Ukraine lounge

[jimukr104]

@Jim http://m.belarusdigest.com/story/belarus-refuses-support-russias-invasion-ukraine-17082

That was my interpretation of it, though I admit I'm not aware if there are concentrated areas of ethnic Russians in Belarus.

Lukashenko may be more concerned about Putin subverting him in particular in the future, especially since he has been to known to stage temporary rebellions against Putin.

Again identity has to do with passport and ones own Heart. Belarus culture mostly is subservient to Russian culture.Not as nationalistic as Ukrainians in the West....YET
My uncles family is technically from Belorussian...Pinsk. if you call them Russian you won't get punched.
Remember: Russians, Belorussians(means white Russians) and Ukrainians are ethnicity kievan Rus eastern Slav. All 3 are considered the same as an ethnicity.

 

[DaveR]

Totally agree, Blunt. Putin's move is increasingly looking strange. "Drunk on Sochi" as Khrushchev's granddaughter said in that Nat Geo interview I shared.

His previous gains on the diplomatic front, Snowden, and others had done a lot for Russia's perception on the world stage - and even won many admirers in the West. Those were very intelligent decisions.

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext (Crimean lives weren't ever at risk and Crimea does belong to Ukraine regardless of what people there think) is a whole different ballgame.

He's really overplaying his hand at a time when he doesn't even need to (his power and influence was not at risk).

He would have been better off exerting Russian influence behind the scenes - which could have met his goals just as effectively - just as the US had doing for the pro-west Ukrainians.

You have no idea..

Putin has played this like a boss. In the end Obama will look impotent for using his toughest language and being ignored. Russia will get a historical region back, a $20B discount on the construction of South Stream, no need to pay Kiev for leasing and the long-term ability block its steel exports (currently half the country's exports).

The EU doesn't have the money to integrate another large country, and the job will be twice as difficult this time because of the dilapidated state of Ukraine's infrastructure. Much of the country's housing was intended to be temporary and is structurally unsound, therefore has to be rebuilt. Above all that, the EU has no experience or proof of its ability to implement reforms in any of the core former-Soviet states.

From a Ukrainian perspective, the misfits who were in power from 2004 to 2009 are back and making the same mistakes all over again. They desperately need cash and their only option is to comply with the IMF's demands, which means raising utility prices and cutting pensions and subsidies. The clock is also ticking for Ukraine to pay back its gas debts, because in two years South Stream will go live, giving Russia the ability to cut gas delivery for non-payment. If you think they can hold onto power given all of those caveats, then you are delusional. Much of Ukraine's population is living on the poverty line and simply cannot afford any austerity or reform. They blew their chance in 2004-2008 and will now have to wait for the next global bull market for cash to be available.

By the way, gas installations can't simply be switched overnight. For starters, the US is far away and shipping oil adds a lot of cost, making shale oil uncompetitive in Europe. Industry would have to re-tool and all of the residential gas heating and cooking installations would have to be converted to electric. That would take years, and in the meantime Russia has $500 billion in foreign exchange reserves on its books. Compare that with the Eurozone having $750 billion and Russia's position doesn't look that bad.

 

[jimukr104]

Totally agree, Blunt. Putin's move is increasingly looking strange. "Drunk on Sochi" as Khrushchev's granddaughter said in that Nat Geo interview I shared.

His previous gains on the diplomatic front, Snowden, and others had done a lot for Russia's perception on the world stage - and even won many admirers in the West. Those were very intelligent decisions.

But using force to invade Crimea with no internationally justifiable pretext (Crimean lives weren't ever at risk and Crimea does belong to Ukraine regardless of what people there think) is a whole different ballgame.

He's really overplaying his hand at a time when he doesn't even need to (his power and influence was not at risk).

He would have been better off exerting Russian influence behind the scenes - which could have met his goals just as effectively - just as the US had doing for the pro-west Ukrainians.

You have no idea..

Putin has played this like a boss. In the end Obama will look impotent for using his toughest language and being ignored. Russia will get a historical region back, a $20B discount on the construction of South Stream, no need to pay Kiev for leasing and the long-term ability block its steel exports (currently half the country's exports).

