|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: What's going on in Ukraine?
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Chill, just as a matter of interest, do you think any of the Bilderberg Group, Opus Dei, the Freemasons or the Elders of Zion have a significant role in this crisis?
Sorry been busy with work. No, its actually an Alien plot. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I don’t believe in cartoon arch-villains in smoke filled rooms. The Bilderberg group, however,is clearly a forum for the very influential group of people, (cooperate, political and academic) to gather and network and discuss current events in an off the record setting. I imagine there will be strategic movers and shakers in the room. That said I don’t think they roll down the blinds all do the secret dance and do the evil villain laugh or anything.
What I do think is that there are in this world powerful, economic and strategic agendas which have an impact on world events. How could they not? Those events are of course fluid and impacted by a multitude of factors. It seems to me that the U.S. has the least to lose and the most to gain whilst Russia and the EU and of course Ukraine has much to lose. I think these factors have been exploited by US diplomatic influence. I think it is entirely credible that powerful lobbies, organisations and government elements may seek to influence events in their favour and vie for strategic/economic advantage. That some of this might involve secrecy seems to make sense. After all we have an official secrets act, or is that just a misnomer?
I also made reference to revolving door of oligarchical corruption and that the new Ukrainian government looks a doggy as the old one. It seems from this leaked call that there are those on the Maidan who agree with me. It makes interesting listening, there is clearly immense distrust. I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. It speaks volumes about how well trusted this lot are.
http://tinyurl.com/kelsmjx
Confirming the authentisty of call we have this from the press.
http://tinyurl.com/nph3qdh
and
http://tinyurl.com/k4y3ycj
Chaz
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
Thinking about it, if Crimea did join the Russian Federation, that would leave the rest of Ukraine with a permanent pro-Europe majority, leaving Putin with less influence over Ukraine, not more.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
IconiumBound
Shipmate
# 754
|
Posted
I may have missed, in this long-going thread, the issue which probably lies at the core of the crisis. That is, the control of the fossil fuels, oil and gas, which lie under the Crimean turf. I read other opinions that put this at the front of other European concerns.
If I am right then ISTM that we are back to our tribal origins in seeking new territory for food. Our sub-human progenitors didn't have any problem with using force to get the neighbors veggies.
Posts: 1318 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Thinking about it, if Crimea did join the Russian Federation, that would leave the rest of Ukraine with a permanent pro-Europe majority, leaving Putin with less influence over Ukraine, not more.
I think even without the Crimea, the Eastern half of Ukraine is majority pro-Russian (or at least not anti-Russian, or non-pro-Europe).
Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
... I also made reference to revolving door of oligarchical corruption and that the new Ukrainian government looks a doggy as the old one. It seems from this leaked call that there are those on the Maidan who agree with me. It makes interesting listening, there is clearly immense distrust. I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. It speaks volumes about how well trusted this lot are.
http://tinyurl.com/kelsmjx
Confirming the authentisty of call we have this from the press.
http://tinyurl.com/nph3qdh
and
http://tinyurl.com/k4y3ycj
...
Chill why is this surprising? And why is the existence of this telephone call supposed to be scandalous?
I don't know who first said of revolutions "when the pot boils, the scum rises to the surface". Not all those in any struggle are good, noble, high-minded etc. Bad people do bad things.
And I'm a lot happier that engaged people in the EU are discussing what might be happening realistically, rather than if they are assuming 'our' lot are clean and the 'others' are dirty. Remember also, Urmaes Paet and Baroness Ashton are discussing allegations, hearsay, rumours. They aren't committing themselves to believing any version. They may not have wanted to have been overheard, but now they have been, I don't think they have anything to be ashamed of in what they are heard saying.
That the allegations have made means neither that they are true, nor untrue. They could be either. They aren't convincing evidence of anything.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IconiumBound:
I may have missed, in this long-going thread, the issue which probably lies at the core of the crisis. That is, the control of the fossil fuels, oil and gas, which lie under the Crimean turf. I read other opinions that put this at the front of other European concerns. ...
