Is Anyone Truly in Control Amidst the Ukrainian Crisis?

[Dotini]

If Russia were to attack other countries with which it shares a border, ie Norway, Poland, the Baltic states, should that also be left to them to solve?

Ignoring the fact that there is no shared border with Poland nor all the Baltic states, the answer would seem straightforward. It depends on the terms of treaties obligating other countries to come to the defense of the attacked state(s).

However, there is the problem of WWI. A cascading series of interlocking treaties required a whole world to go to calamitous war over the assassination of an obscure figure in an obscure place.

Going to war should never be an automatic reflex. We should carefully consider if our vital interests are well-served by committing great, open-ended acts of violence. If they are not, then the parties involved should settle it amongst themselves.

 

[mheslep]

Yes Poland and all the Baltics share a border with the Russian Federation
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaliningrad_Oblast

 

[Cyril141795]

I wonder what this whole thread about. The war in Ukraine is an example of simulacrum. Nobody actually knows what happens. People make conclusions from rumours and fragments of information. Mass media obviously aren't independent. One will have different point of view whether he or she lives in pro-USA or pro-Russian country.

Who has started this war has own interests in it and I think they are too simple and as old as time. It's imposible to know the truth now so it's senseless to speak about it.

 

[Dotini]

The revolution in Ukraine now appears to be entering yet another phase - collapse of the original revolutionary junta.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/07/24/ukrainian-prime-minister-yatsenyuk-to-resign/

"Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk has announced his resignation, Fox News confirms.

Yatsenyuk made the announcement from the dais of the parliament after two parties said they would pull out of the governing coalition. "I am announcing my resignation in connect with the collapse of the coalition," Yatsenyuk said.

He said the parliament could no longer do its work and pass necessary laws.

The nationalist Svoboda party and the UDAR movement led by former boxer Vladimir Klitscho pulled out of the group of legislators that took over after former President Viktor Yanukovich was ousted by protesters seeking closer ties with the European Union."

 

[Czcibor]

I wonder what this whole thread about. The war in Ukraine is an example of simulacrum. Nobody actually knows what happens. People make conclusions from rumours and fragments of information. Mass media obviously aren't independent. One will have different point of view whether he or she lives in pro-USA or pro-Russian country.

Who has started this war has own interests in it and I think they are too simple and as old as time. It's imposible to know the truth now so it's senseless to speak about it.

Weird. Maybe just you don't get it? Anyway, in era of (freeish) internet is it Russian propaganda so hard to avoid problem?

 

[Czcibor]

Anyway, seems that the problem "Russian propaganda does not work well enough to convince people in the West, but at least to sew doubt" seem to be noticed by the Economist:

Russia, MH17 and the West
A web of lies

Vladimir Putin’s epic deceits have grave consequences for his people and the outside world

Jul 26th 2014 | From the print edition

IN 1991, when Soviet Communism collapsed, it seemed as if the Russian people might at last have the chance to become citizens of a normal Western democracy. Vladimir Putin’s disastrous contribution to Russia’s history has been to set his country on a different path. And yet many around the world, through self-interest or self-deception, have been unwilling to see Mr Putin as he really is.

The shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, the killing of 298 innocent people and the desecration of their bodies in the sunflower fields of eastern Ukraine, is above all a tragedy of lives cut short and of those left behind to mourn. But it is also a measure of the harm Mr Putin has done. Under him Russia has again become a place in which truth and falsehood are no longer distinct and facts are put into the service of the government. Mr Putin sets himself up as a patriot, but he is a threat—to international norms, to his neighbours and to the Russians themselves, who are intoxicated by his hysterical brand of anti-Western propaganda.

The world needs to face the danger Mr Putin poses. If it does not stand up to him today, worse will follow.

Crucifiction and other stories

Mr Putin has blamed the tragedy of MH17 on Ukraine, yet he is the author of its destruction. A high-court’s worth of circumstantial evidence points to the conclusion that pro-Russian separatists fired a surface-to-air missile out of their territory at what they probably thought was a Ukrainian military aircraft. Separatist leaders boasted about it on social media and lamented their error in messages intercepted by Ukrainian intelligence and authenticated by America (see article).