The EU doesn't have the money to integrate another large country, and the job will be twice as difficult this time because of the dilapidated state of Ukraine's infrastructure. Much of the country's housing was intended to be temporary and is structurally unsound, therefore has to be rebuilt. Above all that, the EU has no experience or proof of its ability to implement reforms in any of the core former-Soviet states.

From a Ukrainian perspective, the misfits who were in power from 2004 to 2009 are back and making the same mistakes all over again. They desperately need cash and their only option is to comply with the IMF's demands, which means raising utility prices and cutting pensions and subsidies. The clock is also ticking for Ukraine to pay back its gas debts, because in two years South Stream will go live, giving Russia the ability to cut gas delivery for non-payment. If you think they can hold onto power given all of those caveats, then you are delusional. Much of Ukraine's population is living on the poverty line and simply cannot afford any austerity or reform. They blew their chance in 2004-2008 and will now have to wait for the next global bull market for cash to be available.

By the way, gas installations can't simply be switched overnight. For starters, the US is far away and shipping oil adds a lot of cost, making shale oil uncompetitive in Europe. Industry would have to re-tool and all of the residential gas heating and cooking installations would have to be converted to electric. That would take years, and in the meantime Russia has $500 billion in foreign exchange reserves on its books. Compare that with the Eurozone having $750 billion and Russia's position doesn't look that bad.

That's why they were afraid in Odessa. Taking Odessa, Nikoliev and kherson would completely shut ukraine from gas from the sea and port trade.

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/eu-and-imf-spell-disaster-for.html

 

[Hencredible Casanova]

^^ This is a classic example of a person cherry picking what information to emphasize - or ignore - based on where his sympathies or allegiances lie. I hope the Kremlin is paying you my friend.

Instead of talking about what we think might happen, lets talk about what has already happened. The ruble has already plunged and many objective sources indicate the Russian economy is taking a hit as a result.
How is that "boss?"

And that's before any sanctions have been applied. Just imagine when the full monty gets implemented. Asset freezes, visa bans, and all sorts of restrictions. Oh boy. Do you know how much Russian money is tied up in the West?

Russia is up against the most powerful country in world history. Do you really believe it's going to let Putin ride off into the sunset without paying a heavy price? The US has made examples out of leaders for far less.

Anyway, lets just see what happens. I don't think it's going to be pretty for Russia.

 

[Orion]

Russia isn't a world power, it simply has the tone of one thanks to the image and decisions of its leader - an ex-KGB relic of the Cold War. Most political scientists consider Russia an emerging or re-emerging power, not even a potential superpower. Russia lost much of its potential power as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even India and China are more likely to be potential superpowers than Russia.

As a matter of fact, there will not be an emerging new superpower for next 20 years, it can be said with certainty. China views itself quite modestly compared to other world powers. India is out of debate.

That's why sanctions would really bite.

Problem is, it is hard to find the line where European economy ends, and Russian begins. Economy is more than simple trade nowadays. Freezing country's entire assets including those of it's wealthy individuals is another word for theft. If they do it, then such move would be irreversible, if Russians retaliate. It would have far bigger implications for world than anything going on in Crimea right now.

Sounds like bunch of empty threats to me.

Just as Russia has leverages on Ukraine, the US/EU has leverages on Russia. Should the US lift the ban on its oil exports, helping meet European needs, then Russia is further marginalized.

I don't think it's oil that matters, rather gas, petroleum and investments.

That's why Putin's move seems crazy to me. Russia still has to work with the West on a whole host of issues. The West can afford reckless foreign misadventures and bounce back, but Russia doesn't have it like that, even in its own neighborhood.

Putin might be wrong. But i don't think any state, no matter how centralized, is lead by one man. Putin cannot do something that would seriously damage Russian elite (composed of security big shots, oligarchs and army). It is only question about do they fear Putin more than west. My guess is that Putin is still more reliable Ally than west which flushed every single ally down the toilet

Russia is obviously a politically weak country internally. Any nation that depends on a single leader to keep it stable - Putin has ruled since 1999 (Medvedev is a puppet) - is by definition at risk of instability.

