Ukraine (closed; covers till August 2014)

[OUTLAW 09]

Dayuhan ---this goes a little to what JMA is alluding to even though I do not necessarily blame it only this WH---it goes back to a large degree the Bush years "who looked Putin in the eyes"........

What worries me and it goes to this WH is a distinct lack of clarity in fully explaining the current Russia issue and it is just not the Crimea to the American population as a whole regardless of political views.

For way to long we as a country ignored Russian and Putin since 2000 as we literally chased the "bad guys" around the world and in the end it was a failure and a 4T USD loss.

For example--this WH dallied on calling out Russia for being in violation of the INF, for not being in compliance with the agreements they signed under the OCSE since 2001, they have not "leaked" to the US population that the Russian troop movements and supply operations on the Ukraine border are far more serious than they have stated just in the last four days (they only started leaking to the NYT today) and that it takes German intelligence leaks to indicate that the Russian AF was flying simulated air attack runs against the Koenigsberg area of Lithuania SINCE this last autumn on an almost daily basis, that Russian activities in the southern hemisphere has drastically picked up to a point of matching them from 30 years ago and the list goes on.

The same WH and the previous WH have failed to indicate to the American population that Russia is currently being managed by four separate organizations ie the Russian Security Services FSB/GRU/MoI, the oligarchs, the Army and especially the Russian Mob.

To understand the use of the Russian Mob ---here is a great link on Mob activities in the Ukraine;
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...n-ukraine.html

Also our own think tankers and pundits keep stating it is all about Russia needing a "sphere of influence" WHEN in fact it is about two things 1) keeping the Ukrainian street from igniting a similar trend in Moscow AND 2) more importantly is really is about reestablishing the former Soviet Union.

Take a map and draw in the Russian Federation then draw in the "Stans" that are under direct Russian influence, draw in Belarus which is under a former Communist who is a dictator and proRussian, then draw in the enclaves Russia has taken since 2008 in Georgia and Moldovia and Crimea and look at the pressure they are applying to the remaining Ukraine and the Baltics.

In order to exert military pressure from the breakaway enclave in and on Moldavia the Russian military needs a land route and it is only through the Ukraine that it is possible--BUT from the Crimea it is an easy run into Moldavia.

One is looking at the former Soviet Union all over again and this in the 21st century when the Cold War was suppose to be over.

So in formulating foreign policy just how does one go about it if in fact the American public is totally in the dark?

Do we have a strategy that reflects a clear end goal and what is to be achieved and or we just going to muddle through this over and over.

Putin does have a strategy and it is long term.

This I think is where JMA is coming from.

[JMA]

I see you have met our man from the boonies.

His stock in trade is to nit pick what others post to create work for them in responding then repeats the same routine over again.

... and never posts anything of substance himself in case someone does the same to him.

It get old pretty quickly.

Dayuhan ---this goes a little to what JMA is alluding to even though I do not necessarily blame it only this WH---it goes back to a large degree the Bush years "who looked Putin in the eyes"........

What worries me and it goes to this WH is a distinct lack of clarity in fully explaining the current Russia issue and it is just not the Crimea to the American population as a whole regardless of political views.

For way to long we as a country ignored Russian and Putin since 2000 as we literally chased the "bad guys" around the world and in the end it was a failure and a 4T USD loss.

For example--this WH dallied on calling out Russia for being in violation of the INF, for not being in compliance with the agreements they signed under the OCSE since 2001, they have not "leaked" to the US population that the Russian troop movements and supply operations on the Ukraine border are far more serious than they have stated just in the last four days (they only started leaking to the NYT today) and that it takes German intelligence leaks to indicate that the Russian AF was flying simulated air attack runs against the Koenigsberg area of Lithuania SINCE this last autumn on an almost daily basis, that Russian activities in the southern hemisphere has drastically picked up to a point of matching them from 30 years ago and the list goes on.

The same WH and the previous WH have failed to indicate to the American population that Russia is currently being managed by four separate organizations ie the Russian Security Services FSB/GRU/MoI, the oligarchs, the Army and especially the Russian Mob.