I'm not sure whether the deposits are under the Crimea or the pipes pass through it. The base for the Russian Black Sea Fleet might be even more important.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IconiumBound
Shipmate
# 754
|
Posted
I have read that Europe depends on the gas supply from Crimea for 30% of its supply. No wonder Angela Merkel is holding her cards close.
Posts: 1318 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IconiumBound:
I may have missed, in this long-going thread, the issue which probably lies at the core of the crisis. That is, the control of the fossil fuels, oil and gas, which lie under the Crimean turf. I read other opinions that put this at the front of other European concerns.
If I am right then ISTM that we are back to our tribal origins in seeking new territory for food. Our sub-human progenitors didn't have any problem with using force to get the neighbors veggies.
I'm not sure Crimea has significant fuel reserves. It is close to the Donetsk basin so may have some coal, but it would be overshadowed by the reserves in the rest of Ukraine.
What is more relevant is that Ukraine (the rest of it) is the principal corridor for the main gas and oil pipelines from the extensive Caspian Sea reserves. About 30% of Europe's gas comes this way for example. Anyone controlling Ukraine gets the stranglehold over this.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
What is more relevant is that Ukraine (the rest of it) is the principal corridor for the main gas and oil pipelines from the extensive Caspian Sea reserves. About 30% of Europe's gas comes this way for example. Anyone controlling Ukraine gets the stranglehold over this.
But since the Ukrainian pipe comes from Russia anyway, surely Putin already has a stranglehold over this?
(Does anyone else have the feeling that if the UN agreed a memorandum to the effect that Putin has a larger dick than any other head of state, this whole crisis would go away?)
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I don't understand why Russia needs to base the black sea fleet in the Crimea, why can't they have a port in their own territory ?
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
At a rough guess, probably for the same reasons that the Royal Navy would prefer not to have to move their submarines away from Faslane in the event of Scotland declaring independence... because it would cost a lot of money to move everything and the alternative sites for a naval base on their own territory are less suitable.
[ 09. March 2014, 15:31: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I'm guessing because they don't have a port capable of supporting a fleet in their own territory.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
OK...after looking at pictures on Wikipedia...Sochi and Novorossiysk seem capable of accommodating large ships. So, that's not it. Proximity to Turkey? Turkey is why the Russians want a Black Sea fleet in the first place. I don't have a clue other than that's where they have always had it.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
It's because most Russian ports are frozen up in winter. More detail here. Though if Figes (quoted in the link) told me the Pope was a Catholic, I'd feel obliged to ring the Vatican to check.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
That explains why they want a fleet in the Black Sea. It doesn't explain why they need it on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast rather than the Russian Black Sea coast, which I think was Doublethink's question.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
I Am Not A Geopolitician, but having a base west of that strait to the right of Crimea looks like it could be of strategic interest to me.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
That explains why they want a fleet in the Black Sea. It doesn't explain why they need it on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast rather than the Russian Black Sea coast, which I think was Doublethink's question.
Could it be because it would be a bit closer to the Balkans and closer to the mouths of the Dnieper and Danube rivers?
[ 09. March 2014, 19:47: Message edited by: Pancho ]
--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"
Posts: 1988 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
That explains why they want a fleet in the Black Sea. It doesn't explain why they need it on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast rather than the Russian Black Sea coast, which I think was Doublethink's question.
Shortsightedness. They probably weren't thinking ahead to the future distinction between Ukrainian and Russian coasts when they founded Sevastopol as a naval squadron base in 1783.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
True, but they could have thought about it when they gave the penninsula away to another country, or any time in the last two decades really.
Surely, building a new base is normally cheaper and easier than annexing a country ?
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533
|
Posted
Russia sees itself as descended from Kievan Rus'. When Russians celebrated 1000 years of Christianity back in 1988, they were dating it from the baptism of Prince Vladimir and his people in Kiev. I imagine that quite a few Russians see Ukraine as not quite another country.
--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"
Posts: 1988 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
True, but they could have thought about it when they gave the penninsula away to another country, or any time in the last two decades really.
