Ukraine: military (Aug '14 to mid-June '15) closed

[OUTLAW 09]

Put the blanket in a dryer and run it at full heat for a little while. No more flea. If you have no dryer, boil a bucket of water and toss the blanket in. Been there, done that, both ways.

A "solution" in the Ukraine is a lot harder, and I'm not at all sure there is one, at least not in any sure or reliable sense. The current program of focusing on economic repercussions, gradually escalating them, and hoping Russia's economic elite can be hurt badly enough to pressure Putin is hardly ideal, but it has the advantage of being reasonably practical.

Despite many hundreds of posts, I'm not sure what solution you'd propose either. Enlighten us, perhaps?

Dayuhan---ah someone who understands fleas.

Obama summed it up in the last couple of days outside of oil/gas as a second rate developing country who has nuclear weapons so just really what is the need of Russia for the rest of the global market place and or global political arena? Think about it for a moment if Russia did not have nuclear weapons would we be really all that concerned?

If you really look at it from that perspective then understanding what to do is easy---what is difficult is understanding who to deal with inside the former and still Soviet Union.

http://en.delfi.lt/central-eastern-e...d1407158104477

I have written here often that they are four general legs of power---the following is a far better discussion of the inside groups that control the former Soviet Union ---the West really needs to understand them in light of what is going on in the Crimea and Ukraine.

Both you and AP had not done me the favor of going back and reading thoroughly the new Russian nuclear doctrine since 2012 and then looking intently at their INF violations and tell me Russia has a sane nuclear policy as stated since 2012?

Once in agreement that 1) Russia is a second rate developing country and 2) has developed some rather strange nuclear strike thoughts then we can discuss what should be done.

I am all for far more financial sanctions ie cutting all abilities to get short term credit lines of 90 days are less and cutting the ability to deal in investment quality bonds issued by Russian companies and sovereign fund bonds as a start.

The latest round of sanctions has hurt regardless of what Putin is telling his population and the Russia western sanctions are a farce---especially when they are stopping items like fruit, milk, pork and chicken which is now in short supply across all of Russia driving prices higher for the average Russian, and the bank sanctions have driven private credit interest to now 22%.

[davidbfpo]

At first this headline in 'The Moscow Times' puzzled me,, but they do explain they are a Moscow-based, independent English language newspaper:http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinio...ls/504197.html

No surprises in the content. more that this is available inside Russia:

Rather than Ukrainian citizens carrying a legitimate grievance against the Kiev government's pro-EU outlook, they are outsiders and usurpers, men with either mercenary or imperial motivations. They are pro-Russian, yes. They are separatists. But these men are invaders — and they are not Ukrainians.

[OUTLAW 09]

At first this headline in 'The Moscow Times' puzzled me,, but they do explain they are a Moscow-based, independent English language newspaper:http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinio...ls/504197.html

No surprises in the content. more that this is available inside Russia:

David---it is actually balanced based on writers/their locations and on occasions even Russian supportive although not Putin supportive.

[kaur]

AmericanPride, have you studied those numbers?

A survey, which was conducted for my research project by Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) in Ukraine, except Crimea, from April 29 to May 11, shows that the representation of separatism in Donbas by the Ukrainian and the Western governments and the media as small groups of Russian military intelligence agents and local “terrorists” or “rebels” who lack popular backing in this region and, therefore, can be easily defeated by force is unfounded. Most residents of Donbas supported different forms of separatism (54 percent).

The survey results also show that views expressed by the Russian government and media concerning widespread popular support for separatism in all of eastern and southern Ukraine are unfounded. Crimea and Donbas do not represent the entire southeast, because they have much larger ethnic Russian populations and a history of separatism. Minorities of residents of three eastern regions neighboring Donbas (15 percent) and in the south (10 percent) support separatism. Ethnic Russians, who are concentrated mostly in the east and the south, are split on the issue of separatism. Some 44 percent of ethnic Russians support different separatist options, including joining Russia (18 percent), while 40 percent favor preservation of the current unitary system, mostly with expanded powers. Among Russian speakers, who include many ethnic Ukrainians, 24 percent favor secession from Ukraine or regional autonomy in federal Ukraine.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...out-secession/

About Crimea.