To understand the use of the Russian Mob ---here is a great link on Mob activities in the Ukraine;
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...n-ukraine.html

Also our own think tankers and pundits keep stating it is all about Russia needing a "sphere of influence" WHEN in fact it is about two things 1) keeping the Ukrainian street from igniting a similar trend in Moscow AND 2) more importantly is really is about reestablishing the former Soviet Union.

Take a map and draw in the Russian Federation then draw in the "Stans" that are under direct Russian influence, draw in Belarus which is under a former Communist who is a dictator and proRussian, then draw in the enclaves Russia has taken since 2008 in Georgia and Moldovia and Crimea and look at the pressure they are applying to the remaining Ukraine and the Baltics.

In order to exert military pressure from the breakaway enclave in and on Moldavia the Russian military needs a land route and it is only through the Ukraine that it is possible--BUT from the Crimea it is an easy run into Moldavia.

One is looking at the former Soviet Union all over again and this in the 21st century when the Cold War was suppose to be over.

So in formulating foreign policy just how does one go about it if in fact the American public is totally in the dark?

Do we have a strategy that reflects a clear end goal and what is to be achieved and or we just going to muddle through this over and over.

Putin does have a strategy and it is long term.

This I think is where JMA is coming from.

[brynoch]

Lets look at the common good. Taxation supports the common good, but Americans don't want to pay taxes. We make a joke out of cheating on them. No one will support an obligation of civil duty (one year working for the good of the nation), let alone a draft.

While not wholly relevant to the overall topic, I don't believe this is correct. I see many Americans searching for a cause to support and believe in. Unfortunately the public opportunities offered to them aren't very appealing for several reasons(public service or military) and the private options don't seem to offer a big enough tent to welcome diverse groups to a common goal.

You can see the hunger for it in the initial support for the Tea Party, the Obama presidential campaign, the Occupy movements, support for veterans services, and private aid to domestic and foreign crisis among others.

You can also see the backlash against those institutions which initially attracted that support and then either failed to live up to the initial goals or subverted them.

I think Americans are hungry to do 'something' more than ever, I just don't think there is an appealing leader or organization out there which passes the general sniff test since the joiners have been burnt several times. It also doesn't help that in general Americans are divided into a red tribe blue tribe camp and our current political conversations don't allow acknowledgement of any of the other sides points or the availability of a third view.

[AmericanPride]

One of the main arguments by Russia has been that NATO is on their doorstep and they feel betrayed that has occurred. It has become a Russian mantra since Crimea and it came through in a number of US pundits as well in their remarks on Crimea--that the Crimea is a sphere of influence thing--I guess is one repeats it enough times even disinformation becomes real.

This has been a prominent Russian position on NATO expansion for many years now; I cited a number of pre-Crimea Crisis documents from the Russian Foreign Ministry a few posts earlier. This has been a position either ignored or outright dismissed by Washington. During the 1990s and early 2000s, Russia had to accept the fact of NATO expansion. But that no longer appears to be the case. The chaos of the 1990s is over; Putin's nationalist-realism faction is firmly in control of the Russian state. Washington ignores this threat at it's own peril.

Also our own think tankers and pundits keep stating it is all about Russia needing a "sphere of influence" WHEN in fact it is about two things 1) keeping the Ukrainian street from igniting a similar trend in Moscow AND 2) more importantly is really is about reestablishing the former Soviet Union.

Take a map and draw in the Russian Federation then draw in the "Stans" that are under direct Russian influence, draw in Belarus which is under a former Communist who is a dictator and proRussian, then draw in the enclaves Russia has taken since 2008 in Georgia and Moldovia and Crimea and look at the pressure they are applying to the remaining Ukraine and the Baltics.