When the Crimean peninsula was transferred to the Ukraine in 1954, the Ukraine wasn't "another country", it was part of the USSR just as Russia was.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Yes and no: theoretically, the SSRs, of which Ukraine was one, were republics in 'voluntary union' with each other.
Where nest for Putin?Moldova? If he can secure southern (including Odessa) and eastern Ukraine, he will then have a contiguous swathe of territory stretching to Transnistria, and the 'Second Gathering of the Russian Lands' will be complete...
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
When the Crimean peninsula was transferred to the Ukraine in 1954, the Ukraine wasn't "another country", it was part of the USSR just as Russia was.
Oddly enough, not quite, though the effect is the same. In Soviet times, the Ukraine, and I think Byelorussia both had seats in the United Nations, though none of the 'stans did. It was a quid pro quo because the Russians originally argued that the Dominions couldn't be individually members.
It does though, look as if Khrushchev should not have given away the Crimea. Was it his to give? Although it has been assumed to have been included ever since, there also seems to be some doubt as to whether his gift included Sebastopol, where the fleet is, or not. Irrespective of great power politics, does the present situation rather imply that the Crimea has been in the wrong country the last sixty years?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
You're right about the then Ukrainian and Byelorussian SSRs being UN members. Initially Stalin and Molotov wanted all 15 of the USSR's SSRs to be members but the USA retorted that in that case they would want all 50 US States to be UN members, so an unhappy compromise was struck.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Yes and no: theoretically, the SSRs, of which Ukraine was one, were republics in 'voluntary union' with each other.
Where nest for Putin?Moldova? If he can secure southern (including Odessa) and eastern Ukraine, he will then have a contiguous swathe of territory stretching to Transnistria, and the 'Second Gathering of the Russian Lands' will be complete...
This was, in fact, a big theoretical question in the thinking of Lenin et al. prior to, and in the aftermath of, the Russian Revolution, i.e. the "nationalities question". Different nationalities were supposed to be in fraternal relationship to one another under the regime of workers and peasants, and the old Tsarist imperial regime thus couldn't simply dominate the other nations that had been conquered over the centuries by Moscovy/Russia. The solution was to create seperate, theoretically sovereign socialist republics out of the territory of the Russian empire. Each republic had its own government and its own communist party, but of course the various communist parties all rose in a pyramidal organisation to the All-Union Communist Party, the policy setting body for the entire USSR (through its central committee and presidium), reflecting the principle of "democratic centralism". The latter, of course, made a sham of the theoretical independence of the constituent republics of the USSR, but the logic was consistent within the theoretical confines of Marxism-Leninism.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Just to add, the dissolution of the USSR was achieved through an extra-constitutional coup that might be seen as the mirror image of the Revolution of 1917. Although the Stalin and Brezhnev constitutions had provided for the right of secession by constituent republics, there were no procedures laid out for doing this. In the aftermath of the reactionary, failed coup against Gorbachev, the presidents of the Russian Federated SSR, the Ukranian SSR, the Kazak SSR, and the Byelorussian SSR got together and declared the USSR dissolved on the pretext that they had authority to do this as the heads of state of the four original constituent republics that had formed the USSR (apparently the other Southern and Central Asian SSRS weren't created until some later point, and the Baltic republics - which had been independent during the inter-war years before being annexed by Stalin in 1940 - had already withdrawn from the USSR by the time the Soviet Union was declared dissolved).
The extra-legal manner in which the USSR came apart has certainly muddied the waters subsequently.
[ 10. March 2014, 12:29: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
That explains why they want a fleet in the Black Sea. It doesn't explain why they need it on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast rather than the Russian Black Sea coast, which I think was Doublethink's question.
Ice free port. Also Novorossisk, the obvious alternative, wasn't yet part of Russia when the fleet was based in Sevastopol (round about the time the USA was declaring independence).
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
...none of which explains why they need it now.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
...none of which explains why they need it now.
I find it hard to imagine that a once and (would-be) future superpower would ever be enthusiastic about giving up the military installation that provides its only warm water port...
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
But it's not its only warm-water port now: as others have pointed out, it has Novorossiisk and Sochi; I can understand why the Russians would want to keep Sevastopol (prestige etc) but not why they need to.
