Looks like what used to be called a 'revolutionary situation' in Ukraine. The streets in the capital and elsewhere are controlled by armed groups, spontaneous peasant and worker sort of soviets. Meanwhile efforts are being made to establish a viable constitution, and assorted politicians are struggling in a crazed scrum for supremacy in parliament and some sort of proper access to the groups who hold the streets. The Former president has fled to his heartland and says he's still in power, there's an acting chap, and there's mrs Tymoshenko the rightist rival, fatter after her two years in the slammer and now being shouted down by her own supporters.
Apart from her there are said to be awful fascist and anti-semitic politicos hoping to be heard. But the real nationalist groundswell, the one in the streets, seems quite left-wing. Ukraine has been here before. But it's enough to scare the bejasus out of a soppy Western bien-pensant like you or me, no offence.
|
>> and there's mrs Tymoshenko the
>> rightist rival, fatter after her two years in the slammer and now being shouted down
>> by her own supporters.
Well respected reporter on BBC news on Saturday (whose name I can't remember) said she was basically incompetent and corrupt, so probably not a good replacement!
|
|
It is Russias back yard, if things get too far out of line they will send in the tanks and shut off the gas and money. No doubt our politicians will want to posture and spout hot air but be totally powerless.
|
|
As far as I can tell from reports, it might be one country, but there are two basic groups of people in it. I suspect the new situation won't last for long and the country could well spit.
|
ON is right, Ukraine - 'Borderland' - is more Russia's back yard than anyone else's, and the US and Europe are being provocative. Let's hope the silly bossy carphounds restrict themselves to sabre rattling. Even that is potentially dangerous.
Russia hasn't 'moved troops' into Ukraine. It's just reinforced the military it had there already.
|
>>Russia hasn't 'moved troops' into Ukraine. It's just reinforced the military it had there already<<
You'd make a 'good' politician.
|
|
"Military Advisors" would be the PC term.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Sun 2 Mar 14 at 10:48
|
|
Security Squads I believe is the current term.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 2 Mar 14 at 10:59
|
>> Security Squads I believe is the current term.
Nah. They're different.
|
|
Well it's hard to keep up with all the countries fronting for gangs and gangs fronting for countries etc.
|
>> hard to keep up with all the countries fronting for gangs and gangs fronting for countries etc.
Yeah, it really is sometimes. I certainly get it wrong quite often. I have in this case.
|
A colleague of mine has friends in Russia, and says the reporting of events in Russia makes it appear there will be a "small regional war" next week.
Whatever that means.
|
|
Russia's reaction to the Ukraine has a certain similarity to a past German leaders case for getting lebensraum in Czechoslovakia.
|
>> Russia's reaction to the Ukraine has a certain similarity to a past German leaders case
>> for getting lebensraum in Czechoslovakia.
The whole area's a melting pot of ethnicity/nationality plus Russia was already in area under post USSR arrangements.
|
The news this afto during the footie's half time break said Willy Hague was on his way to Kiev.
Well, that should sort things out then ! Why can't we keep our cherry out for once ?
HO
|
>>
>> The news this afto during the footie's half time break said Willy Hague was on
>> his way to Kiev.
>>
>> Well, that should sort things out then ! Why can't we keep our cherry out
>> for once ?
>>
>> HO
>>
Perhaps we're worried about escalation? The rest of the former Soviet Block are not the most stable of places.
|
>>
>> The news this afto during the footie's half time break said Willy Hague was on
>> his way to Kiev.
>>
>> Well, that should sort things out then ! Why can't we keep our cherry out
>> for once ?
>>
>> HO
>>
We popped our name to this, I would imagine that's why the FS has gone.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
|
>> Why can't we keep our cherry out for once ?
'Cherry' Horatio? I'm a bit puzzled. Could it be Mancunian alcoholic slang for 'nose', I wonder? Or could it be a slanderous reference to the Home Secretary's imagined lack of sexual experience?
|
The former....my dear Lud !
HO
|
AC, with respect I haven't a clue what a ''soppy Westen bien pensant'' is. Nor being scared the bejjus by it. Frankly I don't give a stuff.
It doesn't affect me walking my dog in the Dales, or the price of beer or sirloin, or my job, so why all the headlines? I'm quite happy to be a parochial peasant. Personally I think all our elected politicos should keep their muzzles out.
|
>> Frankly I don't give a stuff.
You aren't alone legacy. But I didn't mean it should scare the bejasus out of soppy western bienpensants like you or me happening far off in Ukraine. I meant it would scare the bejasus out of us it if it happened where we lived, dig?