Unfortunately, this is somewhat true. But again, Russia is much more stable than all surrounding states, but that is not much of a success. Still, there are some suggestions that Putin is about to form another party (Russian road towards dual party system ?). That would be a step forward, but they must really speed up the process of introducing pluralism (fake one, as everywhere else) in Russia, or at least make autocracy much more efficient.

However, even if some big change is about to happen, it is more realistic that it will be another chair rotation, than some street uprising.

 

[jimukr104]

^^ This is a classic example of a person cherry picking what information to emphasize - or ignore - based on where his sympathies or allegiances lie. I hope the Kremlin is paying you my friend.

Instead of talking about what we think might happen, lets talk about what has already happened. The ruble has already plunged and many objective sources indicate the Russian economy is taking a hit as a result.
How is that "boss?"

And that's before any sanctions have been applied. Just imagine when the full monty gets implemented. Asset freezes, visa bans, and all sorts of restrictions. Oh boy. Do you know how much Russian money is tied up in the West?

Russia is up against the most powerful country in world history. Do you really believe it's going to let Putin ride off into the sunset without paying a heavy price? The US has made examples out of leaders for far less.

Anyway, lets just see what happens. I don't think it's going to be pretty for Russia.

Of course in RUBLES. I just watched "Americans" so it stirred some memories.

 

[Blunt]

@Dave You don't think that the EU could leverage Serbia to delay implementation of the South Stream if it was suggested as a tool against Ukraine?

I'm not sure who controls the pipeline or particular segments of it but it seems like Serbia has been pretty eager to go along with EU wishes during their accession.

 

[DaveR]

@Dave You don't think that the EU could leverage Serbia to delay implementation of the South Stream if it was suggested as a tool against Ukraine?

I'm not sure who controls the pipeline or particular segments of it but it seems like Serbia has been pretty eager to go along with EU wishes during their accession.

The thing about South Stream is.. EU countries have a 50% financial stake in it, and Russia has been successful in blocking any other gas pipeline projects. So while their politicians do a lot of chest-beating, they have a lot of vested financial interests behind the scene. To give another indication.. Germany's former Chancellor took up work at Gazprom a few months after leaving office.

 

[Roosh]

While it's not a big topic here, a couple people have used Poland as an example of the benefits Ukraine would receive if they joined the EU. Poland is doing better than Ukraine for sure, but it's still a poor nation. Every day in the dumpster outside my apartment I see people digging through it. Beggars are common in my city, and it's relatively prosperous. If you stay in the center of Polish cities, you have the impression that all is well, but if you look a bit closer you will notice that EU prosperity doesn't hit everyone equally, especially older people who have not learned skills necessary in a globalized economy. I'm still not convinced that Ukraine would do better in the EU than with Russia.

 

[jimukr104]

While it's not a big topic here, a couple people have used Poland as an example of the benefits Ukraine would receive if they joined the EU. Poland is doing better than Ukraine for sure, but it's still a poor nation. Every day in the dumpster outside my apartment I see people digging through it. Beggars are common in my city, and it's relatively prosperous. If you stay in the center of Polish cities, you have the impression that all is well, but if you look a bit closer you will notice that EU prosperity doesn't hit everyone equally, especially older people who have not learned skills necessary in a globalized economy. I'm still not convinced that Ukraine would do better in the EU than with Russia.

Ukraine will be more like Bulgaria in 15 years.. or Romania..certainly nothing to brag about.
You are right Poland is very poor when you minus that a large % have to send money home from working in other EU countries.
The infrastructure also has always been ahead of UA. Remember Poland was a western country until it was annexed as Warsaw pact.

 

[Hencredible Casanova]

Yeah. Poland was never an FSU state, only part of the Warsaw Pact.

No telling what Ukraine will end up like. Lots of variables.

But the people in the western part at least have already chosen their fate.

And I don't blame them, especially those who recall the days of the USSR. Why the hell would they want to be part of Putin's vision?

This is a man who spent the majority of his career working to maintain one of the most depressing, uninspiring and deadliest totalitarian systems the world has ever known. Even more telling, he considered the crumbling of that system a "personal humiliation" and "the worst geopolitical disaster of the 20th century."