Russia’s president is implicated in their crime twice over. First, it looks as if the missile was supplied by Russia, its crew was trained by Russia, and after the strike the launcher was spirited back to Russia. Second, Mr Putin is implicated in a broader sense because this is his war. The linchpins of the self-styled Donetsk People’s Republic are not Ukrainian separatists but Russian citizens who are, or were, members of the intelligence services. Their former colleague, Mr Putin, has paid for the war and armed them with tanks, personnel carriers, artillery—and batteries of surface-to-air missiles. The separatists pulled the trigger, but Mr Putin pulled the strings.

The enormity of the destruction of flight MH17 should have led Mr Putin to draw back from his policy of fomenting war in eastern Ukraine. Yet he has persevered, for two reasons. First, in the society he has done so much to mould, lying is a first response. The disaster immediately drew forth a torrent of contradictory and implausible theories from his officials and their mouthpieces in the Russian media: Mr Putin’s own plane was the target; Ukrainian missile-launchers were in the vicinity. And the lies got more complex. The Russian fiction that a Ukrainian fighter jet had fired the missile ran into the problem that the jet could not fly at the altitude of MH17, so Russian hackers then changed a Wikipedia entry to say that the jets could briefly do so. That such clumsily Soviet efforts are easily laughed off does not defeat their purpose, for their aim is not to persuade but to cast enough doubt to make the truth a matter of opinion. In a world of liars, might not the West be lying, too?

Second, Mr Putin has become entangled in a web of his own lies, which any homespun moralist could have told him was bound to happen. When his hirelings concocted propaganda about fascists running Kiev and their crucifixion of a three-year-old boy, his approval ratings among Russian voters soared by almost 30 percentage points, to over 80%. Having roused his people with falsehoods, the tsar cannot suddenly wriggle free by telling them that, on consideration, Ukraine’s government is not too bad. Nor can he retreat from the idea that the West is a rival bent on Russia’s destruction, ready to resort to lies, bribery and violence just as readily as he does. In that way, his lies at home feed his abuses abroad.

Stop spinning

In Russia such doublespeak recalls the days of the Soviet Union when Pravda claimed to tell the truth. This mendocracy will end in the same way as that one did: the lies will eventually unravel, especially as it becomes obvious how much money Mr Putin and his friends have stolen from the Russian people, and he will fall. The sad novelty is that the West takes a different attitude this time round. In the old days it was usually prepared to stand up to the Soviet Union, and call out its falsehoods. With Mr Putin it looks the other way.

Take Ukraine. The West imposed fairly minor sanctions on Russia after it annexed Crimea, and threatened tougher ones if Mr Putin invaded eastern Ukraine. To all intents and purposes, he did just that: troops paid for by Russia, albeit not in Russian uniforms, control bits of the country. But the West found it convenient to go along with Mr Putin’s lie, and the sanctions eventually imposed were too light and too late. Similarly, when he continued to supply the rebels, under cover of a ceasefire that he claimed to have organised, Western leaders vacillated.

Since the murders of the passengers of MH17 the responses have been almost as limp. The European Union is threatening far-reaching sanctions—but only if Mr Putin fails to co-operate with the investigation or he fails to stop the flow of arms to the separatists. France has said that it will withhold the delivery of a warship to Mr Putin if necessary, but is proceeding with the first of the two vessels on order. The Germans and Italians claim to want to keep diplomatic avenues open, partly because sanctions would undermine their commercial interests. Britain calls for sanctions, but it is reluctant to harm the City of London’s profitable Russian business. America is talking tough but has done nothing new.

Enough. The West should face the uncomfortable truth that Mr Putin’s Russia is fundamentally antagonistic. Bridge-building and resets will not persuade him to behave as a normal leader. The West should impose tough sanctions now, pursue his corrupt friends and throw him out of every international talking shop that relies on telling the truth. Anything else is appeasement—and an insult to the innocents on MH17.

From the print edition: Leaders

(I quote it instead of linking, because at least theretically it's behind a paywall)

 

[Dotini]

July 16th, the day before MH17, marked an important date in the conflict. That's the day a Russian jet fighter downed a Ukrainian Su-25 with air-to-air missiles. Two more Su-25s have gone down since. Why? The Su-25 has proved to be quite successful in attacking separatist ground targets.