Sorry to seem so imprecise. But please don't try to explain that it wouldn't be likely to happen here, or that you wouldn't care if it did. The first is crashingly obvious and the second would be a lie.
|
|
Totally agree AC. I am not so parochially narrow minded that I only care about what happens within a ten mile radius of where I live, and should I live in that part of the world my kecks would be well and truly twisted by now! Nobody needs another conflict. The world has sufficient at the moment.
|
Everyone is talking as if the Ukraine has a long and reputable history as a free democratic country long aligned to ancient European liberal concepts.
But it doesn't. It's had a chequered history, mostly as virtually part of Russia. Kiev WAS Russia once long ago. They were until recently a communist republic nominally independent but in fact part of the USSR.
This is Russia's sphere of influence and we are mad to try and get involved.
Think Finland. It took decades of very cautiously edging away from Russia before they finally were able to come out and join the West
Of course it's wrong to invade another country, but that's what the Russians do and always have done when they feel encircled. They are realists.
|
Western Ukrainians often supported Hitler when invaded. They made up several regiments fighting the Russians. ( SS Galician division for a start)
See: www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4413813,00.html
Hence the animosities...
|
>> Western Ukrainians often supported Hitler when invaded. They made up several regiments fighting the Russians.
>> ( SS Galician division for a start)
So did the English, and the Irish, and the French.
|
>>
>> So did the English, and the Irish, and the French.
>>
I think we'll be ok, no russian groups that need 'saving' you see.
|
>> So did the English, and the Irish, and the French.
Similar cause I guess, better Adolf than Joe. Bit more immediate in Ukraine though.
|
>> that's what the Russians do and
>> always have done when they feel encircled. They are realists.
>>
This is an excellent point, and one often missed in the West. We saw the USSR (and now Russia) as a massive, sprawling empire able and willing to strike out in any direction globally, a huge threat in other words. The USSR saw themselves as encircled, surrounded by the rest of the hostile world, and therefore in need of an, erm, "positive", defence policy.
Anyone interested in a bit of Soviet era fiction (written by a Soviet defector one out in the West) which helps describe this feeling of being encircled by "rings of hostility" would enjoy "Moscow 2042" by Vladimir Voinovich. A bit of a silly time-travel novel, but quite amusing and quite revealing into the Soviet mindest at the same time. A mindset which is still evident in Russian politik. I'm actually surprised they let the Baltics go EU-side so quickly, but then again shortly after the end of the USSR and under Yeltsin, they were hardly in the strongest position. Putin has changed all that.
|
>> >> I'm actually surprised they let the Baltics
>> go EU-side so quickly, but then again shortly after the end of the USSR and
>> under Yeltsin, they were hardly in the strongest position. Putin has changed all that.
>>
That's been a recuring theme in Russia's relations with the west for centuries, from the days of the Teutonic Knights, through wars with Mongols, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, Germany, etc.
When they are weak they yield territories, when strong they grab them back again. They view history through a very long perspective.
The west on the other hand has a 10-year perspective. In the inter-war period we encouraged the creation of a whole ring of semi-sustainable states, taking advantage of the collapse of the Russian Empire (and others). Poland expanded to a ludicrous extent, and all the middle-European states from Finland to Bulgaria were welcomed into the western fold as if that had always been their destiny.
Then when war threatened in 1938 we abandoned them all again to rampaging ambitious dictators, smugly saying how silly it was to be digging trenches for the sake of faraway places of which we knew nothing.
Now the west thinks it has pushed the curtain back to its furthest east for centuries, and wonders why the Russians don't like it.
It's bad luck on the Ukrainians, as it was for Finns, Hungarians and Czechs. But if you live next to a rottweiler it's best not to kick it too hard. And even better for us not egg them on from the comfort of our armchairs.
|
|
Nice post, Cliff. You are quite right.
|
All Russia needed was an excuse to tighten its grip on Ukraine. Means and motive were already present.
Putin is a gangster, and if he should ever stop acting like one the other gangsters will chuck him out. How can you moralise with a government that thinks it is OK to appropriate zillions in state assets and create an oligarchy?
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 3 Mar 14 at 11:16
|
>> It's bad luck on the Ukrainians, as it was for Finns, Hungarians and Czechs.
... and the Poles, and others living in the unstable marchlands between empires with shifting, wriggling borders.
