, but of course didn't vote to defund the actions.


Nonsense. The US is not going to pick a fight with Russia over a former Soviet member state with whom we have no security agreement.

I don't care who the president is, or which state it is, there is no way the US is going toe to toe with Russia over something so attenuated to our own interests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I find it comical that people referring to what W did or didn't/would or wouldn't do as cover for Obama. W was horrible at FP.


No one is invoking it as "cover." Its just the reality of the situation that we can do almost nothing about it.

And to be honest, I don't see why we would. I certainly cannot come up with a reason for us to get involved other than G8, not show up for a conference, style stuff. Can you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
China weighs in:



Perhaps the meaning got lost in translation.

Sounds to me like he's saying that China recognizes the legitimacy of international law (in order to ingratiate themselves on this issue), but that China recognizes that current conditions in Ukrainian politics may warrant a re-examination of previous Ukrainian-Russian agreements.

In other words, China says, " 'Ain't nobody got time for that,' but yes, we do indeed still care and are a great nation."
 
Anyone remember this?

Palin was just spouting crazy talk! :rolleyes:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKYOd3EyyJI[/youtube]
 
Last edited:
No one is invoking it as "cover." Its just the reality of the situation that we can do almost nothing about it.

And to be honest, I don't see why we would. I certainly cannot come up with a reason for us to get involved other than G8, not show up for a conference, style stuff. Can you?

Yes - we should be hustling for diplomatic solutions and hell bent on diffusing a potential military incursion into Ukraine.

Given your attitude about staying out you must be disappointed at how Kerry is talking and the movement on economic sanctions that are underway.

We can be world influencers without being world police - there is a massive difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
For those championing the Romney and Palin statements that apparently "proved them right," I posit this:

What do you think this situation would currently look like had a Romney presidency taken effect, accusing Russia as being our number one geopolitical enemy? Perhaps Russia backs off, although I personally think Putin couldn't give a **** about Romney either, but suppose they wouldn't. With all of Romney's "admirable" chest-beating, in your assessment, there might be even more pressure on the US in this moment. And while I'm hesitant to say it would necessarily lead to this, even the war rhetoric could be louder right now.

Again, all speculative, but something to consider.
 
I find it comical that people referring to what W did or didn't/would or wouldn't do as cover for Obama. W was horrible at FP.

I just want people to be consistent in their standards over time. And spare us this "everything terrible in the world started in 2009" nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top