Eastern Europe/Ukraine

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by TSJones »

vina wrote:
The US had to kill 77,000 Japanese infantry and also 44,000 - 150,000 civilians, some of which we could not keep from committing suicide.
How touching, along with how many 100,000s in Hiroshima and Nagasaki ? Why not just demonstrate the power of the A Bomb off Tokyo bay ? But no, you had to drop an A Bomb and kill and maim a million of an already defeated nation .

Face it, the Japanese were a tough, and ruthless enemy and the Americans were simply mad at the Japanese in WWII. It was not a "oh , we were forced to, we really didnt want to " kind of thing. You were hopping mad, you wanted to and you did.
Yet...yet.... we gave Okinawa back to Japan in 1972.

Russia? 'nuff said. Off topic.
Difference is, Sakhalin and other Kurile islands are largely ethnic Russian today, unlike in Okinawa. How about handing Hawaii back to the natives and undoing the forcible occupation in 18** by US Navy/Marines , led by the missionaries (the usual storm troopers) and the deposing of the Hawaiian queen? That would be the equivalent of handing back Sakhalin, not Okinawa.
Thanks for the irrelevant logic.

The US fought the Japanese and gave it back, Russia never will.
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8423
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by disha »

TSJones wrote: Thanks for the irrelevant logic.

The US fought the Japanese and gave it back, Russia never will.
Sir, restore Hawaiian islands back to Hawaiians (native). Why for US Hawaii is a strategic toe hold in Pacific?

So US can have strategic interests but Russians cannot?

Okay, how about giving back Diego Garcia to India? What is US doing there? Maintaining peace?

US is welcome to send its troops to defend Ukraine and also Crimea., instead of putting up toothless sanctions. As has been demonstrated time and again., the US Foreign policy is now in the hand of juveniles!
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8423
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by disha »

TSJones wrote:The Russians will never give up the Kuril Islands. Never. Anybody who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. Therefore there is no use in the Japanese buddying up to the Russians. I mean they can do it if they want to, but it's a useless proposition.
Why for so much angst against Japan when they decided to chart their own actions independent of US? Japan needs a counter-balance against China and which country will provide effective counter-balance? US?

Japan will fume but given the toothless sanctions which US has imposed and even more tooth-lesser-sanctions EU *plans* to impose but does not have will., Japan has imposed tooth-lessest sanctions on Russia. Here you go:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wir ... a-22950520
Japan Imposes Sanctions on Russia Over Crimea
TOKYO March 18, 2014 (AP)
Associated Press

Japan on Tuesday imposed some modest sanctions on Russia for its recognition of Crimea as an independent state — suspending talks on relaxing visa requirements between the two countries and talks on investment, space exploration and military cooperation.

Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida said in a statement that Japan does not recognize the outcome of Crimea's referendum to split from Ukraine, saying it violates the Ukrainian constitution.

"It is regretful that Russia's recognition of the independence of Crimea interferes with the integrity of Ukraine's sovereignty and territory," Kishida told reporters. "We cannot overlook Russia's attempt to change the status quo by force."

The moves are seen as mild compared to sanctions by the U.S. and European Union, which have frozen the assets of individuals linked to the unrest in Crimea or who support the region's vote to secede from Ukraine.

But Japanese officials said that an investment seminar sponsored by private institute but also backed by both governments that is scheduled for Wednesday was still on.

Ties between Russia and Japan have been strained for decades due to a dispute over a cluster of Russian-controlled islands off the northern island of Hokkaido called the southern Kurils in Russia and the Northern Territories in Japan. The dispute has kept the two countries from signing a peace treaty after World War II.

But last month, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said that negotiations toward forging a treaty were accelerating. Abe is also eager to unleash new trade and energy business with Russia that has been hung up by the dispute.

