1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is Russia's rash move into the Crimea a sign that...

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Golf1.6, Mar 8, 2014.

  1. Golf1.6

    Hitman

    Joined: Oct 5, 2012

    Posts: 622

    ..it knows it's lost Ukraine and therefore undertaking damage limitation while it can so if Ukraine sides with the EU, it can't take Crimea with it.

    Most likely scenario is that Crimea will decide to become part of Russia due to its large ethnic Russian population.

    The tartars aren't big enough to vote the other way and yet again will be persecuted by the Russians (they were displaced to central Asia by stalin during communism).

    Worse still, Russia has probably alienated Ukrainians who were on the fence regarding Russia. This fuels the pro Euro camp that Russia is just a regional bully who invades neighbouring countries therefore Ukraine should seek to join the EU and NATO so it can get protection from the allies.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2014
  2. RedvGreen

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 2, 2009

    Posts: 3,504

    Location: Midlands

    Frankly, my knowledge on the subject is only what wikipedia and the BBC has supplied, however from this I have been drawn to the conclusion that Crimea and approximately 50% of Ukraine are Russian, and/or are Pro-Russia. This is roughly the right-hand side of the country. The left hand side of the country is roughly Ukrainian and Tartar.

    The Tartar held a population majority until Stalin forcibly removed them from the country under unproved allegations that they were Axis-sympathisers; this thereby allowed Russia to repopulate the depleted country with their kin.

    I've found the situation to be fairly knife-edge - China has some protectorate obligations to the Ukraine too, however they are not currently getting involved. Instead, it is believed that the situation is as follows:

    - Russia have taken over Crimea, and will not withdraw as it believes that the Russian populace are 'at risk' from anti-Russian militia - the verysame who ousted the previous leader. Also, it is keen to stress that it has not supplied Russian troops (i.e. crossed the territorial border) to Crimea - the ones there are inferred to be citizens at the very least.

    - Russia have used the ousting of the leader to justify taking back at the very least, Crimea.

    - NATO and EU believe that the former leader was not fairly elected, and that the public whom he represented decided against him, so his removal was fair and just. Hence any Russian involvement is unsupported.

    - Also, Russia, UK and USA signed a protectorate memorandum (1994 Budapest memorandum) which would provide protection to Ukraine in the event of a threat to it's borders. I find it a bit vague, as it talks primarily of nuclear threat, but in this instance, the threat is actually from one of the protectorates who have seemingly reneged and twisted their law and legal protectorate obligation.

    - EU and NATO do not want another war, even if just localised to Crimea (again) or Ukraine.

    - Russia supplies a lot of natural resources to EU, in particularly the hugely wealthy Germany (25% of it's gas supplies end up there).

    - Gas pipelines run through the Ukraine.

    - China have an agreement to protect the Ukraine, and are on very good terms with Russia.

    - If Russia advance (further?) into Crimea or Ukraine, and then NATO and EU defend, China could step in, and that would be in favour of the Russian side of the conflict.

    - Biggest concern is that Russia is huge, powerful and greedy. And has Nuclear warheads. NOBODY wants any Nuclear readiness, as that will get ridiculous very quickly, and would probably lead to mutually assured destruction, pretty much wiping out humanity.

    - The knife-edge is that all it takes is for one round to be discharged and Russian/Ukrainian troops will take that as an act of hostility. Similarly the same with warheads. It might not even be a Russian/Ukrainian or anyone involved in the conflict who ignites the 'trigger' bullet/warhead.
     
  3. Von Smallhausen

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Aug 1, 2004

    Posts: 12,561

    Location: In The Night Garden.

    I have a feeling that Putin, before he came to power, hated the fact that the old USSR fell from power and collapsed and its mighty war machine and influence with it.

    Now that he is in power, I think he likes to flex Russia's muscles and show the world that Russian power is on the up. I might be way off but Putin seems to like his macho image.
     
  4. SPG

    Soldato

    Joined: Jul 28, 2010

    Posts: 5,286

    Who is behind Putin though, we hear nothing of his internal support are they all ex KGB generals, are there moderates waiting for him to fall.

    What`s worrying is Russian military capability is no where near the level of western Europe, we know how well Stalin treated his people (imo worse than Hitler) are they more likely to use a Nuke when things dont go there way.

    The only card the West has is to let them have the Crimera, and get the rest into some form of the EU ASAP, then over a period of time 20-30 years maybe more, slowly chip away with people from the the new EU states and bordering regions getting better lifestyles, better health care and general better standard of living. Russians will see this and want some of that pie and effect changes internally. (the cold war all over again more or less, with very little trade between the two)

    Looks like Fracking is coming to the UK... now there is a conspiracy.
     
  5. Vern1961

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 29, 2007

    Posts: 2,635

    Location: Swindon UK

    Does Ukraine, or for that matter any of the former Soviet Baltic states (who must be watching this closely) have nuclear weapon capability or just Russia? If the answer is "no", then unless NATO or the US intervened directly militarily (unlikely given no one is even boycotting the Sochi Para-Olympics), hopefully we are safe from mushroom clouds rising over Fairford and Brize Norton...
     
  6. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 18,688

    Uhh no its always been clear who's behind Mr Putin, the Russian mob.
     
