Huge pro-EU rally grips Ukraine

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

I think the story here is simpler and more complex at the same time.

When the cold war has ended the West has assumed that:
- the looser would behave as a looser should (as it was assumed that "Russia" lost the cold war).
- that Russia would soon follow the Western rules of the game and would be succeptable to the Western mentality.
- would quitely grow and would never fully recover.

This is not what happened. The reasons for this are many, the obvious ones are that Russia has viewed the results of the cold war differently and that Russia has a very different, eastern christian mentality/cultural heritage. If you are interested in further reading you can use this article:
http://pozneronline.ru/2014/03/7200/
It is writen by an independent journalist and was originally published in the opposition's media outlet (the Echo of Moscow radiostation).

So many wrong misassumptions were made when the cold war ended.

That the world would be safer in general.

That the end of history had come (Fukuyama).

That socialism would be dead. - It is more openly rampaging throughout Europe than ever before, turning the EU states into states mdoelled after sovjet example.

That democracy would spread everywhere now and that it would be the beginning of an American century. - Democracy is in decline everywhere, eroding in the west, pushed back by autocracy and religious dogmatism.

That Russia would become America's poodle.

That China would endlessly play by the dollar rules and only be our export market, not our rival dictating the rules.

That the "tectonic" inner tensions of this entity that got to huge parts artificially created on the map named Ukraine could be iognored and would ease all by themselves. In the early 90s I was still stuyind and a young man not knopwing too much. But even then already I got into arguments with other students when I said that this strange birth-thing hardly could last for longer time in the form it then had.

In general, it was a shift from less to more complexity and from more stability to less stability, and from less to greater vulnerability.

=======

Random find: a German interview with British historian Catherine Merridale about the symbolic meaning, architecture, destructions and re-buildings and theatre-function of the Kremlin. I found it interesting.

http://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/pu...638084.html?p=

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

I don't think that NATO would escalate the conflict by participating in it openly.

But they will and probably already do in secrecy deliver weapons and intel information. At least countries like Britain and the US, some others as well maybe, Poland for example. The hea dof the CIA was in Kiewv earlier this year - I think it was short before there show turned really hot on the Maidan.

[ikalugin]

Well NATO countries (namely Hungary) already do sell weapons to the Ukraine. However this is very different from sending active units to participate in the actual war.

[Jimbuna]

Angela seems to give the impression Germany are a major player in Europe (certainly economically) but I'm wondering what she can or will do of a military nature, after all, the French are still going to supply those two warships to Russia.

[ikalugin]

Well about half of our naval establishment doesn't see any need in those overpriced militarised civilian ferries :trollface:

In general most people doubt the need of Russian navy in such ships, especially to the apparently overinflated price we have to pay for them.

[Jimbuna]

Quality always comes at a price...or so they tell me.

[ikalugin]

Apparently when compared to its piers the Mistral class does not offer much, while costing more.

[Skybird]

Merkel has a very strong socialist family background, her father was socialist by conviction, and a Protestant priest who brought his family from Westgermany back into the GDR. She made her vcareer in the FDJ up to chief swcecretary for propaganda, responsible for universities and the Academy of Science. So, by socialisation is quite friendly towards Russia. However she also is a merciless opportunist and master of empty, meaningless phrases, she makes plenty of words by which she does say nothing - but that with determination. She learned the business of propaganda from scratch, you see.

Even she seems to slightly shift against Putin now, and now demands tougher snacitons althoiugh no other country in the world will pay a tougher financial - and social - price for them, than Germany. Even more, with Germany being expected to pay for this Euro disaster as well, and the EU mulling a European unemployment insurance for which again the Germans have to pay, eroding one important business pillar of Germany's already stuttering economy could come at even greater costs to all Europe. Not to mention that Germany still depends on Russian gas, to a significant degree.

As far as Russia is conerned, the longer the sancions last, the more antipathy the sanctions will cause in ordinary Russian people, playing into Putin's hands again. Also, improvised deals with China, Belarus, Turkey and others that currently replace import losses from EU countries, could turn into solid and unlimitedly settled business arrangements so that if there will ever be a return possible to the former diplomatic status between Russia and the EU, Russia will see no need at all to return to its contract arrangements with EU suppliers.

As far as I can analyse it all, I think the relations between East and West have crossed the point of no return. The peaceful post-cold-war order of the world in the Northern hemisphere, is history. And Russia is doing a dangeorus balance between imperial posturing, trying to establish a post-dollar regime together with china, and possibly getting trapped in its own collapsing fiscal system. The West mulls Russia's exclusion from the SWIFT system.

The war already is lost for Kiev, NATO officials gets quoted with.

In the end, the problems today are just the consequence of the folly done over two decades ago. The Ukraine never should have been founded as a state with borders like these. The same mistake - drawing borders on maps randomly and in ignorrance of cultural, historic and ethnic realities on the ground (forcing together what doe snot match, ripping apart what belongs together) - has been made in the ME as well, repeatedly. And nothing than conflicts have come from that. That essential geopolitical interests of a major global power sitting in that region were thought of that one could simply ignore them, did not make it better.