I agree with your first point, and preserving one's own political sovereignty seems an inalienable right under international law and norms. Is Washington to be in the business of provoking revolution in large, nuclear armed states? As to your second point, I think this is a tired cliche. First, great powers generally exert significant influence on the countries in their immediate surroundings; is Russia an exception to this practice? Second, all the states in the CIS/CSTO were part of the USSR; which, in turn, were also part of the Russian Empire. The Empire held these territories for many centuries as the world's largest multi-ethnic country. The combined years of these states' independence is probably less than the amount of time they spent as part of this empire. Sure, in politics, hypocrisy and deceit is standard, and frankly, Washington triumphed in the struggle of the Russian empire. But if we dismiss these historical relationships in intellectual discussions, we are only doing ourselves a disservice.

So in formulating foreign policy just how does one go about it if in fact the American public is totally in the dark?

That's been the practice of Washington foreign policy making for years. There are still people who believe Saddam Hussein's Iraq had nuclear weapons.

Do we have a strategy that reflects a clear end goal and what is to be achieved and or we just going to muddle through this over and over.

No - we stumble from one crisis to the next, pushing to maximize short term gains. We have an "end of history" approach to foreign policy making. And Crimea is clearly the rebirth of history.

[OUTLAW 09]

American Pride---my response to your following sentence---"But if we dismiss these historical relationships in intellectual discussions, we are only doing ourselves a disservice."

What we currently have with Russia and the Crimea goes further back than just the Empire and we have I would say since about the late 1980s not talked about something we in international relations use to call "nationalism".

Whole books were written on the subject and hundreds of university/college classes were held on the topic from the 50s through to the early 80s.

"Nationalism" is a strange word and it is not often heard in our intellectual exchanges since the Wall came down--wonder why?

In order to understand currently Putin and his motives one must understand the depth of the belief in the current propaganda/disinformation that is originating from the Russian State/Russian oligarch owned mass media that is flooding over the Russian population 24/7.

Nationalism is an easy thing to turn on but extremely difficult to turn off.

Wikipedia: Russian nationalism is the nationalism that asserts that Russians are a nation and promotes the cultural unity of Russians. Russian nationalism has its roots in the 18th century. It was closely related to Pan-Slavism. There are a number of individuals and organizations in Russia today, consisting of both moderate and radical nationalists.

If one read the exchanges between NATO's Rasmussen and the Russian Ambassador in the OCSE Friday ---the Russian myth and it is a myth of NATO expansion was shot down because in the OCSE documents Russia signed in 1999 it contains a single sentence "allowing" all members of the OCSE to select the block or organization freely they wanted to join ie NATO/EU and yes even rejoin Russia.

So the constant bitching about NATO is just a smoke screen for something else---namely nationalism. By the way Russia, Ukraine, K'stan and Belarus all signed the 1999 OCSE agreements which the Ambassador was reminded of and he agreed that Russia has signed the agreement.

So is “wag the dog” a valid explanation of the Crimea and any future tactics that Putin uses in the reestablishing the old Soviet Union?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...n-ukraine.html

This article---excerpts below--- is extremely interesting to read as it goes to the heart of Russian “nationalism”.

Consider this widely shared Facebook post by a Moscow yuppie named Artem Nekrasov: “If Putin manages to annex Crimea and the southeast of Ukraine peacefully I personally forgive him everything: wild corruption, the lawlessness of officials, lack of any prospects in the economy, disorder in education and journalism and even the common stupefaction of the people....” The post is popular because, as polls show, it reflects the common mood in Russia. Putin’s approval rating is 75 percent since he announced the annexation of Crimea.

Roman Kokorev, a senior researcher in the International Law Department of the Russian Federation government, goes still further. “The next step is Moldova and all Ukraine!!!” he writes on Facebook. He wants all the old territories of the Soviet Union back; he wants Russian military power, once again, to reign supreme. He wants the Baltics and Finland and Poland and “Alaska will be returned,” he writes, “because all these lands are Russian.” (Sarah Palin, watch out.)