Tonight, CNN reports US State Department evidence of Russian artillery fire into Ukraine in support of rebel operations. CNN also reports Russian multiple rocket launchers and other heavy-duty hardware being transported into the hands of the rebels. They report new massing of Russian troops at the border.

So at length it seems here and now is where Russia draws the line and begins to show its hand with respect to east Ukraine.

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-in-ukraine-warns-him-of-possible-defeat.html

Igor Strelkov, the rebel commander many hold responsible for the MH17, is sending a thinly veiled warning to the Kremlin that he won’t go down alone.
...
And then—bodies began to fall from the sky. An anti-aircraft missile almost certainly fired by some of Strelkov’s men had reached six miles up to Malaysia Air Flight 17, and suddenly Strelkov found himself not only the leader of a rebellion, but denounced as a possible war criminal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD4pIGQOZLQ

 

[mheslep]

Igor Strelkov, the rebel commander ...

Interesting name for a Russian rebel commander. Needs one more syllable.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hCczioWiZk

 

[nsaspook]

Interesting name for a Russian rebel commander. Needs one more syllable.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hCczioWiZk

The guy is a historical re-enactor but he is also a stone cold killer with lots of combat experience who's been hand picked by Russia for this job. IMO he's also not the kind of guy you want talking if he's wanted by international tribunals to stand trial for his crimes.

 

[Czcibor]

Further strikes (and deeply inside Ukraine):

Major of Kremenchuk shot dead:
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/kremenchuk-mayor-babayev-shot-358041.html

While house of major of Lviv hit with anti-tank missle:
http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/215604.html

 

[OmCheeto]

Interesting name for a Russian rebel commander. Needs one more syllable.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hCczioWiZk

I thought the same thing, and watched the same video yesterday. Some are saying that "Strelkov" means "Gunman". My Russian is pretty bad, but I can find no evidence of this. Though it may be similar to the way we equate "Hitler" with "Demagogue", or "Obama".

I was going to quote Gen. Yevgraf Zhivago from the movie yesterday in the "Syria" thread:

... One man desperate for a bit of fuel is pathetic. Five million people desperate for fuel will destroy a city.

That was the first time I ever saw my brother. But I knew him. And I knew that I would disobey the party. Perhaps it was the tie of blood between us, but I doubt it. We were only half tied anyway, and bothers will betray a brother. Indeed, as a policeman, I would say, get hold of a man's brother and you're halfway home. Nor was it admiration for a better man than me. I did admire him, but I didn't think he was a better man. Besides, I've executed better men than me with a small pistol.
...

but I knew I'd posted the quote before, and decided people might be getting tired of me using tired old stories, as examples of how little things change.

But today, I decided, meh...

Being of Dutch, German, Ukrainian, English, and very possibly Polish ancestry, I view the conflicts less in terms of sectarian or nationalistic points of view, but more along the lines of something my newest Facebook friend posted the other day:

I kept asking;
“Who did it?
Israelis? Palestinians?
Russians? Ukrainians?”

Then my mom answered;
“Humans.
Humans killing humans.”

 

[voko]

I thought the same thing, and watched the same video yesterday. Some are saying that "Strelkov" means "Gunman". My Russian is pretty bad, but I can find no evidence of this.

It is approximately true. Strelok (in Russian: Стрелок) means a "shooter". In Russian militariease it may also mean the lowest rank in infantry, i.e., a "rifleman". From what I hear, "Strelok" is or used to be the call-sign of this person, which eventually made it into his nom de guerre "Strelkov".

The line between a "rifleman" and a "gunman" is pretty thin, and has more to do with politics than with their primary meanings.

 

[nsaspook]

It is approximately true. Strelok (in Russian: Стрелок) means a "shooter". In Russian militariease it may also mean the lowest rank in infantry, i.e., a "rifleman".

The equivalent Militarese in the US today is a "Trigger Puller". It's usually not a high honor to be called that unless you are very good at your job.

 

[jim hardy]

What would be the Russian word for Sniper ?