Talking to a friend the other night, daughter of a Viennese-Jewish doctor, who was raised in Reading. Her great grandfather was conscripted into the Austro-Hungarian army and was stationed and fought - not very intensely I think - in Ukraine in the first world war. When the war drew to a close one thing led to another and he ended up in Moscow where, being a bookbinder and compositor by trade, he spent a few months as a typesetter on Pravda or Izvestia during the early, heady post-revolution days. Repatriated to Vienna after that.
Fingers crossed, it still looks as if the US and EU are just sabre-rattling over Ukraine. They'd better be, for everyone's sake.
|
Ukraine is not a country, never has been. Its always been annexed or part of some other countries territory or state, so Ukraine in its current form is not natural merely a set of administrative boundaries decided upon by someone else.
The crimea is more or less Russian and there is no way the soviets are going to allow anything less than friendlies to surround their black sea port.
Russia should annex the crimea, geographically its perfect for that, and leave it at that.
They won't tho - they will ratchet up the pressure and take the whole country back. And by doing so will end up with permeant running sore in their sides.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 3 Mar 14 at 18:25
|
>> Ukraine is not a country, never has been.
Agreed. the name "Ukraine" translates as "Regions" or "Provinces".
>> They won't tho - they will ratchet up the pressure and take the whole country
>> back.
I doubt that. I think they'll go for the Eastern half though.
|
Of course Ukraine is a country and has been since the fall of the Soviet Union. All countries were created at some time - none go back to time immemorial and to believe that is OK to invade a legitimate state just because it is comparatively new would be a dangerous doctrine.
Modern Russia is just as much a fragment of the the old Soviet Union as is the Ukraine and has no more or less legitimacy than it's neighbour.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Tue 4 Mar 14 at 10:07
|
|
It's got a huge amount more legitimacy historically speaking. The concept of Russia was first born in what is now called Ukraine. The concept of Ukraine as a nation stems really only from its language, which is pretty much nothing more than a dialect of Russian.
Last edited by: Alanović on Tue 4 Mar 14 at 10:21
|
Ukraine is a legitimate sovereign state and is recognised internationally as such by all countries including Russia. Justifying its invasion because it was once a part of the Russian Empire or part of the Soviet Union makes no more sense than would a UK invasion of the Republic of Ireland. They were after all part of the British Empire not so long ago and speak English
|
|
In no way do I seek to justify the invasion. Just pointing out historical realities which sit behind the current situation. Sovereign states come and they go. Always have, always will.
|
>> Ukraine is a legitimate sovereign state
>>
That's not enough to make a region a country however.
Jugoslavia was a legitimate sovereign state for a short time in history, so was Byzantium for a somewhat longer time. Come to that, so was the Commonwealth of Poland and Ukraine, for a longer period than Ukraine has ever been a sovereign state.
|
|
What's the difference between a sovereign state and a country?
|
>> What's the difference between a sovereign state and a country?
>>
One is a legal entity, the other is a cultural, historical and linguistic entity.
Sometimes they are the same thing, or partly overlap.
|
>> One is a legal entity, the other is a cultural, historical and linguistic entity.
>> Sometimes they are the same thing, or partly overlap.
Too variable a definition to be useful unfortunately. But true nonetheless.
I have a Hungarian friend who once told me he was born in Ukraine. So you're really Ukrainian, said I. No! He went on to say his grandfather had lived in three countries without even moving house. Yet he had no difficulty with his nationality (though I think he could have done without all those Magyar dumplings).
The UK, as an island, has a different understanding of borders to central Europeans. Nationality is a different thing.
|
>> Of course Ukraine is a country
Of course its not, it has no history, no single common bond, no single identity no national identity. It is merely an administrative boundary imposed by state bureaucrats that conquered a much wider area. Thats why there is the current upheaval, its two sides of a story that shouldn't exist together.
|
>> >> Of course Ukraine is a country
>> Of course its not, it has no history, etc. etc.
Ukraine isn't the only country with arbitrary borders or with a complicated, sometimes difficult 'ethnic' and cultural mix. And it is quite simply fatuous to say it has 'no history'. There isn't a square inch of the planet's surface that has 'no history'.
The current upheaval has been caused by western mischief-makers egging Ukrainian nationalists on to go too far. Always easier in a place that is intrinsically unstable. Russia is being presented to us as the aggressor, but it's just defending its backyard.
|
Interesting, the concept of 'country'.
Germany has only existed since 1871. Yet it was Julius Caesar who invented the term around the time of the birth of Christ.
Odd isn't it? The concept existed almost 2,000 years before it came to being.
Meanwhile Poland didn't exist between 1795 and 1918 (nor between 1939 and 1945).
The reality is that countries are created and disintegrate the whole time; particularly in central Europe.