Kishida urged Russia to comply with international laws, withdraw the recognition of Crimea's independence and not move further toward its annexation.
UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by UlanBatori »

Hmm! I just realized that the Secession and later Annexation of the Independent Republic of Texias in 1936-1845 was completely illegal. Texias was a legitimate and integral part of Mexico!
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by vina »

The US fought the Japanese and gave it back, Russia never will.
The Russians fought against genocidal Germans who were bent on enslaving the Slavic peoples (and took 20 million plus human losses ) and gave back East Germany. How about that ? Does that qualify as a relevant example, even if you are not willing to give back Hawaii, Texas, New Mexico and California ?
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8423
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by disha »

^^ You mean Tejas? Right? And given that it sounds to a flying bird sometimes seen in India., I think Tejas belongs to India.

For the bird watchers:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... s#r=hpt-ls
Tracking a story such as Ukraine’s from afar is, I imagine, like scanning the horizon to watch which way a flock of birds might break. You strain your eyes for the telling silhouette, the beating of a wing that catches your eye. You try to look in the right direction, and you wonder if one flutter might be followed by another.

After Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fled the capital and then the country, reporters sifted through soggy documents fished from a reservoir near his weirdly opulent home1. As journalists blow-dried and photographed paperwork for curtains that reportedly cost €290,000 ($403,100), you might have started to wonder: Could this tumult shed some light on the doings of Ukraine’s oligarchs?

They are a notoriously secretive lot whose names, like their counterparts in Russia, are often followed by rumors of links to corrupt officials and organized crime. How much exposure might the Kremlin have to Ukrainian oligarchs and their ties to Russia? Not that anything you read about the documents at Yanukovych’s place suggested as much, but they got you to thinking.

STORY: The New Great Game: Why Ukraine Matters to So Many Other Nations
The news that as Yanukovych’s regime collapsed, former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko was released from prison in Ukraine furthered your curiosity. Tymoshenko had been put behind bars in 2011 on charges that she abused power by inking a gas agreement with Russia. Among the implications of the deal was that it cut out a middleman company named RosUkrEnergo, which was co-owned by Ukrainian businessman Dmitry Firtash and the Russian state-controlled energy giant Gazprom (GAZP:RM).2

The point for the patient watcher is this: Firtash and Tymoshenko are not friends—they are on what one might call “racketeering lawsuit” terms.3

Through his business dealings with Gazprom, Firtash is almost certain to be in a position to know about the workings of the Russian elite. What’s more, he reportedly acknowledged to U.S. Ambassador William Taylor Jr. in 2008 that he operated, at least earlier in his career, with the blessings of Russia’s Semyon Mogilevich—he of the FBI’s 10 most wanted.4 Writing in a secret 2008 diplomatic cable, Taylor recounted a conversation with Firtash in which he said he “needed, and received, permission from Mogilievich when he established various businesses, but he denied any close relationship to him.” Both before and after the publication of the cable by WikiLeaks, Firtash said he did not have ties with Mogilevich.

STORY: As Investors Flee, Russia Inc. Is Feeling the Pain
All of which suggests that Firtash knows things that Moscow would prefer remain quiet.

The White House announced this week that 11 in Russia and Ukraine, including Yanukovych, had been hit with U.S. sanctions in light of efforts to “undermine democratic processes and institutions in Ukraine; threaten its peace, security, stability, sovereignty, and territorial integrity; and contribute to the misappropriation of its assets.” The list did not have the sorts of names you might have been thinking about when you saw the story about the documents at Yanukovych’s home.

But a few days earlier, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that based on an investigation of an alleged international corruption conspiracy:

“Dmitry Firtash, 48, a Ukrainian businessman, was arrested Wednesday by Austrian authorities in Vienna on a provisional arrest request based on charges filed in the Northern District of Illinois … the U.S. government will seek his extradition.”

And a Vienna court set the highest bail ever in Austria: $174 million. For its part, the U.S. Justice Department wanted to be sure something was clear: “Firtash’s arrest is not related to recent events in Ukraine.“

Firtash’s company, Group DF, said it had the same understanding.Firtash arranged for a statement through his spokesman: “The reason for my detention in Vienna last week was without foundation and I believe strongly that the motivation was purely political.”

