Ukraine (closed; covers till August 2014)

[Firn]

So, Putin just spared two million people from civil war?

There is a fair chance that his friendly occupation will cause exactly that in a Crimea which had it's problem but very little violence.

I already wrote about the manyfold economic dependance of the Crimea on Ukraine. It will be hard hit by the demand shock from tourists, internal turmoil and friction. As you pretty much can count on a puppet regime under Russian control to miss-manage the economy, see Transnistria etc I doubt that Russia will be able to do even a decent economic job. Apart perhaps from gifts to the selected ones which played their part in the political game.

Next it would be nice if you stopped using one-liners and at least try to make your case. I sincerly interested in it, as so far I have seen none.

Shaun Walker ‏@shaunwalker7 15 Min.

Crimea politician: This now Russian territory. Only legal troops here russian. any troops of a 3rd country will be treated as illegal bands.

.....

So the non-Russian Russian troops have not invaded the Crimea, the Crimea moved to them to become Russian. Stupid me.

P.S: Will the great Putin magnanimously accept the vote of the his puppets that the Crimea is from 'today' Russian or will the great leader wisely cool down his people and insist that they should would for the certain outcome of the the fair and open referendum under the Russian boot.

[Firn]

@davidbdfo: Can you correct my last entry, I really should not jump so quickly between work and a forum post.

Mao in the little red book:

Every Communist must grasp the truth: Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.

After all this back and forth about the referendum a joke sums it up perfectly:

Shaun Walker ‏@shaunwalker7 52 Min.

Translated twitter joke via @metkere : Crimean authorities have changed the date of the referendum again. It will now take place yesterday.

I wonder when we will see the western reporters getting invited to leave the occupied Ukraine. Yesterday we had the abuse and threats against the UN envoy, now it seems that 'very professional, very well-trained' gunmen have barred the OSCE observes the entry into the occupied territory.

This is interesting, if currently unconfirmed: AFP reports that the 40-strong team from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) were prevented by gunmen from entering Crimea to begin their monitoring mission. The agency cites an unnamed “Western diplomatic source”. The source told AFP:

They are stuck but they are not turning back. They are not being allowed in by two groups of armed people - very professional, very well-trained.

[mirhond]

Next it would be nice if you stopped using one-liners and at least try to make your case. I sincerly interested in it, as so far I have seen none.

I don't have any case, actually, I care less about all this mess in Ukraine.
Well, I you dont like one-liners, I'll made it two-liner:
Putin spared two million people not only a from civil war, but from the ravages of decaying Ukraninian economy and poor leadership. Reasonable Crimean polititians just calculated net gains/losses and desided to stick to Russia, plain and simple.

[AmericanPride]

It's not just Moscow that has economic obstacles affecting a rational outcome in Crimea. From the National Interest:

The reforms would allow Ukraine to borrow approximately 60 percent more (from $1 billion to $1.6 billion) from the IMF’s emergency fund. That’s money that Ukraine can use to pay off its debts and avoid a default. In certain scenarios, the IMF makes exceptions and allows countries to access additional funds, as it did with Greece and Ireland after the financial crisis. But there’s no guarantee it would do so with Ukraine. By blocking the passage of the IMF reforms, Republicans are actively making it harder for Ukraine to pay back its loans.

...

“The rest of the world is furious at us,” Ted Truman, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and the assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury for International Affairs from 1998 to 2001, said. “For us to say, ‘We just stiffed you in January’ and now we’re turning around to try to ask you to be part of the team helping Ukraine, we look silly.”

“It does undermine our credibility and leadership,” he added. “We look like we’re giving with our right hand and taking with our left hand.”

Of course, there's also the risk that any aid to Ukraine will be stolen anyway:

As always, it’s about preventing a default during which bondholders and lenders, including numerous Western banks, hedge funds, and other speculators, would finally feel the teeth of a free market and be forced to take losses, big losses, perhaps big enough to sink a lender or two, which would be a welcome sign of housecleaning by market forces. But that won’t be allowed to happen. Instead, taxpayers in other countries will be shanghaied into bailing out these bondholders and lenders, but indirectly, under the guise of bailing out the Ukrainian people.