[code]
[ 11. March 2014, 09:16: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
(Thanks for fixing my code cock-up, Eutychus.)
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
But it's not its only warm-water port now: as others have pointed out, it has Novorossiisk and Sochi; I can understand why the Russians would want to keep Sevastopol (prestige etc) but not why they need to.
[code]
Well no they have Tarsus in the med too.(only one in the med I think) Syria being another example of western encroachment on Russian strategic interests. However noble one may believe our intentions are two major strategic ports is a big impact on Russian interests.
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
... I also made reference to revolving door of oligarchical corruption and that the new Ukrainian government looks a doggy as the old one. It seems from this leaked call that there are those on the Maidan who agree with me. It makes interesting listening, there is clearly immense distrust. I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. It speaks volumes about how well trusted this lot are.
http://tinyurl.com/kelsmjx
Confirming the authentisty of call we have this from the press.
http://tinyurl.com/nph3qdh
and
http://tinyurl.com/k4y3ycj
...
Chill why is this surprising? And why is the existence of this telephone call supposed to be scandalous?
I’m not sure I said that but maybe I am wrong. I have read through and couldn’t find were I said it. Sorry if I have not made it clear I was saying it is indicative of a house divided amongst. I think it helps to show that I am not alone in worry that the corruption may continue under this new regime.
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Not all those in any struggle are good, noble, high-minded etc. Bad people do bad things. .
Yes, although I’m sure some are, I agree I have been trying to say this for some time.
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
And I'm a lot happier that engaged people in the EU are discussing what might be happening realistically, rather than if they are assuming 'our' lot are clean and the 'others' are dirty.
Yes I have been saying this for a while now too.
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
“Remember also, Urmaes Paet and Baroness Ashton are discussing allegations, hearsay, rumours. They aren't committing themselves to believing any version. They may not have wanted to have been overheard, but now they have been, I don't think they have anything to be ashamed of in what they are heard saying. That the allegations have made means neither that they are true, nor untrue. They could be either. They aren't convincing evidence of anything.
Yes when I said this:
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
... I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. ...
I was hoping to convey the fact that I am aware this is a conversation about hearsay. I don’t think it proves a thing about who shot whom. I think on balance a Gun battle between protesters and police is most likely.(there were dead police officers too) Ockham’s razor and all that, but who knows?
Unless I am missing something, I suspect that we are in disagreement over my view that our leaders are not much better if at all than the any others involved. That this is a strategic tug of war not some great moral stand against Russian aggression. I have suggested that the US has cheerfully poured oil on burning waters for strategic reasons; Syria and the Snowdon affair are part of the backdrop.(not the whole story) Is this where we part company? I recognise that we in west have more freedoms than many in the world. I think they are under siege. Our complacency has me worried. Our freedoms were not given freely. We in the west are afforded those freedoms because our ancestors struggled and died for them. The Peterloo massacre is not that long ago in historic terms. I think it is incumbent upon us if we wish to retain our freedoms to look critically at those who govern us. I try to do this in both domestic and foreign policy contexts. I suspect that this critical tone is why we are debating round in circles. If I have misunderstood I apologise but I’m trying to get to grips with your position.
I also have great sympathy for the Ukrainian people. Many of whom have undertaken such a struggle themselves for much the same reasons. I hope that such sentiments triumph rather than the politics of ethnic division and a new round of corruption and financial enrichment. Only this time with western puppets. Ukraine, in my view, is sadly burdened by strategic significance and horrendous internal corruption.
Chaz
[code]
[ 11. March 2014, 12:11: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
But it's not its only warm-water port now: as others have pointed out, it has Novorossiisk and Sochi; I can understand why the Russians would want to keep Sevastopol (prestige etc) but not why they need to.
[code]
Because Russia. I mean, seriously. Its part of the national myth. Would the Americans give up their constitution just because its a bit of 18th century legalism unsuited for modern times? Would the French give up the tricolor? The Irish their rather odd view of 1916?
Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet, the defeat of the Golden Horde, the Crimean War, "Hero City of the Soviet Union"...