As journalist and political scientist Alexander Morozov writes in his widely-read essay “Conservative Revolution: Making Sense of Crimea,” Putin’s logic is no longer tied to those rational considerations of cooperation and economic interdependence on which the West puts so much faith. His is now a “revolutionary” mindset in which he and his followers are ready to sacrifice Western capital, risk having their assets frozen, and rely on “political myth”—a focus on heroism, sacrifice and martyrdom—to generate public support. There is no rational response to this. Those infected by the myth cannot imagine any other possibility for the future but success: “Crimea is ours!”

[Stan]

Outlaw,
Interesting indeed ! Wondering when the rest of us will figure out just how difficult the logistics will be in these three tiny countries with almost no infrastructure. Thus far, nothing has happened (at least not here).

Having worked for both the Swedes and Swiss, it doesn't take long to figure out where their allegiance lies when the chips are down, or, when some "humanitarian op" requires financing to the tune of $5 to 10 grand per person

Much like our current administration, hype it up and beg for cash

Regards, Stan

Interesting ---who is correct ---reports out of the US--yes there are exercises, but no apparent move towards actual invasion or the Scandinavians who say everything is in place with units, equipment and needed operational supplies effective tomorrow?

[Firn]

@stan: There is something in this oldie song, minus the fighting, that reminds me of Putin and the Kremlin's propaganda machine...

@outlaw: Overall I stick to my line I established in the recent week that everything, yes everything coming out of the Kremlin and it's media has to be treated as propaganda and deceptio. I'm pretty sure that soon enough we will hear that Russia will strongly protest against any foreign meddling in his internal affairs in Crimea.

Supporting Ukraine in it's political and economic development and it's integration into the European landscape should IMHO be the long term Western goals, including EU membership, likely with some clever legal framing. A more capable military seems to be sadly also necessary. In the short term, getting strong financial aid, keeping the Russians military and provocateurs out of the rest of the country and getting free and fair elections with a proper change of power should be the biggest goals for Ukraine. It will be a very difficult path to walk on, especially if somebody keeps throwing rocks at you. Then again this somebody might really try to stop you dead.

[OUTLAW 09]

American Pride---in support to the propaganda/disinformation effort to support the Russian "nationalism" are the agitation demos of the proRussians in eastern Ukraine.

If you check this particular photo that was supplied to the German media---you will notice a row of very quiet riot police not responding as they should be to the agitating proRussian crowd.

Then you notice just how many "photographers" are positioned exactly in the right place to photograph "any" "mistreatment" of the proRussians by the Ukrainian riot police.

And this is not "staged" for the Russian media in the motherland?

http://www.tagesspiegel.de/images/bi...1-format14.jpg

[OUTLAW 09]

Notice how the Russians are at every turn trying to get legality for their Crimea move---the last sentence in this Interfax PR was bluntly answered by the German Ministry Foreign already on Saturday as being in another level of reality.

But at least the Russians keep trying in the Stalinist tradition of ignoring what they want and accepting another level of reality to give their message some reality.

"Russia counts on an objective and impartial work of the OSCE international monitors in Ukraine, which will help eliminate ultra-radical trends and achieve national accord, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a commentary posted on its website on Saturday."

"It also said that the mission mandate reflected the new political and legal realities and did not apply to Crimea and Sevastopol, which had become integral parts of Russia."

[JMA]

From Stratfor:

Russia Examines Its Options for Responding to Ukraine

Worth a read.

[davidbfpo]

Two BBC News vignettes from the Crimea. First 'The politics of water in Crimea', a short film report by what appears to be a local reporter and the snippet that a few days ago the sluices were opened to supply the Crimea, the water takes two weeks to arrive:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26683376

Second, 'Five ways Crimea is becoming Russian' which is puzzling:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26679240

I do wonder if we will see a population exit, notably of Ukrainians and maybe the Tatars. Given the assumed inter-marriage of Russian and Ukrainians this will not be easy. How will the new Russian Crimea treat those who retain Ukrainian passports let alone language?

[Firn]

Good catch about the water channel. I'm pretty sure that the Ukrainian government will decide to cut it's subventions on water delivery and will find out that it has to charge higher prices to be able to deliver the services to it's costumers. In the end the NCC seems to be in a deplorable state and in dire need of large investments...