...

But Danilishin’s idea that aid cannot save the Ukrainian economy because the money will simply be siphoned off by pandemic corruption, and that instead the state should go after the oligarchs who plundered the country? It “can’t be implemented because the ‘revolution’ in Kiev has been partially sponsored by the oligarchs who will not let the state become stronger,” Mândrăşescu explained.

From an economic point of view, the revolution in Kiev did Ukraine no favors. In fact, it may have sacrificed whatever remaining stability the Ukrainian economy had. But I suppose Ukraine's territory integrity (there is a vote for Crimean secession planned this month) is a small price to pay to bring the Washington Concensus to Russia's doorstep.

On another subject, DNI made a statement to the effect that they were not "caught off guard" by the Russian intervention because the "decision [to intervene] was made at the last minute". With an open territorial dispute between Ukraine and Moscow (not to mention Russian troops in Crimea), I think the prospects of Ukraine ever entering NATO are at an all-time low. We'll have to wait and see what IMF reforms are proposed and if that's politically feasibility for the new government in Kiev.

[carl]

From an economic point of view, the revolution in Kiev did Ukraine no favors. In fact, it may have sacrificed whatever remaining stability the Ukrainian economy had. But I suppose Ukraine's territory integrity (there is a vote for Crimean secession planned this month) is a small price to pay to bring the Washington Concensus to Russia's doorstep.

Here I thought the Ukrainian people had something to do with all this, the various demonstrations and all. I figured they were very unhappy with their situation and are trying to change it. I figured too that since they live their they are probably most able to judge whether their situation was/is tolerable or not. Hmm. Upon reflection, I still think so and any crisis that is developing is the result of an aggressive police state invading an neighboring country.

[jmm99]

For an oldster, it's comforting to see that some aspects of days gone by continue. One can still find TASS, Pravda and Izvestia. For my next round of comfort food, I'll try to find Cracker Jacks with prizes inside while listening to Moon River.

But, in the meantime, duty calls; and I will footnote an IL note. A prior post briefly noted Ashley Weeks' summary of why Russia's actions were illegal under IL. In her column yesterday, she posted the Russian response (albeit by a German, Stefan Soesanto - at very bottom of CSIS Kelly bios).

Its BLUF:

The Russian position for sending troops into Crimea is based upon five legal arguments.

First, the interim government in Kiev is not the legitimate government of the Ukraine as it violently usurped power in a coup d’état.

Second, the interim government is promoting a nationalistic agenda which is threatening the human rights of the Russian minority living in the Ukraine.

Third, given the fear of revolutionary chaos in the Ukraine Russia is facing a potential humanitarian refugee crisis at its border.

Fourth, under Article 61(2) of the Russian constitution, the Russian federation “guarantees its citizens defense and patronage beyond its boundaries.”

And fifth, President Yanukovych and the Prime Minister of the autonomous Republic of the Crimea invited Russia for security assistance to protect and stabilize the Ukraine.
...
[JMM: much more in Soesanto's post getting down into the weeds on these five points]

Again, it's comforting to see that the Cheka's IL department is still alive and well after all of those years.

Regards

Mike

[slapout9]

For an oldster, it's comforting to see that some aspects of days gone by continue. One can still find TASS, Pravda and Izvestia. For my next round of comfort food, I'll try to find Cracker Jacks with prizes inside while listening to Moon River.

But, in the meantime, duty calls; and I will footnote an IL note. A prior post briefly noted Ashley Weeks' summary of why Russia's actions were illegal under IL. In her column yesterday, she posted the Russian response (albeit by a German, Stefan Soesanto - at very bottom of CSIS Kelly bios).

Its BLUF:



Again, it's comforting to see that the Cheka's IL department is still alive and well after all of those years.