 

[nsaspook]

http://time.com/3042640/satellite-russian-ukraine-shelling/

U.S. officials released satellite images Sunday they say offer proof that Russian forces have been shelling eastern Ukraine in a campaign to assist rebel groups fighting Ukraine’s government in Kiev. Obama administration officials said as early as last week that the Russians were launching attacks in eastern Ukraine.

 

[SW VandeCarr]

What would be the Russian word for Sniper ?

снайпеp (snayper)

 

[Dotini]

The Independent reports on a deal to end the conflict. The deal makes it clear the Russians will likely support the MH17 investigation to completion.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...an-deal-could-end-ukraine-crisis-9638764.html

Germany and Russia have been working on a secret plan to broker a peaceful solution to end international tensions over the Ukraine.

The Independent can reveal that the peace plan, being worked on by both Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin, hinges on two main ambitions: stabilising the borders of Ukraine and providing the financially troubled country with a strong economic boost, particularly a new energy agreement ensuring security of gas supplies.

More controversially, if Ms Merkel’s deal were to be acceptable to the Russians, the international community would need to recognise Crimea’s independence and its annexation by Russia, a move that some members of the United Nations might find difficult to stomach.

Sources close to the secret negotiations claim that the first part of the stabilisation plan requires Russia to withdraw its financial and military support for the various pro-separatist groups operating in eastern Ukraine. As part of any such agreement, the region would be allowed some devolved powers.

At the same time, the Ukrainian President would agree not to apply to join Nato. In return, President Putin would not seek to block or interfere with the Ukraine’s new trade relations with the European Union under a pact signed a few weeks ago.

Second, the Ukraine would be offered a new long-term agreement with Russia’s Gazprom, the giant gas supplier, for future gas supplies and pricing. At present, there is no gas deal in place; Ukraine’s gas supplies are running low and are likely to run out before this winter, which would spell economic and social ruin for the country.

As part of the deal, Russia would compensate Ukraine with a billion-dollar financial package for the loss of the rent it used to pay for stationing its fleets in the Crimea and at the port of Sevastopol on the Black Sea until Crimea voted for independence in March.
However, these attempts by Ms Merkel to act as a broker between President Putin and the Ukraine’s President, Petro Poroshenko, were put on the back-burner following the shooting down of the MH17 plane in eastern Ukraine.

But insiders who are party to the discussions said yesterday that the “German peace plan is still on the table and the only deal around. Negotiations have stalled because of the MH17 disaster but they are expected to restart once the investigation has taken place.

 

[russ_watters]

Why would anyone but Russia want any part of that deal? They get to keep essentially everything they've gained so far and basically just promise to stop taking more.

 

[Dotini]

Why would anyone but Russia want any part of that deal? They get to keep essentially everything they've gained so far and basically just promise to stop taking more.

The article goes on to say the following:

“It is in everyone’s interests to do a deal. Hopefully, talks will be revived if a satisfactory outcome can be reached to investigations now taking place as to the causes of the MH17 catastrophe.”

Closer trading ties with the EU have been one of the big ambitions of Mr Poroshenko’s presidency. He has been a staunch supporter of the country’s pro-European movement even though he is unaffiliated to any political party. He was one of the backers of the 2004 Orange Revolution and served as Foreign Minister under Yulia Tymoshenko.

A spokesman for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office said they had no knowledge of such negotiations taking place. However, the spokesman said he thought it highly unlikely that either the US or UK would agree to recognising Russian control over Crimea. There was no one available at the German embassy’s press office yesterday.

Reaching a solution to the ongoing dispute is pertinent for the Germans as Russia is their single biggest trading partner. Under Ms Merkel, the Russo-German axis has strengthened significantly and, until the plane shooting, her government had been staunchly against punitive sanctions for commercial but also diplomatic reasons.

Such strong trade ties between the two countries have also served to strengthen Ms Merkel’s hand and the Russian speaker has emerged as the leading advocate of closer relations between the EU and Russia. “This is Merkel’s deal. She has been dealing direct with President Putin on this. She needs to solve the dispute because it’s in no one’s interest to have tension in the Ukraine or to have Russia out in the cold. No one wants another Cold War,” said one insider close to the negotiations.