  7. Dev2

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 5, 2006

    Posts: 959

    Location: Dublin

    I don't think this figure is accurate outside of Crimea. I believe it's approximately 20% pro Russian - depending on whether you mean ethnicity, language or voting history.
     
  8. ThestigGT999

    Soldato

    Joined: Aug 30, 2009

    Posts: 7,459

    Location: one nation under sony

  9. scorza

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 22, 2004

    Posts: 26,685

    Location: Deep England

    What's your point? That because it's possible to hold a free and fair referendum and to respect the outcome that we should also respect a referendum that is neither free or fair?
     
  10. Stretch

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 14, 2004

    Posts: 11,283

    Location: Cambridge

    You can't be serious?

    This is the most useful contribution from your link.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2014
  11. Xordium

    Capodecina

    Joined: Apr 8, 2009

    Posts: 12,702

    Russia doesn't give a stuff about the Crimea it does however give a stuff about Sevastapol.
     
  12. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    What Russia does give a stuff about, and always has, is Ukraine. Crimea is simply a push to repatriate Ukraine into the Russian Federation. I suspect that Putin, like many Russian leaders before him throughout history see Kiev as the gateway to Russia Proper.
     
  13. The Running Man

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 33,202

    Location: block 16, cell 12

    But why,? Lebenraum? The russians don't exactly have a history for caring for thw Ukranian people. So what's so special about the land the Ukrainians live on?
     
  14. Superficial

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 29, 2002

    Posts: 3,933

    Location: London

    It might be Ukraine but, in my view, the real prize is the prospect of Oil and Gas off the Crimean peninsula. Exxon Mobil were in advanced talks with the Ukraine and have now backed off.

    Mark My words Gazprom will be in there like a shot: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/13/ukraine-crisis-speaker-gazprom-idUSL6N0MA1AN20140313

    All this talk of Russian power, much of the time, does not really take into account the facts about Russia. Russia has 69% of its export dependent on fossil fuels which make up between 35 - 40% of it's tax intake.....and no matter how many Crimean or arctic land grabs take place Russia's economy is going to take nose dive in the next quarter century as the newer fields yield less than the drier ones in Siberia - and Putin knows it. Even the Good new fields don't make enough profit for Russia to rely on: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2012/10/03/is-russia-ready-for-life-after-oil/

    When you understand this you understand why Putin is, well, Putin. Desperation.

    Putin can do no wrong in Russia and no amount of Pussy Riot protests will do much to change it. Putin has given the people of Russia something more than they have EVER had - Shades of Western wealth ALL of which has been built on the tax money raised from his consolidation of oil rights. Christ if I were Russian even I would love him possibly.

    There is a problem though, Putin is out of ideas - oil and gas is all he knows, He's a one trick pony that does not really understand how to diversify Russia's economy without relinquishing some measure of control.

    the west does not need to beat Russia - it just needs to wait it out.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2014
  15. badcompany

    Soldato

    Joined: May 12, 2004

    Posts: 7,020

    Location: England

    Oh yes text book ain't it.
     
  16. ubersonic

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 26, 2009

    Posts: 20,434

    The west were given the option of sending observers to monitor the referendum, the Crimean government actually requested it, the west refused and then cried it was being done wrong before the first vote was cast, quite sad.

    For the majority of the people in Crimea this is something they have desperately wanted since the Ukraine took over the region from Russia in 1991, and the coup of a western backed anti-Russian (anti-Crimean) government in Kiev has just intensified this.
     
  17. do_ron_ron

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 23, 2002

    Posts: 8,645

    I think there are still too many Cold War warriors in America. The Cold War is not that distant and a lot of politicians on both sides are still in power. Ex Soviet block countries, Poland etc. now have American missile sites. Russia is probably very worried about having another country around its borders brought into the EU/US/NATO fold especially having their main Black Sea fleet there.

    One of the original main points of the protest was the corruption of the oligarchs. This seems to have been ignored as the protest moved to a EU/US vs Russia angle. The new Govt. appointed two oligarchs as Governors of regions. Plus ca change.
     
  18. James J

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 4, 2002

    Posts: 14,499

    Location: Bristol

    Russia just wants to protect its naval fleet, which has a main base in crimea, whilst the country goes through turmoil. From a national security threat level, its massive. USA, UK and any other country that values its hundreds of millions of pouinds worth of military hardware would have done the same thing as Russia in a heart beat. I honestly don't see whats wrong with doing it.
     
  19. Nefarious

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Aug 1, 2003

    Posts: 1,039

    The difference between the Crimean referendum and others, lets use Scotland as an example, is that the Crimea is part of the Ukraine and they didn't sanction the referendum. Scotland had to ask permission from the UK central parliament to have such a referendum, it was only when they agreed that it moved ahead. To put it another way, Lancashire county council can't just decide to leave the UK and give itself to Denmark.

    'IF' the Ukrainian government had agreed to recognise the referendum then this would be a different argument.... but they didn't.... so it's not.
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2014
  20. regulus

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Aug 18, 2006

    Posts: 9,640

    Location: Wellington, NZ

    So the wish of 97% of the people of Crimea should be ignored?

    The West appearing very clueless right now. Wonder what the next move would be.