Regards

Mike

Nice legal perspective jm99. No luck with cracker jacks but here is Andy Williams for you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_jgIezosVA&feature=kp

[AmericanPride]

Carl and Firn,

The point is that with or without Russian intervention, Ukraine would still be facing this same economic dilemma. And the problem isn't is "West better than East?" Because that's a false dichtonomy. Ukraine's integration into the Washington Concensus will unleash a very painful program on the Ukrainian people that will benefit a few small class of investors and financiers. Whatever his motivations and faults, Yanukovych rejected this program. His government was in an impossible situation given the immense pressure from both Washington and Moscow. A considerable of the portion of the population is in favor of this course of action - another considerable portion is in favor of achieving the status of a Russian protectate. The narrative of a spontaneous freedom-thirsty pro-West Ukrainian revolution is a myth.

[JMA]

Mike, these Russian citizens living in Ukraine, are they Russian expats or Ukrainians of Russian origin?

I have heard that the Russians are dishing out passports to prove these people are Russian citizens? This to justify their invasion.

If this is so then you can't be a Russian or a Ukrainian at the same time... if dual citizenship is allowed then the national parliament can - quickly - push a new law through making it impossible for Russian citizens and passport holders to also be citizens of the Ukraine.

Russian citizens would then be required to apply for residence permits and work permits to live and work in the Ukraine. Pretty standard requirements for citizens of another country.

For an oldster, it's comforting to see that some aspects of days gone by continue. One can still find TASS, Pravda and Izvestia. For my next round of comfort food, I'll try to find Cracker Jacks with prizes inside while listening to Moon River.

But, in the meantime, duty calls; and I will footnote an IL note. A prior post briefly noted Ashley Weeks' summary of why Russia's actions were illegal under IL. In her column yesterday, she posted the Russian response (albeit by a German, Stefan Soesanto - at very bottom of CSIS Kelly bios).

Its BLUF:



Again, it's comforting to see that the Cheka's IL department is still alive and well after all of those years.

Regards

Mike

[Firn]

@AdamG: Good links, I quickly read through the Remi Piets article, I liked it in general. It is of course impossible to address all his points.

@AmericanPride: If you go back in the thread I already wrote a couple of stuff about the Ukrainian economy, the role of the oligarchs and so forth with some interesting links. It is frankly quite obvious that the political turmoil and the foreign invasion have negative consequences for the economy. On the other hand a closer integration into the European systems has considerable upsides.



The success of neighbours like Slovakia and Poland in the EU had and has of course a huge attraction for many Ukrainians, especially the younger and better educated ones. When I was an active member of an European student organization you could feel the energy and thirst of the members, especially the women, stemming from those countries. Great times.

This is of course part of the vast soft power or attraction of the West, which just can not be matched by countries like Russia or China. It is no surprise that many of the brightest and many of the richest vote with their feet and money and decide to come, live, and invest in the West.

I wrote already about some basics of the weak Russian economy. This article provides a nuanced opinion on the current situation:

Fear and pain following Russia's military intervention in Ukraine last weekend is obviously a factor. Clearly some market players were expecting some sort of backlash from the world regarding Russia's moves. There was the usual talk of U.S. sanctions, presumably to fall on Russian state banks. When it comes to financial sanctions, it is hard to dream up a government player more scary and dangerous than Uncle Sam, and any action against Russia could leave a lot of folks high and dry. Naturally, smart guys would buy dollars and move them out if they feared sanctions, thus contributing to flush the ruble out. But this is not sufficient to explain the crash.

But the plain fact is that Monday's market turmoil was just a hyperextension of a trend that has been gathering steam for some time. The ruble is being punished for the sins of the Russian economy.

Any banker who is free to talk nowadays will tell you that corporates are simply not borrowing the way they used to. More generally, people are not investing into their own businesses and have not been or more than two years. Increasingly, company directors, entrepreneurs and the like have been "milking" their businesses in Russia and getting the money out of the country any way they can. This is called capital flight with a capital "F" and has been going on in Russia increasingly over the past two years.