Today, Russia is little more than a corrupt petrostate that is vastly unequal; a tragedy given the nation's immense resources, size, and relatively low population density.

Ukraine's transition if it actually joins the EU will undoubtedly be brutal at first, given the IMF reforms, but over the long term I don't think anyone can say definitively that it's a bad thing for them.

Time will tell.

 

[jimukr104]

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2014/03/06/lawrence-solomon-why-ukraine-should-break-up/

 

[DaveR]

Instead of talking about what we think might happen, lets talk about what has already happened. The ruble has already plunged and many objective sources indicate the Russian economy is taking a hit as a result.
How is that "boss?"

Yeah, let's talk about what has already happened:
- Russia militarily intervened after Georgia's Western-leaning president tried to use his military to crush an uprising
- The US talked a lot and did nothing
- New administration initiated a "reset" of its relations with Russia

Because you're fixated on the Rouble, I thought you might want to know that it isn't a free-floating currency. The Central Bank widened the Rouble trading corridor in October. It started falling before Euromaidan had even started, and that was an intended consequence.

The Central Bank of Russia (CBR) has announced an increase in the range that its currency the ruble (RUB) can trade, effective from October 7, 2013, as part of a gradual transition towards a free floating exchange rate by 2015.

Do you know how much Russian money is tied up in the West?

Do you? Why don't you tell us where and how much. Oligarchs don't just rock up to a bank and open accounts in their own name. Their assets are held 20 layers deep in holding structures so nobody can find them.

This is a man who spent the majority of his career working to maintain one of the most depressing, uninspiring and deadliest totalitarian systems the world has ever known. Even more telling, he considered the crumbling of that system a "personal humiliation" and "the worst geopolitical disaster of the 20th century."

Actually, those quotes were taken completely out of context. I posted the original text in the now-closed Ukraine conflict thread. This is a classic example of a person cherry picking what information to emphasize - or ignore - based on where his sympathies or allegiances lie. I hope the White House is paying you my friend.

 

[Blunt]

BBC reporter trips over himself trying to admit the presence of neo fascists while simultaneously downplaying their role:

http://m.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26468720

However, even though the far right are a minority, for their numbers they have played an outsized, though not decisive, role

What would you call leaping up to the stage and demanding Yanukovich to be out by 10 am on threat of violence, if not decisive?

It seems like this guy was under major pressure to downplay them, probably a result of the BBC Night news video.

 

[Hencredible Casanova]

This is a man who spent the majority of his career working to maintain one of the most depressing, uninspiring and deadliest totalitarian systems the world has ever known. Even more telling, he considered the crumbling of that system a "personal humiliation" and "the worst geopolitical disaster of the 20th century."

Actually, those quotes were taken completely out of context. I posted the original text in the now-closed Ukraine conflict thread. This is a classic example of a person cherry picking what information to emphasize - or ignore - based on where his sympathies or allegiances lie. I hope the White House is paying you my friend.

They were not taken out of context. He actually did say "personal humiliation" in regards to the breaking up of the SU in his memoir. This is the first time I've posted that quote which you've never attempted to repudiate.

As for the geopolitical thing, most people agree with my view as to what he actually meant.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...adimir-putin-call-breakup-ussr-greatest-geop/


Further, the fact that he was a KGB official for a totalitarian state - and rose rapidly through the ranks, mind you - is direct evidence that he worked hard to maintain a system of oppression against millions of people.

So, either way you look at it, he was part and parcel of a totalitarian regime. There's no need to look at what he said when we know what he did for most of his life.

We'll see what happens in the coming days wrt Crimea and sanctions.

 

[DirectDanger]

 

[Hencredible Casanova]

Every day in the dumpster outside my apartment I see people digging through it. Beggars are common in my city, and it's relatively prosperous.

This could perfectly describe San Francisco, and probably many other US cities.

 

[DaveR]

This is a man who spent the majority of his career working to maintain one of the most depressing, uninspiring and deadliest totalitarian systems the world has ever known. Even more telling, he considered the crumbling of that system a "personal humiliation" and "the worst geopolitical disaster of the 20th century."