The big Russian victory monument at what used to be Stalingrad is a statue of Mother Russia waving a sword. It is built on a hill that used to be one of the royal sites of the Tatars and the Golden Horde. And it looks east.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
... Unless I am missing something, I suspect that we are in disagreement over my view that our leaders are not much better if at all than the any others involved. ...
I'm not disagreeing with you on this one, Chill.
Where I think I do disagree is attributing only cynical motives to all political figures. They, like us, are a mixture of conflicting motives, some good and some less so. The public presentation of this crisis in the west seems to be based on assumption that Mr Putin is simply a warmonger. However, his take on this crisis is entirely comprehensible if one imagines what the world looks like from Moscow or St Petersburg. I think and hope that I am not a warmonger. But if I were a Russian leader, I suspect I would think about the Crimea rather as Mr Putin appears to.
However, I am not a Russian and not in St Petersburg. So I don't agree with Mr Putin. If I met him, I might not like him very much. However I don't think Mr Kerry's contributions have been remotely helpful either.
[ 11. March 2014, 15:23: Message edited by: Enoch ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet, the defeat of the Golden Horde, the Crimean War, "Hero City of the Soviet Union"...
The current crisis made me flick through a history of the Crimean war by Orlando Figes. I've now got a glimpse of how much history there is behind this and how emotional it must be for Russians to see unfolding.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Where I think I do disagree is attributing only cynical motives to all political figures. They, like us, are a mixture of conflicting motives, some good and some less so.
I see, I tend to think that the criteria for honesty and good intentions in politics is a lack of success. So yes I think its fair to say I have a cynical view.
That said I think this is about a clash of civilisations. I think there is a are complex agendas and pressures at work. Both the weight of history and current strategic and the economic factors must it seems to me have an immense impact upon the events unfolding.
Chaz
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet, the defeat of the Golden Horde, the Crimean War, "Hero City of the Soviet Union"...
The current crisis made me flick through a history of the Crimean war by Orlando Figes. I've now got a glimpse of how much history there is behind this and how emotional it must be for Russians to see unfolding.
My office used to be three doors down from Orlando Figes. Unfortunately he left us under something of a cloud ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Eric Hobsbawn's office was on the same corridor. He had to die before we'd let him go. No-one that famous gets allowed to retire...
(And that is nothing but a name-drop - I doubt if I passed more than five words in a row with Dr. Figes - certainly never talked to him about history - though I have read one of his books)
[ 12. March 2014, 15:28: Message edited by: ken ]
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Unfortunately he left us under something of a cloud
I think he wrote online reviews praising his own work and denouncing rivals work. It's a shame he felt he needed to do that, because his book on the Crimean war seems excellent and has really opened my eyes to the strong religious element in the war as well as the cultural heritage that different groups felt they were fighting for.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
I think that if the Crimea votes to leave Ukraine and join Russia on Saturday (assuming the vote actually occurs), that Putin will "respect their decision" but that he will delay acting on it for the time being. With South Ossetia and Abkhazia, he recognized them as independent states and occupied them (and fought a war with Georgia over them), but he did not annex them. I think that is as far as he is willing to go with Crimea, too. If he annexes Crimea, Russia will be a diplomatic pariah for a long time. I'm not sure if China will care (it has some separatist regions of its own, though), but I still don't think Russia would go through with annexing Crimea. Putin, I think, wants to dominate Crimea and Eastern Ukraine de facto but knows better than to try to do it de jure. I could very well be proven wrong, though.
Also, can anyone explain why pro-Russians argue the Ukraine parliamentary vote impeaching Yanukovych and removing him from office was illegitimate? Was there a procedure that needed to be followed that was not? Or is it because they feel that many members of parliament from Yanukovych's party were coerced into voting to remove him by fear of being attacked by the crowds outside? How does the legitimacy of the vote removing Yanukovych compare with the legitimacy of the vote in Crimea's parliament removing its government and installing the new pro-Russian one?