As I wrote before in economic issues people are most readily voting with their money. Despite the high interest rates offered in Russia, the smart money has for a couple of years flowing away from Russian and the ruble into the West and the Euro, Swissie, USD or Pound. The Russian aggression against the Ukraine has accelerated the trend and the Bank Rossii had to raise and to sell reserves to slow it down. There have smart guys there but the task to stop the flood is huge.

[Firn]

@jmm99: Good job. Something for you, found while I looked at the Russian economy. The first sentences left a deep impressions in a strange way.

In Moscow, I have lived through two ideologies, two Olympics, two revolutions and several economic crises. I have wept through terrorist attacks. I have lost all my savings a couple of times. I am always getting paid in whatever currency is losing value. This week I think: I am getting too old for this.

Konstantin Sonin, a columnist for Vedomosti, professor of economics and vice rector at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow has written this nice&short piece. The quote from Talleyrand is in this occasion much appreciated and fitting. I use it also from times to times.

It is said that after Napoleon committed a particularly shocking and amoral blunder, Foreign Minister Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord remarked that "it was worse than a crime, it was a mistake." Those are timeless words, and it is no wonder that Talleyrand's political career began earlier and lasted far longer than the emperor's.

The same observation applies to the recent actions of Russia's political leadership. Whatever the legal or moral implications, sending troops into a neighboring country is a tragic mistake. This move ended all hopes of Russia attaining the long-term stability it has been working toward ever since the fall of the Soviet Union, and it will lead to serious political and economic consequences that will continue to affect this country for many years.

Historians will long debate how such a major miscalculation could have happened, but for the moment, other considerations deserve more immediate attention

@carl: It is indeed to stop sometimes and try to look at the issues through the eyes of the people living there. I fear for the Ukrainians and also the common Russians, it is a bad situation which might still result in a shooting war. An Ukrainian officer IIRC described the situation in the Crimean as a powder keg.

[AmericanPride]

Here I thought the Ukrainian people had something to do with all this, the various demonstrations and all. I figured they were very unhappy with their situation and are trying to change it. I figured too that since they live their they are probably most able to judge whether their situation was/is tolerable or not. Hmm. Upon reflection, I still think so and any crisis that is developing is the result of an aggressive police state invading an neighboring country.

Who are "the Ukrainan people"? The few thousand ethnic Ukrainians of Fatherland and Right Sector parties that protested in Kiev? Or the ethnic Russian demonstrators in Donestsk, Kharkiv, and Odessa in opposition to the new government? John McCain, Victoria Nuland, and others in Washington expressed strong opinions about what Ukraine's should be. The crisis would still exist regardless whether Moscow intervened in Crimea or not. The Ukrainian people expressed their popular will through an election that put Yanukovych in office (for a second time and was certified by international monitors as legitimate). Is it a democratic principle for a minority party to force the sitting president from office? Would we find it acceptable in the United States if the Tea Party occupied the White House and Congress until their demands that Obama resign were met? Probably not.

If we're concerned about Ukraine's democratic future, then we need to condemn political agitation by all outside parties, recognize the interests of the ~20% of Ukrainians who are ethnic Russians, and call upon the new government to recognize democratic principles by holding new elections. This month. Not in May or December. Given Ukraine's demographic condition and split idenity, from a foreign policy perspective, the country's best bet is the Austria or Finland model of neutrality. But neither Moscow or Washington or genuinely interested in the political sovereignty or territorial integrity of Ukraine or the democratic aspirations of any of the Ukrainian people. And until we recognize that fundamental fact, we always be surprised by the actions of others.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Who are "the Ukrainan people"? The few thousand ethnic Ukrainians of Fatherland and Right Sector parties that protested in Kiev? Or the ethnic Russian demonstrators in Donestsk, Kharkiv, and Odessa in opposition to the new government? John McCain, Victoria Nuland, and others in Washington expressed strong opinions about what Ukraine's should be. The crisis would still exist regardless whether Moscow intervened in Crimea or not. The Ukrainian people expressed their popular will through an election that put Yanukovych in office (for a second time and was certified by international monitors as legitimate). Is it a democratic principle for a minority party to force the sitting president from office? Would we find it acceptable in the United States if the Tea Party occupied the White House and Congress until their demands that Obama resign were met? Probably not.