From what I have read there are lots of divisions inside families, young and old, friends and couples across ethnic, political and linguistic borders which seemed hardly relevant a couple of weeks ago. Significant emigration should mostly come from the young and educated, further depressing the private sector and accelerating the demographic trend downwards. Lots of unkowns so far. This will be smart to monitor.

-----------------

Russia's Online-Comment Propaganda Army is an older article in the Atlantic by the Russian author Olga Khazan. The part from the St. Petersburg Times is especially interesting considering the current propaganda offensive and possibly some recent activities at the SWC:

To my question about a technical task—what exactly should be written in the comments—a young guy, a coordinator, told me, briefly and clearly, that they were having busy days at the moment and that yesterday they all wrote in support of [Moscow acting mayor Sergei] Sobyanin, while ‘today we #### on Navalny,’” she wrote on her VKontakte [ed: a Russian social network] page.

According to Lvova, each commenter was to write no less than 100 comments a day, while people in the other room were to write four postings a day, which then went to the other employees whose job was to post them on social networks as widely as possible.

Employees at the company, located at 131 Lakhtinsky Prospekt, were paid 1,180 rubles ($36.50) for a full 8-hour day and received a free lunch, Lvova wrote.

At least that part of the war seems to come rather cheap for the Russians...

[OUTLAW 09]

Firn---the Russians (the Minister President Medwedew) now want to do an international conference on how to secure the future energy and water supplies for the Crimea since 80% of the electricity, 85% of the water and a large amount of gas comes from the Ukraine.

Interfax:
15:06 Russia prepares additional resources in case of power cuts in Crimea - Kozak
14:50 Temirgaliyev: Crimea to stop being dependent on Ukrainian electricity in 45 days

The real focus is to get international respect and legality for the Crimea any way possible--but still it is interesting the center of gravity seems to have hit the Russians as it seems they did not do their globalization studies before moving in. But again their propaganda is saying they can replace the electricity in 45 days so why the need of an international conference?

They are now talking about subsidizing airline tickets to the Crimea probably trying to get Russian tourists to replace the 1M Ukrainian tourists per year---yet another cost for supporting the enclave.

"Der russische Ministerprsident Dmitri Medwedew fordert internationale Verhandlungen, um die Energie- und Wasserversorgung der Krim sicherzustellen. "Wir muessen den besten Weg fuer die Energieversorgnung auf der Halbinsel finden", forderte der Ministerprsident. Die Krim ist bislang von Lieferungen aus der Ukraine abhaengig. Sie erhalte bislang rund 80 Prozent des Stroms, 85 Prozent des Wassers und groe Mengen an Gas aus der Ukraine, sagte Medwedew."

[Firn]

Firn---the Russians (the Minister President Medwedew) now want to do an international conference on how to secure the future energy and water supplies for the Crimea since 80% of the electricity, 85% of the water and a large amount of gas comes from the Ukraine.

Interfax:
15:06 Russia prepares additional resources in case of power cuts in Crimea - Kozak
14:50 Temirgaliyev: Crimea to stop being dependent on Ukrainian electricity in 45 days

The real focus is to get international respect and legality for the Crimea any way possible--but still it is interesting the center of gravity seems to have hit the Russians as it seems they did not do their globalization studies before moving in. But again their propaganda is saying they can replace the electricity in 45 days so why the need of an international conference?

They are now talking about subsidizing airline tickets to the Crimea probably trying to get Russian tourists to replace the 1M Ukrainian tourists per year---yet another cost for supporting the enclave.

It really fits increasingly nicely together with earlier reports about Putin and his innerst circle initiating the whole invasion without getting little information from non-ex-KGB folk.

Last time I checked the Crimea had between 5-6 million tourists per year, roughly 70% of those from Ukraine and only 25% from Russia. So we are talking about 3,5-4 million Ukrainian tourists which have to be replaced, not one. Then again if the Russian leadership has said otherwise, it must be true...