Forty-one percent of Crimeans in the latest KIIS poll, conducted from Feb. 8-18, said Ukraine and Russia should merge into one state. That percentage has ebbed and flowed in recent years, in part because of the small sample size of any one of Ukraine’s 24 oblasts (provinces) in a national poll. Based on recent years, 41 percent could be an overestimate — just one-third of Crimeans wanted Ukraine to join Russia last year, and fewer than 1 in 4 did in 2012.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...t-polls-didnt/

First Putin accomplished coup d'etat in Crimea despite KIIS numbers. From Russian side were involved green polite men (Russian army), cossacks, spezturisty from Russia, Presidential administration election specialist, propaganda specialists etc. Then Putin tried to repeat the same in Eastern Ukraine. Look at the Novorossija rhetoric. Then they just run out of steam or decided to use different strategy that balanced resorces and aims. They were stuck in Crimea with resources, EU/NATO started to react etc. Then they switched to propaganda by deed track. This is going on under Russia's leadership. They have hidden in huge cities of Donetsk and Lugansk and due to Ukrainian armed forces training and equipment, their action is producing grievancies among the Donbas people.

This paper models a scenario in which an extremist faction considers attacking
a government in the hopes of provoking a counterterror response that will radicalize
the population, increasing the extremists' support at the expense of a more moderate
faction. In our scenario, such radicalization can result either from the economic damage
caused by counterterror operations or by the way in which such operations change the
population's assessment of the government's motivations.

http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politic...propaganda.pdf

[Dayuhan]

someone who understands fleas.

Practical lessons of third world living...

Obama summed it up in the last couple of days outside of oil/gas as a second rate developing country who has nuclear weapons so just really what is the need of Russia for the rest of the global market place and or global political arena? Think about it for a moment if Russia did not have nuclear weapons would we be really all that concerned?

From a US perspective, we need the Russians to keep selling oil, because they sell quite a bit of it and if they stop or slow down significantly the world price will escalate tremendously, which would hurt the US.

We could live with a drop in gas sales (gas and oil price patterns are quite different), but we need them to keep selling oil.

We also need them to not start a nuclear war, for obvious reasons.

We want them to stop manipulating and invading their neighbors. We also want them to get their criminal organizations under control, bring trade practices into synch with the developed world, be nicer to homosexuals, etc.

Need and want are of course two very different things. Things you want and things you need are both goals, but they vary in priority and negotiability.

Clarifying goals is a good start, but it also helps to have a realistic and practical plan for achieving the goals.

I have written here often that they are four general legs of power---the following is a far better discussion of the inside groups that control the former Soviet Union ---the West really needs to understand them in light of what is going on in the Crimea and Ukraine.

I think we're all aware that the internal power dynamics of Russia are different from those in the West, and of the four pillars you speak of... but again, what specific policy options do you suggest for responding to or managing that internal situation?

Once in agreement that 1) Russia is a second rate developing country and 2) has developed some rather strange nuclear strike thoughts then we can discuss what should be done.

I agree that Russia is by most metrics a "second rate developing country" and that the Russian government's thoughts on quite a few subjects seem strange to Americans... so what do you, as an expert on the subject, propose that the US do about it?

If you really look at it from that perspective then understanding what to do is easy---what is difficult is understanding who to deal with inside the former and still Soviet Union.

Ok, so tell us what you think we should do. If "understanding what to do is easy" it shouldn't be difficult.

The latest round of sanctions has hurt regardless of what Putin is telling his population and the Russia western sanctions are a farce---especially when they are stopping items like fruit, milk, pork and chicken which is now in short supply across all of Russia driving prices higher for the average Russian, and the bank sanctions have driven private credit interest to now 22%.

Yes, there is evidence that sanctions have hurt. The question is how people will respond. Will they blame Putin and start grumbling that this Ukraine affair is not worth the price, or will they blame the West and rally behind Putin? Probably a bit of both, at least initially, but which will emerge as the primary response? Perhaps more important, how much pressure will (or can) the oligarchs bring to bear to get Putin to back off and place their economic interests above the political goals in the Ukraine?

So your solutions it to plunge a nuclear power into economic chaos?

I don't think "economic chaos" is the goal of sanctions, and it would take much more aggressive sanctions to even come close to that outcome. The goal appears to be more modest: to impose enough economic pain on the oligarchs that they will pressure Putin to revise his policies. Stretching that to "economic chaos" is somewhat over the top.

Economic sanctions may not be an ideal response, but what are the options? No response at all would only encourage and complicate further land grabs and make response to those more difficult, and the non-economic response options are risky, impractical, and generally unappealing, unless you have a proposal I haven't seen.

I am starting to suspect that your position is less concerned with Ukraine's territorial integrity and more with punishing Russia for diverting from your perception that it ought to stay within the nice political and moral lines you have drawn for it.

Are the "political and moral" lines involved specific to Russia in any way?

And, because it's irresistible...

Originally Posted by Outlaw

Right now Russia is in fact a rouge country regardless of how one wants to define rouge.

rouge1
ro͞oZH/
noun

1. a red powder or cream used as a cosmetic for coloring the cheeks or lips.

But on the bright side, if it gets out that Putin is using the stuff, his reputation will be shot forever...