So, like a watcher of birds, you keep your eyes on the horizon, waiting for what might come next.

1. The website, YanukovychLeaks, is here.

2. Instead of describing those involved with such terms as pro-Russia or pro-West, it’s sometimes helpful to consider business and relationships in Ukraine. For instance, Firtash was allied with Yanukovych, a man now protected by Russia. But Firtash also told diplomats that he had ties to former President Viktor Yushchenko, a man who is decidedly not chummy with Moscow; he came to power during the Orange Revolution that the Kremlin saw as a Western-backed plot.

3. Tymoshenko v. Firtash, 11-02794, U.S. District Court, New York (Manhattan).

4. The FBI’s release on Mogilevich is scathing and available here.
I think it is all about my oligarch is more secular than your oligarch fight.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

panduranghari wrote:If Amirkhan/EU does bring sanctions on, what will Russia do?
1. Stop selling gas to Europe in Winter(about 6 months away)
2. Stop supporting US negotiations with Iran
3. Sell US treasury bills so that the 10 year yield climbs just over 3%( Amirkhan will fear 3% a lot as default becomes a clear and present danger)

I do wonder 'the haircut in search of a brain' Kerry and 'underwear male model' ombaba seem to be clueless. May be Yellen is not yelling enough in their ears.
No they wont do point 1 , it would be considered inhuman and would take away any support that Russia may have from EU population ....... even during the cold war they never played politics with Gas ( not to mention Russia needs as much as Europe money as Europe needs its gas , its a MAD situation )

The only time Europe was in trouble with Gas supply was during orange revolution when Ukraine refuse to pay to the Russian for the gas they received and then blocked supply to Europe effectively squeezing Europe in Ukr Gas dispute with Russia ) thus was born the Nord and South Stream to bypass Ukraine.

Europe wont sanction to the extent that it will hurt the Russians as much as it would hurt them ..... what we might best see is Russia getting kicked out of G8 and slowing of Business relationship.

US might put stronger sanction ( depending on OmBaba constantly moving redline ) but the best way to respond to US is stop taking payment for Oil and Gas in USD and move to Euro and even Yuan/Mixed basket currency.

Stop buying Boeing Aircraft from US Giant and move toward Airbus , Give good deals to Exxon Mobile and tell them to bribe opps lobby with Senators :lol:

Exxon Mobil is the best lobby Russia can have in US ...... they are like the Ambanis of India having good terms with every one and they have big Tight Oil and Arctic Project in Russia ( same goes for Rosneft Alaska project )

You need a combination of Carrot and Stick policy to deal with US and US Interest are its business interest .......... hurt their business and it hurts them a lot more than any thing else.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

Avarachan wrote:Here is the official--and now complete--English transcript of President Putin's speech: http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6889
At the same time, we are grateful to all those who understood our actions in Crimea; we are grateful to the people of China, whose leaders have always considered the situation in Ukraine and Crimea taking into account the full historical and political context, and greatly appreciate India’s reserve and objectivity.
Here is another version of the same transcript, with some useful headings added for improved readability:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:Pu ... March_2014
Thanks for posting .
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

panduranghari , there were reports/rumours that Russian have sold $100 billion bond in past two weeks but Fed's Yellen refused to confirm that yesterday.

Fed chief declined to comment on Russian sale U.S. Treasury

MOSCOW, March 19 - Prime. Head of the Federal Reserve Janet Yellen told a news conference after the Federal Open Market Committee declined to comment on the question of whether to sell the Russian Federation government bonds U.S. $ 100 billion over the past two weeks.