We will see how much of those will stay away and how much the Russian money and maybe patriotism brings in as a replacment in the short and long run.

[OUTLAW 09]

Who says the Putin doctrine of annexing territory based on Russian ethnicity/language/was not opening a can of worms in a nice funny comical way.

From the Moscow Times today:

Russia's annexation of Crimea following a referendum has prompted calls from such distant places as Alaska and the Gaza Strip to hold votes on their own absorption by Russia.

A petition calling for Alaska to secede from the U.S. and join Russia gathered more than 12,000 signatures on the White House website by early Monday morning, just a few days after it was posted by an unidentified local resident.

Entitled "Alaska back to Russia," the petition cites the travels of 18th-century Russian explorers to Alaska, which was a Russian colony until the U.S. bought it in 1867 for a mere $7.2 million, or $120 million adjusted for inflation. The petition must attract 100,000 signatures by April 20 to be reviewed by President Barack Obama's administration.

In the Middle East, the Russian-language version of a Palestinian website run by Hamas said that Russian speakers in the Gaza Strip planned to hold a referendum on their territory join Russia, though no confirmation by Hamas leaders of any such plans were reported.

An activist supposedly involved in the referendum movement, and identified only by her initial "N," cited Moscow's statements about its readiness to protect Russian citizens in any part of the world, Palestine-info.ru website reported.

Joining Russia would provide Gaza with "modern weapons — even nuclear ones cannot be ruled out," the woman was quoted as saying.

Palestine-info said the number of Russian citizens living in Gaza is about 50,000, most of them Russian women who married Palestinian men, though Voice of Russia cited Russian media reports as saying that the actual number was less than 400 people.

[Stan]

Outlaw,

Great posts !

Would however appreciate the links vs a bit of German text. Some of us speak German and the rest can google it. But, providing the links allows us all to see the direction of the articles.

Germany is a key player herein, but the reader also needs to be aware of Germany's role and the spin that is put on these media articles.

Kind of where you come in !

Thanks, Stan

"Der russische Ministerprsident Dmitri Medwedew fordert internationale Verhandlungen, um die Energie- und Wasserversorgung der Krim sicherzustellen. "Wir muessen den besten Weg fuer die Energieversorgnung auf der Halbinsel finden", forderte der Ministerprsident. Die Krim ist bislang von Lieferungen aus der Ukraine abhaengig. Sie erhalte bislang rund 80 Prozent des Stroms, 85 Prozent des Wassers und groe Mengen an Gas aus der Ukraine, sagte Medwedew."

[Firn]

The costs are secondary, says the German MoF Wolfgang Schaeuble.

"Hier geht es darum, dass die internationale Rechtsordnung eingehalten werden muss", sagte der CDU-Politiker am Sonntagabend im ZDF. Mit Blick auf die Sanktionen gegen Russland und Hilfen fr die Ukraine fuegte er hinzu: "Ob uns das wirtschaftlich und finanziell etwas kostet, ist zweitrangig."

He is clearly talking about financial and economic costs, which are moved backwards by the importance of upholding international law. Personally I fear that the although everybody is talking about quick help the IMF process could be too slow and too demanding in the short run. There have to be parallel processes, with some money becoming available for Ukraine right now, without any strings. But I wrote about that weeks ago.

[Firn]

Rosen Plevneliev, the Bulgarian president in an Austrian interview. He speaks German, a lot about energy btw.

[Stan]

Pandora's box is opened ?

"We are demanding a referendum on returning Yuzovka to its original bosom — Great Britain!" it said.

The local Donbass.ua news website reported that more than 7,000 people had supported the proposal by Sunday, with an online poll showing about 61 percent of respondents favored accession to Britain, and another 16 percent favored "broad regional autonomy" with English as an official language.

[OUTLAW 09]

Firn---the German finance Minister indicated today that he will support the Ukraine regardless of the cost to the Germany economy---he feels that is it extremely important to do so.