If we're concerned about Ukraine's democratic future, then we need to condemn political agitation by all outside parties, recognize the interests of the ~20% of Ukrainians who are ethnic Russians, and call upon the new government to recognize democratic principles by holding new elections. This month. Not in May or December. Given Ukraine's demographic condition and split idenity, from a foreign policy perspective, the country's best bet is the Austria or Finland model of neutrality. But neither Moscow or Washington or genuinely interested in the political sovereignty or territorial integrity of Ukraine or the democratic aspirations of any of the Ukrainian people. And until we recognize that fundamental fact, we always be surprised by the actions of others.

OK … this comment is going to be less about the Ukraine specifically and more about applying political theory to human motivation … let me explain.

This is the second time in as many years that a duly elected leader of a country was removed from office by a “popular uprising” that has been embraced by the American people. The first was Egypt. In both cases the elected leader was cast aside because he appeared to be moving the country towards a identity based collectivist government. In Egypt the group was the Muslim Brotherhood. In the Ukraine it was Putin’s “Russia”. In Putin’s “Russia” the Russian State is the most important thing. It is a collectivist society. Nationalistic. Tied to a common identity.

In both cases it amounted to a choice between a government where the individual people held the power and were the most important political unit, or the Collectivist Group held the power and the group was the most important political unit. Hobbes’ Leviathan.

Don’t get wrapped around the axel over elections. That someone is elected is largely irrelevant. Autocratic, identity based leaders are elected and re-elected by the population they lead all the time. Elections are not the important point. Political ideology, either individualistic or communal, is. So, it does not matter if Yanukovych was elected. He was taking the country where those people of a individualist mindset did not want to go. We Westerners generally agree with that mindset, so we support a non-democratic change of power.

[AmericanPride]

Don’t get wrapped around the axel over elections. That someone is elected is largely irrelevant. Autocratic, identity based leaders are elected and re-elected by the population they lead all the time. Elections are not the important point. Political ideology, either individualistic or communal, is. So, it does not matter if Yanukovych was elected. He was taking the country where those people of a individualist mindset did not want to go. We Westerners generally agree with that mindset, so we support a non-democratic change of power.

Several questions:

(1) Is it justified for those of "an individualist mindset" to conduct a "non-democratic change of power"? What if those individuals are not in the majority or are distinctly in the minority? Is the reverse equally justified; can those not of an individualist mindset also execute a "non-democratic change of power"? If tomorrow ethnic Russians in Ukraine conducted a counter-coup and installed a pro-Russian government, is this justified politically or morally?

(2) If the fact of someone's election is "largely irrelevant" and "elections are not the important point", then how do we measure democratic governance?

(3) Is this a useful framework for understanding the events in Kiev and Washington's and Moscow's actions? It seems to me to be a strain of ideological consistency to champion democratic governance on one hand and to install governments in a "non-democratic change of power" on the other. Is that not the opposite of individualism?

[carl]

Mirhond:

It is good to have a mouthpiece for the siloviki around here. From you we can learn their view of the world and how they want to present themselves to the world. So far we have learned the following.

1. Putin is viewed as a king, not an elected official who will serve a term of office and go, but a king.

2. Putin is worth 40 billion dollars but he is one with the people and is struggling against the oligarchs.

3. Vlad is "kinda beloved leader."

4. Beatings of the right people are quite funny.

5. Stalin is irrelevant to the subject. (Tell that to the east and central Europeans who still remember things like the Katyn Forest and the intentional starvation of millions in the Ukraine.)

6. Getting gobbled up by the bear just improved the lot of the people of the Crimea because they no longer have to be part of the lousy Ukrainian economy and have bad Ukrainian leadership, they get to be part of the Russian economy and have the good leadership of king Vlad.

Keep 'em coming Mirhond. We learn a lot.