"Unfortunately, I can not comment on the issue of the bonds issued under the authority of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York," - said Yellen.
http://ria.ru/economy/20140319/1000268433.html
member_28502
BRFite
Posts: 281
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by member_28502 »

Any way the yield is zilch ok Max 2% may be
With the printing going 24 x 7 on new 3D printers ....
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

****Deleted********
Last edited by Austin on 20 Mar 2014 14:47, edited 1 time in total.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

Moscow threats to 'mirror' US sanctions

Moscow may draft its own "blacklist" of American officials as part of a response that will "mirror" the sanctions imposed by the United States on Russia, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said.
"If Washington restarts measures to escalate tensions and confrontation, as well as attempts to tell us what we should do using the instruments of sanctions, our side's response to this will not obviously be restricted only to personal targeted sanctions dealing with certain individuals," Ryabkov said over the phone from Vienna.

"We are considering a wide range of possible responses. They may include "mirror" measures such as the drafting the certain lists of American officials - not necessarily representatives of the administration, but also representatives of other structures that influence American policies - in response to the sanctions that were declared in relation to Russian high-ranking officials representing the executive branch of power and our parliamentarians. This will obviously happen. I do not doubt that such a response will follow," he said.

"Apart from a purely "mirror" response, there is a chance that we may take asymmetric measures, in other words a response in the form of steps that, let's put it this way, will matter and will not go unnoticed by Washington because there is a whole number of areas of our dialogue and certain contacts, cooperation to a certain extent, that are important to the American side," the deputy foreign minister said.
http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_03_2 ... ions-5967/
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by chaanakya »

What happens in BRIC now that Russia is out of G8?
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by chaanakya »

UlanBatori wrote:Hmm! I just realized that the Secession and later Annexation of the Independent Republic of Texias in 1936-1845 was completely illegal. Texias was a legitimate and integral part of Mexico!
From Wiki
The United States purchased Alaska from Russia on March 30, 1867, for $7.2 million ($121 million adjusted for inflation) at approximately two cents per acre ($4.74/km²).
If there is a land sale , presumably , Sovirginity is not sold out.So, can Russia abrogate sale of Alaska or declare sale deed registered in Registrar of Land sales Russia as illegal and invalid. Can it ask for its return as well?
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

chaanakya wrote:What happens in BRIC now that Russia is out of G8?
How is BRICS related to G8 ....Didnt get your question ?
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

US and Russia exchange threats in heated UN debate on Crimea
US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power told the General Assembly that Russia's annexation of Crimea was nothing more than a land grab

'A thief can steal property, but that does not confer the right of ownership on the thief,' Power said

The Russian ambassador responded by saying 'It is simply unacceptable to listen to these insults addressed to our country'

Russia called the Crimea situation 'a historic injustice [that] has been righted
Sonugn
BRFite
Posts: 449
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 12:03
Location: DeceptyKon Workshop

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Sonugn »

Crimea’s reunification with Russia not subject to revision, Lavrov tells Kerry

American regime needs to accept this fact and move on.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

I was expecting something like that , S&P following US Diktat .....expect Moodys and other lap dogs to follow suite :lol:

S & P downgraded its outlook on Russia from stable to negative

MOSCOW, March 20 - Prime. International rating agency S & P downgraded long-term rating of the Russian Federation in foreign currency "BBB" and a similar rating in national currency 'BBB +' from stable to negative, according to a press release from the agency.

S & P also affirmed the short-term rating of "A-2" and the national scale rating "ruAA". "The deterioration of the forecast due to the possible significant economic and financial consequences of sanctions by the EU and the U.S.", - the report says.

Theo_Fidel

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Theo_Fidel »

This has to be one of the more peaceful and uncomplicated redrawing of a border. Even the wests heart is not really into protesting too much. Give it a year or two, even the sanctions will be quietly withdrawn. Mostly for show.