And Washington should have been overruled by European alliance members regarding pushing NATO eastward.

For all these mistakes, now the bill gets presented.

[Oberon]

Ah, but the age old question is quality vs quantity. After all...


Quality


Quantity

(Although to be honest, that's a gross oversimplification as the T-34 was a high quality tank of its own, however the design and engineering was geared more towards quantity than quality, which was where Germany came late into the fight, trying to switch over to quantity in production of the Panther but too little too late)

That being said, those helicopter carriers will be useful for power projection in the Arctic region which is probably what they are intended for, otherwise most of Russias sphere of influence is within land locked regions.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Merkel has a very strong socialist family background, her father was socialist by conviction, and a Protestant priest who brought his family from Westgermany back into the GDR. She made her vcareer in the FDJ up to chief swcecretary for propaganda, responsible for universities and the Academy of Science. So, by socialisation is quite friendly towards Russia. However she also is a merciless opportunist and master of empty, meaningless phrases, she makes plenty of words by which she does say nothing - but that with determination. She learned the business of propaganda from scratch, you see.

Clearly Germany needs the return of the socialist king:

Even she seems to slightly shift against Putin now, and now demands tougher snacitons althoiugh no other country in the world will pay a tougher financial - and social - price for them, than Germany. Even more, with Germany being expected to pay for this Euro disaster as well, and the EU mulling a European unemployment insurance for which again the Germans have to pay, eroding one important business pillar of Germany's already stuttering economy could come at even greater costs to all Europe. Not to mention that Germany still depends on Russian gas, to a significant degree.

As is often said, one has to look at where the money goes. Germany is the unofficial head of the EU, and if one was to look at the EUs top export market, one would find that 16.6% of EU exports go to the US for a trade balance of E91,998m, out of all the nations trading with the EU, the US has the biggest trade share. So it's natural that the EU will do what it can to keep that. The import difference between Russia and the US is 1.3%, so if the US makes up that import difference then the EU will be only to glad to follow the Washington line.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/doc...doc_122530.pdf

Really, Europe will in the near future become a tug of war between Russia and America as each vye for spherical control, Russia has started off on the back foot, but it won't give up just yet, especially where its former non-NATO partners are concerned (Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus).

As far as Russia is conerned, the longer the sancions last, the more antipathy the sanctions will cause in ordinary Russian people, playing into Putin's hands again. Also, improvised deals with China, Belarus, Turkey and others that currently replace import losses from EU countries, could turn into solid and unlimitedly settled business arrangements so that if there will ever be a return possible to the former diplomatic status between Russia and the EU, Russia will see no need at all to return to its contract arrangements with EU suppliers.

China really is the ultimate winner here, it's going to see increased trade from both Russia and the EU as each seek to avoid the other, heck I wouldn't be surprised to see sanction defying dodges being used where trade from Russia is routed through China to the EU.
Basically in the long run it'll just result in the current entrenched positions being dug deeper.

As far as I can analyse it all, I think the relations between East and West have crossed the point of no return. The peaceful post-cold-war order of the world in the Northern hemisphere, is history. And Russia is doing a dangeorus balance between imperial posturing, trying to establish a post-dollar regime together with china, and possibly getting trapped in its own collapsing fiscal system. The West mulls Russia's exclusion from the SWIFT system.

Sadly I think you're correct, there was a chance for detente but we were too busy congratulating ourselves in defeating the Soviets that we missed it. While I can understand the wish of nations such as Poland to enter NATO in order to escape any potential re-establishment of the Warsaw Pact in the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet Union, I can also clearly see how this would have been seen as a great encroachment of the west towards Russias borders, and a threat to Moscow. That stupid bloody ABM radar system of Bush II really didn't help matters much either. Obama tried to reverse the damage of that, but it was just too little, too late.

The war already is lost for Kiev, NATO officials gets quoted with.

We'll see what winter brings, but it is not looking good for Kiev, that much I think we can agree on.

In the end, the problems today are just the consequence of the folly done over two decades ago. The Ukraine never should have been founded as a state with borders like these. The same mistake - drawing borders on maps randomly and in ignorrance of cultural, historic and ethnic realities on the ground (forcing together what doe snot match, ripping apart what belongs together) - has been made in the ME as well, repeatedly. And nothing than conflicts have come from that. That essential geopolitical interests of a major global power sitting in that region were thought of that one could simply ignore them, did not make it better.

I agree and disagree, I mean taking away land from the Ukrainian SSR would not have ended well for the weakened Soviet Union in 1990, especially since it wanted to get its nuclear weapons back. So it was a bit of a no-win scenario, the USSR either had to give the whole of the Ukrainian SSR to the independent government or risk a nuclear armed anti-Moscow state on its doorstep. Political power flows from the barrel of a gun as Mao said, and there's not much bigger a gun than a nuclear explosive.