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
This
and especially, this:
quote:
the third factor in Putin’s thinking – his unashamed presumption that Russia has the right and duty to protect Russians wherever they may be. He once described the collapse of the USSR as the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the last century. He didn’t mean he regretted the end of communism, but he did regret the collapse of a huge multinational state, and the fact that 25 million Russians ended up outside their own country’s borders. His vow to “protect Russians” in Ukraine is the corollary of that. God forbid if he decides Russians in Latvia and Estonia also require “help”.
Which is what I asked about a while ago.
What happens after he marches into Ukraine? - because we sure as hell can't stop him!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
...
What happens after he marches into Ukraine? - because we sure as hell can't stop him!
It would come down to whether Western Europe prefers Russian cash/investment over ethical and treaty concerns.
The issue for further intrusion west is the Baltic nations and Poland are in NATO. Not supporting them against an incursion would be politically difficult to justify.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
So a new European war then? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So a new European war then?
No, I just doubt Putin would go there as the oligarchs would likely indicate an unwillingness to jeapordise things that much. The West is not prepared to draw a line economically over the Crimea. IMHO, it would over Poland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia.
Ultimately, Putin, though obviously a narcisstic demagogue and a dictator, is a lot more tied to the wishes of owners of money then past dictators like Hitler. Trade matters to the oligarchs.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
... Ultimately, Putin, though obviously a narcisstic demagogue and a dictator, is a lot more tied to the wishes of owners of money then past dictators like Hitler. Trade matters to the oligarchs.
I very much hope you're right.
Incidentally, can somebody answer this question for me? The other evening Bridget Kendall on the BBC News was looking at old maps showing the various different states over the last 300 years or so that have ruled what is now the Ukraine and the Russian Black Sea coast.
Maps from before the First World War don't seem to show any province of Imperial Russia that looks like an ancestor of the Ukraine, the way that there's a Polish province. Obviously, western Ukraine was in Austro-Hungary. It seems then to have been largely Polish.
Part of the Russian area is a large province called Kherson, but that doesn't include Kiev. Where does the Ukraine come from? Is it an identity which has always existed in a suppressed form? Or is it an identity created out of the turmoil that followed the end of the First World War?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
... Ultimately, Putin, though obviously a narcisstic demagogue and a dictator, is a lot more tied to the wishes of owners of money then past dictators like Hitler. Trade matters to the oligarchs.
I very much hope you're right.
Incidentally, can somebody answer this question for me? The other evening Bridget Kendall on the BBC News was looking at old maps showing the various different states over the last 300 years or so that have ruled what is now the Ukraine and the Russian Black Sea coast.
Maps from before the First World War don't seem to show any province of Imperial Russia that looks like an ancestor of the Ukraine, the way that there's a Polish province. Obviously, western Ukraine was in Austro-Hungary. It seems then to have been largely Polish.
Part of the Russian area is a large province called Kherson, but that doesn't include Kiev. Where does the Ukraine come from? Is it an identity which has always existed in a suppressed form? Or is it an identity created out of the turmoil that followed the end of the First World War?
That's a good question, Enoch. I can help with Western Ukraine, which used to be known as Galicia. As the name indicates, the area might originally have been settled by Celts, but the medieval population of Galicia included a number of East Slavic ethnic groups, including Lemkos and Ruthenians, as well as a substantial number of Jewish settlements. The chronicles place it under Hungarian rule in the early 13th century. At that time it was called the principality of Halych-Volhynia.
The Hungarians were pushed out in the middle 13th century, and most of Galicia came under Polish rule in 1362. Some was under Lithuanian rule, which mattered less after the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was formed.
The Hungarian claims to Galicia had been inherited by the Habsburg rulers of Austria, and these were used by Maria Theresia to justify her claims to the province at the first Partition of Poland in 1772. As a result of coming under Austrian rule, Galicia acquired a substantial German minority also.
Galicia remained under Habsburg rule until the Dual Monarchy was dissolved at the end of World War I. Western and Eastern Galicia were bones of contention between the Second Republic of Poland and the newly-formed nation of Ukraine, while the Lemkos attempted to join, first Russia, then Czechoslovakia. Eventually Poland was successful in pressing its territorial claims to Galicia, though Ukrainian nationalism in the region remained a force.