Hope this will stabilize Ukraine so they can get back to governance.
prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2834
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by prahaar »

Expect the smaller EU nations to make more noise than the bigger more populous ones like Germany Spain. The uppity N.European will act most offended because they feel extremely insecure about Russia. Finland has had many parts confiscated during WWII, so the paranoia in this population is deep and kept alive by "Free Media". These folks are US ghulams since they want security guarantee without spending anything for it.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by ramana »

What is S&P rating for US? Based on that one can decide how objective it is.
RSoami
BRFite
Posts: 771
Joined: 23 Apr 2010 14:39

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by RSoami »

Japan has applied only mild sanctions against Russia. To placate the Yankees only.
IMHO Shinzo Abe is out to solve the dispute with Russia and sign that long due peace treaty. He will arm the self defence forces. Revise the constitution. Befriend everyone around China or at least not make an enemy of them. If Putin agrees to play ball, we could see some tectonic changes in the strategic scenario of the far east.
Till Japan achieves the ability to defend itself it will continue to follow the US diktat or at least show itself to be doing so. We can only hope that Putin also sees this as an opportunity and an opening.
MurthyB
BRFite
Posts: 704
Joined: 18 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: "Visa Officer", Indian Consulate #13,451, Khost Province, Afghanistan

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by MurthyB »

BTW, Ukraine is NOT weak or a game:

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Philip »

Yes,the Kiev clique know how to beat the retreat,taking their cue from their Yanqui masters!

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/m ... rom-crimea
Kiev announces plans to withdraw Ukrainian troops from Crimea
Ukrainian servicemen come under pressure from Russian troops and local forces to abandon Crimean bases
Harriet Salem and Shaun Walker
The Guardian, Wednesday 19 March 2014 23.29 GMT
A Ukrainian officer leaves the Ukrainian navy south headquarters base in Novoozerne after it was taken over by Russian forces Photograph: Filippo Monteforte/AFP/Getty

Ukraine is planning to withdraw its forces and their families from Crimea "quickly and efficiently" after more Ukrainian bases were taken over by local militias and Russian troops on Wednesday.

Andriy Parubiy, head of the national security and defence council, told reporters in Kiev that it planned to relocate 25,000 service personnel and families. "We are developing a plan that would enable us not only to withdraw servicemen but also members of their families in Crimea, so that they could be quickly and efficiently moved to mainland Ukraine."

His comments came before Russian forces took over a naval base in Bakhchisaray in Crimea on Wednesday night, the latest in a series of takeovers of Ukrainian bases by Russian troops and local self-defence forces using a mixture of attrition and threats, as well as the dawning realisation that Kiev has lost control over the peninsula and has no way of fighting to regain it.

On Wednesday, the day after Vladimir Putin announced that Russia would absorb Crimea and a Ukrainian soldier was shot dead by a sniper at a base in Simferopol, a pro-Russian militia took control of the Ukrainian naval headquarters in Sevastopol.

"We freed the prisoners inside this base. This is Russian territory. Moscow already accepted Crimea," said Vladimir Melnik, head of a local self-defence unit, shortly after the Russian flag was raised at the base.

According to Melnik, several branches of the local militia co-ordinated in storming of the site during the morning. "We are peaceful people, but we are military people and if we receive orders to storm we will follow them," he said, adding that the civil defence units were under the command of the city administration.

Andrey Kochebarov, a deputy leader of local Cossacks, said: "There was no fight, no resistance; the guys inside clearly understood what situation they are in. This is the naval base headquarters so if they gave up this one, they will give them all up."

In the hours that followed, the Ukrainian troops, who had been inside the besieged base for three weeks, slowly trickled out with heads bowed. Morale is low and the soldiers say they are uncertain what the future holds.

"We have no word from Kiev about what to do next," said Sergei, who has served as an officer in the Ukrainian army for 21 years and remained inside the building until the bitter end. "Of course, there was no resistance [when the building was stormed]. What are we meant to do, outnumbered and without weapons?" Sergei denied the local militia's claims that the men inside were liberated: "This is a lie. We remained there of our own free will."

Sergei, from Sevastopol, said he and the 50 colleagues who remained inside had been able to leave the building, but would not have been able to return if they did so. "I stayed because I swore an oath to the Ukrainian army." He said the Ukrainian officers were not physically threatened, but they were kept without enough food and water, and the electricity was often shut off.