And Washington should have been overruled by European alliance members regarding pushing NATO eastward.

At the very least the eastern NATO members should have been allowed in as partnership members with a view to making them full members if Russia had decided to re-engage Warsaw Pact mode. Honestly you can't deny that the shadow of events like the Prague Spring, and Hungarian uprising did not still hang over Eastern Europe when the wall fell. I can understand the desire of Eastern Europe to seek protection against a potential return of the Soviet Union, but equally, ignoring Russias spheres of influence was only ever going to result in an annoyed Russia. We made hay while the sun shined, but now its becoming overcast again.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

... but I'm wondering what she can or will do of a military nature, after all, the French are still going to supply those two warships to Russia.

For all the french cars i owned or drove, we should not fear. There is some certain french hadware that will break down in any decisive moment.

[Skybird]

Oberon, the Americans promised the Russians that NATO would not be moved eastward and closer to their borders, and that the former Sovjet satellite states would remain somewhat neutral. And the Russians, for a moment, were naive enough to believe that. That promsie were the price they demanded for a peaceful transfering of things into the post cold war order. Maybe they could have not prevented it anyway - but they would have tried to set up troubles and fights.

Later, after Washington had managed to move NATO into these places nevertheless, although with kind of demilitarized rules, they arrogantly snubbed the Russians and told them: "What do you want? Have you any signed treaty on that we would not move NATO in there? No, you haven't. So shut t.f. up, will ya, stupid Ivan."

And this arrogant reaction maybe pissed the Russians even more than the fact that NATO had been moved into these countries, because it illustrated even more to them that they were not even taken serious enough anymore as that one would see the need to at least keep the appearance (=den Anschein wahren), when one already was cheating them. For a country with a traditionally imperial self-understanding of being a powerful cultural sphere in itself, this was even greater a humiliation. Many in the military and political establishment took that extremely queer.

Winning a standoff, a rivalry, a conflict, is one thing. But then starting to mock and humiliating the losing side, is something different. And it boils hostile emotions, necessarily, it can spoil - and in this case has spoiled - the fruits of success, evben more swince it was not the onyl way where America ruthlessly demonstrated to Russia that it does not mean to take care for Russian'S views anymore. Russia was "defeated", wasn't it, and it was expected to behave like a loser. America is extremely incompetent in seeing things from the other's POV, from a non-American POV in general. "Our way or no way" seems to have become it's motto. After all, they even declared this the American century, didn't they. Well, we'll see. I have serious doubts.

[Mittelwaechter]

FYI - http://consortiumnews.com/2014/09/01...nvasion-intel/

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

FYI - http://consortiumnews.com/2014/09/01...nvasion-intel/

"MEMORANDUM FOR: Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Ukraine and NATO
We the undersigned are long-time veterans of U.S. intelligence. We take the unusual step of writing this open letter to you to ensure that you have an opportunity to be briefed on our views prior to the NATO summit on Sept. 4-5.
You need to know, for example, that accusations of a major Russian “invasion” of Ukraine appear not to be supported by reliable intelligence. Rather, the “intelligence” seems to be of the same dubious, politically “fixed” kind used 12 years ago to “justify” the U.S.-led attack on Iraq
[...]"

Priceless



^^ @Skybird, well this kind of prosa does not cause any response here, does it ?
We the NATO are the good, that's all you need to know.
Otherwise you are a communist non-patriot !!

[ikalugin]

On Russo-Sino trade relations. As far as I am aware in relation to high tech products we already have shifted to China. This was the truly signifiant part of that "oil" deal, not the energy(though that was very important ofcourse) but sighning a great deal of other contracts. Those deals are not makeshift or in any other way temporary, they are there to stay, as any sensible organisation cannot deal with the potential risks offered by the politisation of free trade in critical goods and services. However this is all I can say about this, I hope other members of this forum would understand.

Indeed I (and the article I have linked above) do agree with Oberon on the post Cold War settlement. What I think was done wrong with recent crisis was the rapid and decisive push by the Western parties during the Maidan crisis (namely it's radicalisation).

The West should have understood that Ukraine (and number of other ex Soviet states) are critical to Russian interest and enroachment there would be met with utmost resistance. I guess it was the last call, during which the last illusions of Cold War results (ie that Russia would do as told) have failed.

That said, depending on the results of negotiation, I think it is possible to go back to the situation closer to the pre Maidan one, ie should Ukraine be quaranteed to be military neutral and politically/economically friendly (within a reason) it could keep most of it's territories with exception of Crimea and Donetsk/Lugansk areas.

On the dissolution of the USSR - this was (in part) due to the how elites of the Soviet Republics felt at the time. Thus it was not really possible to split the existing Republics in any way, with exception maybe to the Autonomous Republics, which one could negotiate about. Another such possible exception were the Cities of Union Importance (such as Sevastopol).