|
Ukraine: Just Some News Items
The government of the Russian Federation continues to make fun about the sanctions the U.S. imposed because the people of the Crimea voted to reunite with Russia:
[Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry] Rogozin told journalists that the Russian government was not considering imposing sanctions against the U.S. and the European Union because it does not view the asset freezes and travel bans seriously.
Rogozin said the "search for accounts and property of people who cannot have them by definition is some angry joke," he said, referring to the ban on Russian state officials holding assets abroad, Interfax reported.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is even impersonating Secretary of State Kerry:
"The sanctions introduced by the United States and the European Union are absolutely unacceptable and will not be left without consequences," the Russian foreign ministry said Lavrov told Kerry during a phone call on Tuesday evening.
"Absolutely unacceptable" and "consequences" are the typical words used by Obama, Kerry and other "western" leaders to push Russia around. Well, not this time.
President Putin's speech on the association of the Crimea into the Russian Federation was very well received in Russia. I recommend to read it.
I read some claims today that Crimea is poor and Russia will have to pay a lot to update its infrastructure. That would be expensive and a bad deal for Russia. That it would be expensive may well be right but there is a points the people who make such claims fail to understand. The Black Sea around the Crimea has plenty of hydrocarbons and the government of Crimea has seized the Ukrainian companies that are involved in bringing those hydrocarbons to the markets. These gas fields will now be part of the already huge Russian reserves.
There was a something like a sniper attack at a military base used by Ukrainian soldiers in Simferopol. One Ukrainian soldier was allegedly killed and one wounded. On the other side one member of the Crimean self defense forces was killed. Both sides claim not to have shot at each other. This may well have been a provocation by an unknown third forces which snipped at both sides of a potential conflict. From the BBC Live text (18:42):
An officer in the Ukrainian military describes the violence at the military base in Simferopol to Ukrainian television: "One observer was on a rooftop monitoring the situation; he sustained glancing wounds to the neck and shoulder. They say he is being operated on now. Our second observer was on the car park tower. He was shot dead. I personally did not see him. They say his body is still there. Representatives of the Russian Federation and of the Crimean self-defence state that they also have one fatality and one wounded. We did not return fire. We did not fire."
From Russia Today:
The Kryminform news agency, citing an unnamed local police source, reports shooting came from a house under construction opposite the center and targeted Crimean self-defense units as well the military center itself. “Earlier today self-defense units were informed that a group of armed men had been discovered in a partially inhabited building,” a source from the ministry said. “As they were taking measures to check, self-defense units came under fire. One man was killed, one wounded,” the source explained, adding that shooting came “in two directions from one spot”.
The Kryminform source claimed another man from the military center was wounded.
RT’s producer contacted staff inside the military center, who confirmed that the shooting did take place and came from a nearby house under construction. At the same time, the man had no information on the casualties.
Such provocations could start a serious incident. The Ukrainian and the Russian side should ask their soldiers to hold back form violence against each other. At the same time any sign of a third force must be followed up upon immediately and be hunted down.
The biggest and most difficult task now for the "western" foreign policy apprentices who sponsored the coup against the Ukrainian government is to get control over the fascist spirits that they called to help them with the coup. These spirits are likely to use extreme brutality against any perceived enemy. Should they make further trouble in southern or eastern Ukraine Russia will have to intervene against them.
@ Mr. Pragma, since the previous Ukraine thread is coming to a close, let me bring the conversation across to the new thread.
[…] I still think that in the end the whole ukraine will look quite differently. […]
On this we agree.
[…] But I also see that, unless Putin has a major ace up his sleeve, anything coming now will be *way* less good and elegant than could be had without Crimea as part of Russia. […]
On this we don’t. Nothing the Russian administration has done sofar is conveying the impression it will not continue to act ‘elegantly’, for which retaining a Ukraining Crimea isn’t necessary anyway.
Besides, seeing that now all armed Crimean self defense forces can pack up and leave the streets for international TV crews to film a joyfull Crimean population, one could argue it has added some elegance to an otherwise less chic situation.
[…] Maybe the southern/eastern regions will form a new state, maybe they will stay in ukraine, albeit with more autonomy. […]
On this we agree.
[…] No matter which way, the wezt will take that as a major victory and Putin will look weaker. […]
On this we don’t. The exact opposite is already and will continue to be the case. No matter which way you slice it, both options you mention, independent or autonomous South Eastern regions will be a win for Russia compared to the situation before the putsch. Especially by the West. All that’s left to do for Omerkel is to pick up the shattered pieces of their failed attempt at steamrolling East, and arrange them into a mosaic resembling something that’s meant to look like a draw.