Outside, his tearful wife greeted him with a hug. "It's been a very difficult time. I was very anxious about his safety," she said. "I'm delighted to have him back."

Tough decisions lie ahead for all the troops in the Crimea region who have remained loyal to Ukraine. Russian and Crimean officials have issued an ultimatum to the Ukrainian troops either to join the Russian army or take the option of a safe passage out of the peninsula.

Parubiy said the Ukrainian government would appeal to the UN to declare Crimea a de-militarised zone, which he hoped would lead to Russia and Ukraine both withdrawing its forces.

The Ukrainian navy commander, Serhiy Haiduk, was captured during the storming of the headquarters and was believed to have been taken into Russian detention. On Wednesday evening, acting Ukrainian president Oleksandr Turchynov gave the Russians and Crimean authorities three hours to free Haiduk or face "adequate responses, including of a technical and technological nature", without clarifying further.

There was no immediate time frame given for Parubiy's announcement that the troops would be relocated.

Ukrainian politician Vitali Klitschko had earlier said Ukraine should not recognise Russian rule over Crimea, but did call for safe passage to be granted so Ukrainian troops on the peninsula could withdraw to "temporary bases" elsewhere in Ukraine, to prevent further bloodshed.

The Ukrainian government wanted to dispatch two ministers to Crimea on Wednesday to "resolve the situation", but were informed by Crimean authorities that they would not be allowed to enter the territory.

The process of annexation continued apace, with Ukrainian signs being removed from government buildings. Russia's constitutional court reviewed the treaty to join Crimea to Russia and found it legal, and the parliament is expected to ratify the decision by the end of the week.

Putin announced that a rail and road bridge connecting the Crimean peninsula to Russia across the two-mile Kerch Strait would be built.

Russia had already begun distributing passports in the region, said Konstantin Romodanovsky, head of Russia's federal migration service. "Some passports were issued today, and the work will only get more intensive with each new day," he told RIA Novosti. He did not clarify what would happen with those Crimea residents who did not take up Russian citizenship.

Concerns have been voiced about the fate of Crimean Tatars, who make up 13% of the population and, on the whole, are loyal to Kiev. They mostly boycotted the hastily organised referendum that returned a 97% vote for union with Russia. Crimean officials have said some of them may have to return land to which they do not own proper legal rights. Many Tatars live on unregistered land; they were deported en masse during the Stalin era and often found their property in new hands when they returned a generation later.

The most pressing issue remains what happens with the remaining Ukrainian servicemen in bases. Crimean authorities claimed that the officer who was shot dead on Tuesday was shot by a 17-year-old radical Ukrainian nationalist, which has been dismissed as implausible by authorities in Kiev.

A spokesperson for the defence ministry was unable to clarify how many soldiers were left on bases, saying he did not know himself. But there was little fighting talk at bases around the peninsula and more of a sense of resignation that the territory has been lost.

Evgeniy Cherednichenko, an officer at the logistical command centre in Sevastopol, on Wednesday made the decision to abandon his position inside the besieged base.

"It's a very difficult and complicated situation. We don't have proper information. In the end, I just decided to pick up my personal stuff and leave," he said. "I have not deserted the Ukrainian army, I don't know what to do next."

The base is surrounded by Russian troops; through the wire fence it is possible to see the Ukrainian troops moving around. A sniper sits calmly on top of a garage watching the men below.

Speaking by telephone from inside the base, lieutenant colonel Aleksandr Lusyan said: "Kiev should have given the order to use weapons at the beginning, because then we could fight back, but they were afraid to give this command because they were afraid to spill blood. Now we are outnumbered and we cannot fight back."
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Philip »

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 03333.html
Mary Dejevsky
Wednesday 19 March 2014
Crimea crisis: We're constantly spitting venom at Russia, but lack a bite to scare the Kremlin
Hague’s rhetoric is in direct proportion to the UK’s incapacity, or unwillingness, to act
Is it just diabolical bad luck or appalling judgement? Either way, it is hard to describe the past half century of relations between Britain and Russia as anything other than cursed. What malevolent fate was it that designated this year, of all years, the Year of Russian Culture in Britain?