I don't think we in the west understand how threatened the Russians feel historically, being in the centre of western powers. Those brought up in the Cold War were brought up to believe that the west was on the verge of invading; you can understand their nervousness.
|
>> Interesting, the concept of 'country'.
>>
>> Germany has only existed since 1871. Yet it was Julius Caesar who invented the term
>> around the time of the birth of Christ.
>>
>>
Italy has only existed since 1870.
|
>> Italy has only existed since 1870.
Sealand has only existed since 1967 - if you accept it's a country at all of course.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand
|
|
Ah, a wrong mix of ethnicities; of course it could never happen here, could it?
|
|
Well given there's been a huge mix of ethnicities here since the Picts/Celts arrived, we've not done so bad in containing internal unrest since Culloden.
|
"we've not done so bad in containing internal unrest"
Exactly my point - the mix has been stable for a very long time. We wouldn't want to upset that, would we, bearing in mind that all internal conflicts result from:
Ethnic/cultural differences
Religious differences
Wealth differences
And a blend of those factors. Get the balance wrong ……...
|
No, the point I'm making is we've already rubbed along for a very long time with all those differences. Particularly the wealth one. But ethnic, religious and cultural differences too. The mix has changed and "been upset" as much in the past is it is (in your eyes, not mine) being now, and has never been "stable", apart from that glorious period of the childhoohd of the Babyboom generation before the Windrush docked, which so many seem to think should have been preserved in aspic. You just don't like the new varieties of mixers and refuse to accept that it's been the same story here since the Celtic settlers arrived.
The only thing that maintains our veil of civilisation is relative wealth and high standards of living across the vast majority of the populace. Bread and games. Whatever our ethnic/religious/cultural mix.
|
Spot on Al.
The spark in eastern Ukraine and particularly Crimea, is exclusion of a particular group. The new government in Kiev, prceived in the east of the country as being of nationalists form the west, has removed laws accepting use of Russian language etc.
Intolerance of diversity has a much greater record for igniting conflict than does tolerance and celebration of difference.
|
>> The new government in Kiev, prceived in the east of the country as being of nationalists form the west, has removed laws accepting use of Russian language etc.
And seems to have been encouraged, perhaps financed, by 'western' mischief-makers to launch a counter-revolution, chase out the Russian-supported president and plunge the place into sinister confusion.
Wonderful front page on the Sun today, Putin in bare-chested Karate champion photo with the headline: 'Come on, ave a go if you fink you're ard enough', something like that. Tee hee!
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Mon 3 Mar 14 at 15:23
|
"we've already rubbed along for a very long time with all those differences"
Sadly, I'm not sure the ordinary residents of Warrington, Manchester, London, Monaghan, Dublin, Enniskillen, Belfast... nor those who suffered in the race riots of recent years, would agree.
|
Referendum in Crimea on joining Russia in 10 days:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26465962
Would be a right laugh if they vote no. What then?
In reality, I expect there will be heavy pressure on people to vote yes. Militias and the like. Nasty business.
|
|
The UN say such a referendum would not be legal unless the whole of Ukraine gets to vote. Wondering whether this applies to the Scottish referendum too?
|
|
I think the UN are saying it's illegal in Ukrainian law, which probably doesn't have a bearing on matters Caledonian.
|
|
Just need a smart lawyer. :-)
|
>> Just need a smart lawyer. :-)
The Scottish referendum is constitutionally illegal as well, without everyone n the UK voting on it. They can vote however they like, but we don't have to accept it. In fact we could roll tanks in there and prevent them breaking away except for a couple of points.
Point 1 - The jocks have all the nukes. ( the stupid deck heads propose to give them back! eejits)
Point 2 - We don't want them
Point 3 - the tanks will be rolling across the plains of Germany into WW3
|
US sends F16s to Baltic:
tinyurl.com/oqnkszh (Telegraph)
|
Oh dear God. What is it with politicians and interfering in other people's games without thinking of consequences?
That'd hardly going to be a conflict that anybody will come out of well.
|
Trans Dniester (or Transnistria, whichever you prefer) next.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26627236
There are several pockets of majority ethnic Russians in several EU states also. Hell's teeth.
Oh well, if there's a call up I expect I'll be locked in a bunker translating stuff. Would be handy if the government requisition Caversham Park and stick us polyglots there, I could commute by bike. How does one cycle in a nuclear fall out suit is the question, I suppose.
|
I used to play on Caversham Park before it was even a building site.
That and on the lake (a pond really) at the BBC.
|
I have a lot of sympathy for 'our troops' if, as part of NATO they are mobilised to help ward orf those evil Ruskies in Ukraine.