Anyone telling you something different will be either employed by a weztern media conglomerate or is an observer far behind the curve. With your talent spotting both of those, you will have no problems avoiding them for the most part.
[…] The Sevastopol may be important but it’s definitely not valuable enough for what Putin just did. […]
Value lies in the eye of the beholder, no doubt, and in Russia’s eys Crimea is worth its weight in gold.
[…] Some are beginning to say how smart that was from Putin and that he still can enter ukraine and take whatever he wants, anyway. Yes, he can – but not as an honourable upright man; […]
Some may say that, including you, but that argument is obviously flawed. Why? Because Putin hasn’t taken anything yet and will continue this approach, cause unlike you he can differentiate 😉 between taking, or grabbing as you call it sometimes, and accepting.
He will not have to enter the Ukraine, Russian troops lining up on its side of the border are there only for worst case scenarios which I am confident in saying will thanx to Putins elegance not transpire.
All Putin and Russia will have to do is make sure that the new constitution being pushed through allows for the right of regional self determination and secession from the Ukrainian federation if so desired by a large enough majority. Once the time is ripe they will have all the tools needed to elegantly follow Crimea’s example, albeit more in slow motion.
[…] Russia will be tainted by having negotiated with nazi and terrorist sponsors. […]
Every G8 meeting Russia attended over the years was a negotiation with sponsors of terrorism, that’s just what you have to do on an international stage. What matters is whether Russia can extract a pound of flesh every time it needs to sit down with its opponents. And on that count they have shown no mercy.
[…] And zusa, being what it is, will certainly take that as an invitation to consider Russia weak and to go on marauding. […]
I very much doubt that. Sure, the fools responsible for US foreign policy aren’t the sharpest knives in the drawer and marauding is NATO’s nature, a fact Russia can’t change. But by the time they are through with digesting the aftermath of this blunder Russia would have reassured them a couple of times that should they again come marauding into bear country she will again send them home weeping.
[…] Putin, standing for Russia, *did have* his own interests, he *was* an involved party.
This maybe news to you but Putin is supposed to act in Russia’s interest, it’s the first paragraph in his job description. And he was involved only to the degree that he accomodated the wish of 90% of Crimeans to join with Russia.
[…] The difference only being that Putin acted legally and professional while obama, merkel, and the other zio-puppets acted amateurish and obviously criminally. But in the end that’s just a detail and one, that can easily counterbalanced by weztern PR blabla and conspirational media. […]
No, that he acted legally and professionally was all that mattered, as it denies the western PR goons the bullets with which they could win the competition for public opinions.
[…] From today on the weztern politician scum can rightfully say “What’s the big difference? You follow your interests, no matter whether nicely and legally or whether dirtyly and illegally and we follow ours. We tried to de facto annect ukraine to zeu/zato and you did annect Crimea”. […]
To which Vladimir Putin will reply “What are ou talking about! You instigated a murderous coup while Russia merely rolled with the punches and had to accept the Crimean people’s democratically expressed wish to join our lands. Who cares if you can see a difference, the rest of the world can and is pissing itself laughing.”
[…] As for kiev, constitution, blabla – forget it. One can’t trust anything weztern or non ethnic Russian ukrainians say or sign. […]
How would the Crimea remaining with Ukraine have changed the fact that one can’t trust anything weztern or non ethnic Russian ukrainians say or sign? Those people are what they are.
[…] Russia would have had no less with a country “Crimea” in all but name. And Sevastopol was anyway not open for discussion. […]
I can guarantee you that in the Pentagon it was subject to discussion, and give the same guarantee that as of today, with the Crimea back on Russian soil, those discussions would have either completely ceased or are now being held in the men’s toilet when there is nothing better to talk about.
[…] With grabbing Crimea Russia has won next to nothing […]
For the third time, Russia didn’t grab nothing but graciously welcomed a neighboring region onto its territory and please get your head around that unlike you Russian thinkers don’t view the Crimea as next to nothing.
[…] My issue is that he did it *now*. […]
That doesn’t gel with the rest of your argument and the growing list of reasons you provided for why Mr Pragma feels Crimea should have stayed part of the Ukraine. And those reasons did not have the time factor as a variable, eg Crimea being too small to become a Russian state and so on. Just like your next argument:
[…] “Gee, that’s a whole lot of people having separated and joined Crimea. Obviously the right thing to do is to create a new state/country. And sure enough, we (Russia) will be best friends and supporters of that new country”.[…]
What benefits would there be in Eastern Ukraine becoming a separate country compared to having it incorporated into Russia? Option one would leave the regions vulnerable to future marauding maneuvers by NATO agents, option two would exclude any such moves.
Your thoughts?
Posted by: Juan Moment | Mar 18 2014 21:43 utc | 21
|