East Galicia was annexed by the Soviet Union as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and West Galicia was occupied by the forces of Nazi Germany. Stalin carried out mass deportations of "unreliable elements" in East Galicia, sending about 200,000 Poles and others to Kazakhstan and Siberia.
Many more were massacred when the army of Nazi Germany overran the area. People awaiting deportation were simply shot by the Soviets instead. The Jews of Galicia, who comprised around 12% of the population, were murdered by the Nazis.
After the war, Stalin oversaw the forcible transfer of over 500,000 more people. Ukrainians were made to move east, Poles west, and Ukraine was re-incorporated into the Soviet Union as a nominally independent state controlled in fact by Moscow. The Poles were sent west to repopulate areas from which ethnic Germans had been expelled. These were the borders recognized at the Yalta Conference.
As I'd tried to say earlier, borders in that part of the world are very complicated things, and tend to move around quite a bit. It wasn't so bad when the dynastic principle prevailed, and borders moved because one ambitious princeling had managed to outfox another. Communities could live side-by-side in those areas, though they often lived with a great deal of tension, and Jews in particular were often victimized and persecuted. But nationalism was a disaster for the whole region, and it was drowned in blood throughout the twentieth century.
I realize the European Union isn't very popular in the U.K., but some sort of arrangement like the E.U. plus the Schengen agreement, which guarantees the basic rights of ethnic minorities and allows them free movement throughout the entire area, is, I think, arguably a much better thing for Central Europe.
On a slightly different topic: One factor that may be conditioning the US response to the Ukrainian crisis has to do with political calculations involving the "white ethnics" of the Great Lakes industrial regions. (Full disclosure: I'm one of them.) That area experienced massive immigration from Central/ Eastern Europe from 1880 to the 1920s, and the descendents of those immigrants become very concerned when their cousins in their former homelands become threatened by an aggressive Russia. They are likely to reward politicians who talk tough to Russia with their votes. It was certainly that way during the Cold War. John Kerry may be thinking of this, since it's rumored that he lost Cuyahoga County, and therefore Ohio, in his 2004 bid for the presidency, because he dissed a powerful white ethnic group without quite realizing it. So much of the US chest-beating may be for domestic political consumption in the run-up to the 2014 Congressional elections.
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
As I'd tried to say earlier, borders in that part of the world are very complicated things, and tend to move around quite a bit.
Agreed and we must add to this picture that the Russians look to Kiev as one of the first cradles and the first great flowering of the Russ civilisation. The close linguistic, ethnic and historic ties to Russia are also part of this picture. I’m not sure many Russians really see the Ukraine as an imperial position to be regained; it is for them the birth place of their civilisation to be defended from western aggression. I am not saying they are right but it’s part of the emotional DNA in this situation.
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
The feeling clearly isn't mutual, though. To many Ukrainians, the notion that Ukraine is really 'little Russia' or that they are really just a slightly exotic Russian subspecies is highly insulting and inflammatory.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
As I'd tried to say earlier, borders in that part of the world are very complicated things, and tend to move around quite a bit.
Agreed and we must add to this picture that the Russians look to Kiev as one of the first cradles and the first great flowering of the Russ civilisation. The close linguistic, ethnic and historic ties to Russia are also part of this picture. I’m not sure many Russians really see the Ukraine as an imperial position to be regained; it is for them the birth place of their civilisation to be defended from western aggression. I am not saying they are right but it’s part of the emotional DNA in this situation.
My point was otherwise. Yes, this is how many Russians might feel about Kiev. Just as many -- very many -- of the Serbs I've known felt that way about Kosovo. Or, perhaps, come to think of it, it's how I might feel about, say, Königsberg.
But. My point was otherwise. The kind of emotional nationalism you referenced in your post is an artificial creation of the nineteenth century, and in the twentieth century it led to the greatest disasters in Europe since the Roman Empire collapsed in the West. (I didn't say that; the late Vaclav Havel did.) So it has to be resisted. It can't become the basis of policy. Let alone the basis of -- what is now happening in Ukraine.
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