Some of Germany’s biggest companies have big operations in Russia, which is now one of Europe’s biggest car markets, while many of its small to medium companies are also expanding into the country. Although Russia now provides EU countries with a third of their gas supplies through pipelines crossing the Ukraine, Germany has its own bilateral gas pipeline direct to Russia making it less vulnerable than other European countries.

However, Russia is still the EU’s third-biggest trading partner with cross-border trade of $460bn (£272bn) last year, and the latest sanctions being introduced by the EU towards Russian individuals and banks will hurt European countries more than any other – particularly Germany, but also the City of London.

Central to the negotiations over any new gas deal with Gazprom is understood to be one of Ukraine’s wealthiest businessmen, the gas broker, Dmitry Firtash. Mr Firtash – who negotiated the first big gas deal between the Ukraine and Russia between 2006 and 2009 – is now living in Vienna fighting extradition charges from the Americans. But he has close relations with the Russian and Ukrainian leaders – he supported Mr Poroschenko – and has been acting as a go-between behind the scenes at the highest levels.

 

[russ_watters]

Apparently "everyone" doesn't include the Ukrainians? It sounds like one of the WWII solutions where Germany and Russia divided-up Eastern Europe between themselves.

Also - is sourcing quotes not a British "thing"? I'd really like to know who said that.

 

[nsaspook]

Looks like the noose is 'tightening' on the rebels.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28724487

'Completely encircled'

Rebel commander Igor Girkin was quoted by Russian media as saying that Krasnyi Luch had been "captured" after Cossacks defending the town "ran away".

A small detachment of rebels, he said, was still holding out in the town, which connects the city of Donetsk with Ukraine's Luhansk region on the Russian border.

Girkin, who is also known as Strelkov, said his men in the Donetsk region were "completely encircled".

Ukrainian security spokesman Andriy Lysenko said he could not confirm that government forces had taken Krasnyi Luch.

Aleksandr Zakharchenko, the newly installed political leader of the rebels in Donetsk, was later quoted by the AP news agency as saying he would accept a ceasefire.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

U.S. official says 1,000 Russian troops enter Ukraine
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/28/world/europe/ukraine-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Kiev, Ukraine (CNN) -- A top Ukrainian army officer said a "full-scale invasion" of his country was under way Thursday, as a U.S. official said up to 1,000 Russian troops had crossed Ukraine's southern border to fight alongside pro-Russian rebels.
U.S. officials said Russian troops were directly involved in the latest fighting, despite Moscow's denials.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

The Russian invasion is just piecemeal enough that Europe's leaders – with the acquiescence of their economically hard-pressed electorates - can quietly accept that they have no choice but to let it pass, albeit with a lot of huffing and puffing.
There are those who will argue (correctly) that this is short-sighted on Europe's part, but it is the cold reality. Mr Putin is not gambling here, since he has already made the decision that he is prepared to accept economic pain as the price of a project is fundamental to his vision of restoring Russian greatness.
The limits of Europe's options have been reflected in the careful choice of language the last few days – the talk is of "incursions" and "escalations", not "invasions", even though, as the Ukrainian president correctly points out, that is exactly what has happened.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ussian-forces-says-Petro-Poroshenko-live.html

 

[lisab]

The longer Putin puts off admitting the truth, the more foolish he appears.

As Paul Simon put it, Why deny the obvious, child?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

The longer Putin puts off admitting the truth, the more foolish he appears.

As Paul Simon put it, Why deny the obvious, child?

I don't think he needs to say it. His actions are louder than words. It appears he doesn't care because there is little anyone will do. If Russia actually does move even deeper into Ukraine. Who will step up against Russia head on?

 

[lisab]

I don't think he needs to say it. His actions are louder than words. It appears he doesn't care because there is little anyone will do. If Russia actually does move even deeper into Ukraine. Who will step up against Russia head on?

We are already doing it -- economically. It's a lot slower than an airstrike, but still pretty effective.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

We are already doing it -- economically. It's a lot slower than an airstrike, but still pretty effective.