The sequence, like the intention, is familiar. Arrange a host of high-profile events – art exhibitions, avant-garde theatre, ballet – bring over some stars of the arts firmament, and hey presto, the whole atmosphere between two mutually suspicious countries will improve and the way will be smoothed for some seriously productive diplomacy.

Except that with the UK and Russia it rarely works like that. Every slight warming seems to be thwarted. Even as my inbox fills with invitations to the wealth of events that arts organisations have been preparing in recent months, I hear William Hague’s ever more adamant voice in my ear, condemning “land grabs” and “sham democratic processes” and calling on everyone to “stand up to” Moscow. It takes two to spoil a relationship really disastrously, of course, and Russia has done itself no favours with its baiting of Ukraine’s interim government and its de facto annexation of Crimea – the first time it has moved to expand its territory since the Second World War. Nor is the British Foreign Secretary alone in his ire. He has done his level best to present a united front with Washington and Brussels – while also trying not to upset Russia’s London-based super-rich.

But the speed with which relations with Russia habitually seem to go from bad to far, far worse, and the animus that soon displaces almost any other sentiment between London and Moscow, suggests we start somehow from a different place in our dealings with Russia. Different, that is, from the place from which France, Germany or even Washington start in their relations with Russia, and different from the way we handle relations with most other countries, friend or foe.

When things turn bad with Russia, there seems to be real venom that goes beyond the rhetorical diplomatic norm. There is an almost personal vindictiveness that makes mending fences afterwards that much harder. We give the condescending impression that Russia has at once disappointed and betrayed our expectations. We speak patronisingly about our “values” and its “behaviour”. We demonise its leaders as though they rule alone, and everything will be sweet reason when they are gone.

What we are encountering with Ukraine is a Russia problem, not a Putin problem. Most Russians who grew up in Soviet times, if asked what they most regret about the USSR’s collapse, would say the loss of Crimea. Russians see the peninsula as ancestral territory; they have fond memories of childhood holidays there. As Italy is for northern Europeans, so Crimea is for Russians: the land of warmth and romance, “where the lemon trees bloom”. No clumsy propaganda campaign was needed to convince Russians they should seize the opportunity to “get it back”. Rather than understand this and look for a way out, British officials have been shouting their fury louder than most – perhaps to disguise their impotence, and with good reason.

Russia’s move has shown how much weaker the UK has become internationally over the past 20 years. In 1994, Britain joined the US and Russia in underwriting Ukraine’s security in return for Kiev giving up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons. Not only do Britain’s assurances look useless now, but they call into question the wisdom of any country giving up a nuclear capability – just as talks have opened with Iran. Hague’s rhetoric is in direct proportion to the UK’s incapacity, or unwillingness, to act.

The fracas over Crimea, however, is just the latest example of UK officials going the extra mile in condemning Russia, and thereby painting themselves into an anti-Russian corner. Each time it seems that a thaw with Moscow is in prospect, something happens on one side or the other to plunge relations back into the deep freeze.

Just as the worst of the Cold War seemed to be over, it was the UK (under Edward Heath) that expelled more than 90 Soviet diplomats. Other countries acted more discreetly. Having feted and flattered Mikhail Gorbachev, we failed to give him the economic support he had counted on at the 1991 London G7 summit, and he walked, dejected, away. Then, even as we boasted of our superior probity, we gave refuge to dubious characters, such as Boris Berezovsky, who used his millions to buy influence and sway opinion against his enemies in the Russian leadership at home.