Actually, those quotes were taken completely out of context. I posted the original text in the now-closed Ukraine conflict thread. This is a classic example of a person cherry picking what information to emphasize - or ignore - based on where his sympathies or allegiances lie. I hope the White House is paying you my friend.

They were not taken out of context. He actually did say "personal humiliation" in regards to the breaking up of the SU in his memoir. This is the first time I've posted that quote which you've never attempted to repudiate.

As for the geopolitical thing, most people agree with my view as to what he actually meant.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...adimir-putin-call-breakup-ussr-greatest-geop/


Further, the fact that he was a KGB official for a totalitarian state - and rose rapidly through the ranks, mind you - is direct evidence that he worked hard to maintain a system of oppression against millions of people.

So, either way you look at it, he was part and parcel of a totalitarian regime. There's no need to look at what he said when we know what he did for most of his life.

We'll see what happens in the coming days wrt Crimea and sanctions.

If you want to be taken seriously, I suggest you post something a bit more balanced than an article by George W Bush's warmonger.

The original translation is in the old thread. Better still, read the original in Russian if you want to remove any doubt. The bullshit you're trying to spin is completely twisted out of context.

FYI, most of the political leaders of Central and Eastern Europe today were involved in the Communist Party of their respective countries. In one-party Communist states there was no other way to get involved in the leadership of the country.

 

[Hencredible Casanova]

If you want to be taken seriously, I suggest you post something a bit more balanced than an article by George W Bush's warmonger.

The original translation is in the old thread. Better still, read the original in Russian if you want to remove any doubt. The bullshit you're trying to spin is completely twisted out of context.

FYI, most of the political leaders of Central and Eastern Europe today were involved in the Communist Party of their respective countries. In one-party Communist states there was no other way to get involved in the leadership of the country.

:facepalm:


Talk about being taken seriously...


The article wasn't even written by "George Bush's warmonger" (John Bolton); it simply analyzed a quote he made about Putin's statement and evaluated whether it was true or not.

And why ignore the comment Putin made in his own memoir about being "personally humiliated" by the breakup of the Soviet Union?

There's many quotes from Putin speaking about the Soviet Union which all indicate the same sense of remorse he had about its disintegration, so whether or not you agree on what he said in the one instance we have been debating, it doesn't matter since it's a moot point.

This also invalidates your final point because not only did he serve a totalitarian regime, he was emotionally invested in seeing it succeed - and still regrets that it didn't.

His struggle to create a viable Eurasian Customs Union is simply a doomed effort to recreate the Soviet Union to the extent that he can. Without Ukraine in the mix, it has no shot, hence his actions as of late.

He won't even claim many of the Russian soldiers in Crimea as being Russian (unmarked, etc) in order to save face in the event he has to order his troops (the ones that were already on base) to retreat.

That's basically what he's amounted to in recent months - a determined troll of the United States.

You also must realize his moves are already backfiring. The Moscow Stock Exchange saw a 12% drop on Monday, losing the country an equivalent of $58 billion (that's US dollars) in a single day!

So, spin it all you want if it helps you sleep at night, but I'm not buying what you're selling. We'll just have to agree to disagree and see how the rest of this plays out.

My prediction: failure for Putin.

 

[DaveR]

I was expecting that to be completely one-sided given that it's from Stratfor (US intelligence strategy provider), but it turned out to be very balanced.

There were only two mistakes I picked up on:

1: The Crimean referendum poses two questions which the population can vote for or against, so it isn't a fait acompli as was suggested. The questions are: "Join Russia?" and "Leave Ukraine?". So the outcome could be:
- for leaving Ukraine, for joining Russia - Crimea will become part of Russia
- for leaving Ukraine, against joining Russia - Crimea will become independent
- against leaving Ukraine, against joining Russia - Crimea will stay part of Ukraine
- against leaving Ukraine, for joining Russia - an invalid outcome. I'm not sure wha twill happen if this is the result.

2: two of the Baltic states are now Eurozone members, not one as the guy stated - Estonia since the start of 2011 and Latvia since the start of this year.