Is it? Putin will sacrifice his economy for a chance at growing the Russian empire. As long as western Europe depends on Russian oil they don't go as far as they need to. Seriously, if Russian tanks surround Kiev, you think some economic sanctions that affect a few Russian billionaires will matter?

 

[mheslep]

... As long as western Europe depends on Russian oil ...

Russian gas. Europe has many suppliers of liquid oil.

 

[lisab]

Is it? Putin will sacrifice his economy for a chance at growing the Russian empire. As long as western Europe depends on Russian oil they don't go as far as they need to. Seriously, if Russian tanks surround Kiev, you think some economic sanctions that affect a few Russian billionaires will matter?

It's certainly a possibility Putin could do that, he seems very ambitions.

But if he does, there will be more sanctions and they'll start to bite hard at Russian citizens. Food prices are already spiking - 72% increase in the price of potatoes, for example. So more than just a few billionaires are being affected already. I think it won't be long before everyday Russians realize that nationalism feels good, but it won't put food on the table. Winter may be hard in Europe with limited Russian gas but a Russian winter with food shortages and price hikes will be brutal for everyday Russians.

 

[mheslep]

U.S. sanctions in place against Russia so far are minor relative to what was in place against, say, Iran: no U.S. imports from Iran, no exports to, neither directly or via third party. U.S. citizens have been prosecuted for attempting to evade the sanctions. Still, Iran continued with its nuclear and terror export policies for years.

The President has stated more serious sanctions would be forthcoming if Russia actually invaded eastern Ukraine, though now he is having difficulty calling the recent Russian invasion an invasion.

QUESTION: Do you consider today's escalation in Ukraine an invasion? And when you talk about additional costs to Russia, are you ready at this point to impose broader economic sanctions? Or are you considering other responses that go beyond sanctions?
OBAMA: I consider the actions that we've seen in the last week a continuation of what's been taking place for months now. As I said in my opening statement, there is no doubt that this is not a homegrown, indigenous uprising in eastern Ukraine. The separatists are backed, trained, armed, financed by Russia.

Throughout this process, we've seen deep Russian involvement in everything that they've done. I think in part because of the progress that you had seen by the Ukrainians around Donetsk and Luhansk, Russia determined that it had to be a little more overt in what it had already been doing, but it's not really a shift

 

[Czcibor]

The longer Putin puts off admitting the truth, the more foolish he appears.

As Paul Simon put it, Why deny the obvious, child?

Because it works in Russia where Putin has effectively all media support rating above 80%? And that as one outraged Russian said about Russian perception in Poland "they see us as nation of bandits" seems be actually a low priority.

We are already doing it -- economically. It's a lot slower than an airstrike, but still pretty effective.

Just technical info - food sanctions are imposed by Russia. Partially a way to punish its nearby trading partners, and partially I think a way of showing off by trying to make an impression that Russia is impervious to sanctions.

To be candid so far western sanctions were rather mild. The more harm to Russia was done through making the most expensive Olympics in history and imposing food sanctions against the West.

A serious sanctions is something needed.

 

[Czcibor]

The President has stated more serious sanctions would be forthcoming if Russia actually invaded eastern Ukraine, though now he is having difficulty calling the recent Russian invasion an invasion.

I understand that there are some collateral damage of my request, but could you next time elect someone more trigger happy? I don't know, maybe legalize homosexual marriage, cross Obama with W. Bush, and elect the offspring?

;)

(Seriously this guy is somewhat apathetic)

 

[Borek]

I think it won't be long before everyday Russians realize that nationalism feels good, but it won't put food on the table. Winter may be hard in Europe with limited Russian gas but a Russian winter with food shortages and price hikes will be brutal for everyday Russians.

I am afraid the only way they can explain their point of view to Putin is with pitchforks - and Russia has a long history of dealing with rebels and waste areas of Siberia perfect for this task. Which is why Putin doesn't care.

I don't see a good solution.

 

[mheslep]

I am afraid the only way they can explain their point of view to Putin is with pitchforks - and Russia has a long history of dealing with rebels and waste areas of Siberia perfect for this task. Which is why Putin doesn't care.

I don't see a good solution.

Arm the Ukrainians, employ full U.S. import export sanctions, greater EU sanctions.