And I mean that most sincerely: www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9FS1bxaGTg
|
Blimey, Putin's on a bit of a roll then.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26634403
I wonder if he's been "taken out".
|
Fortunately we haven't actually got to the stage of enrolling Ukraine in Nato, so can weasel out of any commitment to defend the rest if the worst comes to the worst.
The analogy with Hitler is completely false, and has proved the downfall of a previous PM. Anthony Eden thought Nasser was another Hitler, so determined to resist the aggression that was so feebly aquiesced in in 1938.
It's the classic story of being so keen to re-fight the last war that they blunder innocently into the next.
|
For those stuck on the idea that a country is a country is a country, this little animation might help explain things...........
loiter.co/v/watch-as-1000years-of-european-boarders-change/
With apologies for the poor spelling in the hyperlink, maybe it was written by an immigrant.
|
That is excellent AV. Makes me reflect on how many lives were needlessly lost in the emergence and movement of those imaginary lines.
Honour and glory, or dangerously smart monkeys squabbling over their occupancy of a chunk of forest...
|
|
That really is good. Thanks.
|
>> monkeys squabbling over their occupancy of a chunk of
>> forest...
Bingo. You win a (virtual) banana.
|
Not sure that many are set on the idea that the borders of countries are immutable. What is of course a source of concern that seizure of the territory of a sovereign state by a neighbour usually leads to instability and war. Nearly all the border changes in that interesting graphic are the result of wars. It was to be hoped that seizure of neighbouring territory by the Russians was a thing of the past.
The big fear is that they will see this land grab as precedent for similar moves elsewhere on their borders in the years ahead. NATO will have to think very carefully about the implications of Clause 5 of the treaty. Is the West ready or prepared for WW3 if the Russians decide to "protect" ethnic Russian populations in a NATO country?
|
Is the West ready
>> or prepared for WW3 if the Russians decide to "protect" ethnic Russian populations in a
>> NATO country?
>>
The message I see are pointed in that direction, 'you've had your fun now back in your box'. I wonder if the Russians would be willing to find out how strong Article 5 is?
|
>>
>> The message I see are pointed in that direction, 'you've had your fun now back
>> in your box'. I wonder if the Russians would be willing to find out how
>> strong Article 5 is?
>>
The Russians aren't stupid and don't want a war any more than we do. They'll push as far as they can get away with but no more.
|
Well of course the big question is how far can they push? How much can they get away with?
After Crimea I guess they feel they can push a little bit further. At what point would the West actually take any action military or otherwise?
|
>> After Crimea I guess they feel they can push a little bit further. At
>> what point would the West actually take any action military or otherwise?
>>
Further action in Ukraine will only earn them a harder slap on the wrist. Any action threatening the Baltic states is likely to lead to a modern Cuba Missiles type scenario.
|
|
The question Putin needs to ask himself "Do you feel lucky? I guess at the moment he feels very lucky Let's hope he doesn't push his luck.
|
>> The question Putin needs to ask himself "Do you feel lucky? I guess at the
>> moment he feels very lucky
Isn't that the Russian way tho? The only thing they seem to recognise is strength, trouble is the west is too fractured to respond with resolve and strength.
|
>> At
>> what point would the West actually take any action military or otherwise?
>>
There's a sort of blurred grey area running N/S down central Europe, representing the tidal foreshore between Russia at her furthest-ever Westwards, and the furthest Eastwards which is where we are now.
Over the centuries the actual line has oscilated about somewhere in the middle. So it's due a westward swing shortly. The buffer states would be wise to tread carefully, and Nato would be wise not to get too committed in supporting them.
So at what point should the West actually take military action ? - probably at the line representing one country-east of the old iron curtain.
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Wed 19 Mar 14 at 20:05
|
>> Over the centuries the actual line has oscilated about somewhere in the middle. So it's
>> due a westward swing shortly. The buffer states would be wise to tread carefully, and
>> Nato would be wise not to get too committed in supporting them.
>>
>> So at what point should the West actually take military action ? - probably at
>> the line representing one country-east of the old iron curtain.
Yeah,
Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Bosnia/Hertzcarrental should be in the west, and never sat easily in the USSR, anything east of that the Ruskies can have. Alas that means they take on Greece, but hey there has to be casualties in any war.
|
"For those stuck on the idea that a country is a country is a country,"
I suspect that 'country' is one of those words that can mean anything that you want it to mean - a bit like the word 'marriage'.
|
Ukraine - déja vu? - Focusless