And even as Berezovsky’s persuasive skills started to fade, the exiled Alexander Litvinenko died an agonising death in a London hospital – the cue for more denunciations of Putin and Russia, more diplomatic expulsions, and the patronising recommendation that Russia should change its Constitution to allow the extradition, on scant evidence, of the chief suspect. Meanwhile our supposedly model justice system has managed to delay an inquest, so far, by more than seven years. And now – just when the UK government seemed ready to turn the page, had restored intelligence co-operation, ended the visa war, and given its blessing to the Year of Russian Culture – we have this. Any goodwill generated by the Sochi Winter Olympics is forgotten; a powerless Britain is reverting to its role as chief anti-Russian cheerleader.

There is, it must also be conceded, a strange duality to our relations. A good many Britons are entranced by Russian culture; still more Russians adore the land of Shakespeare and Dickens, aspire to give their children an English public-school education and delight in their Home County estates. Alas, neither the growing Russian presence in Britain nor the mutual appreciation of each other’s culture has so far failed to lift that Cold War curse.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by ramana »

its the difference between St Paul and St Andreas.
MurthyB
BRFite
Posts: 704
Joined: 18 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: "Visa Officer", Indian Consulate #13,451, Khost Province, Afghanistan

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by MurthyB »

Ukraine bows to Crimea seizure, plans for pullout
On Wednesday morning, militiamen under apparent Russian command barged their way into Ukraine’s naval headquarters in Sevastopol, detaining the head of Ukraine’s navy and seizing the facility. The incursion, which Ukraine’s Defense Ministry described as being led by a self-described local defense force, Cossacks and “aggressive women,” :rotfl: proceeded with no resistance.
panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3781
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by panduranghari »

ramana wrote:What is S&P rating for US? Based on that one can decide how objective it is.
According to the Dagong rating agency of PRC, USA is A-, China is AAA.

According to S&P rating agency of US, US is AA+, China is AA-

Basically it's meaningless. It's just another armament in the American economic warfare.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Philip »

Murthy,did they have names like "Ivana Tearyatitsov,Katerina Kastratov, or Olga Kruschin Yankemov?"

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 03333.html
Mary Dejevsky
Wednesday 19 March 2014
Crimea crisis: We're constantly spitting venom at Russia, but lack a bite to scare the Kremlin
Hague’s rhetoric is in direct proportion to the UK’s incapacity, or unwillingness, to act
Is it just diabolical bad luck or appalling judgement? Either way, it is hard to describe the past half century of relations between Britain and Russia as anything other than cursed. What malevolent fate was it that designated this year, of all years, the Year of Russian Culture in Britain?

The sequence, like the intention, is familiar. Arrange a host of high-profile events – art exhibitions, avant-garde theatre, ballet – bring over some stars of the arts firmament, and hey presto, the whole atmosphere between two mutually suspicious countries will improve and the way will be smoothed for some seriously productive diplomacy.

Except that with the UK and Russia it rarely works like that. Every slight warming seems to be thwarted. Even as my inbox fills with invitations to the wealth of events that arts organisations have been preparing in recent months, I hear William Hague’s ever more adamant voice in my ear, condemning “land grabs” and “sham democratic processes” and calling on everyone to “stand up to” Moscow. It takes two to spoil a relationship really disastrously, of course, and Russia has done itself no favours with its baiting of Ukraine’s interim government and its de facto annexation of Crimea – the first time it has moved to expand its territory since the Second World War. Nor is the British Foreign Secretary alone in his ire. He has done his level best to present a united front with Washington and Brussels – while also trying not to upset Russia’s London-based super-rich.

But the speed with which relations with Russia habitually seem to go from bad to far, far worse, and the animus that soon displaces almost any other sentiment between London and Moscow, suggests we start somehow from a different place in our dealings with Russia. Different, that is, from the place from which France, Germany or even Washington start in their relations with Russia, and different from the way we handle relations with most other countries, friend or foe.

When things turn bad with Russia, there seems to be real venom that goes beyond the rhetorical diplomatic norm. There is an almost personal vindictiveness that makes mending fences afterwards that much harder. We give the condescending impression that Russia has at once disappointed and betrayed our expectations. We speak patronisingly about our “values” and its “behaviour”. We demonise its leaders as though they rule alone, and everything will be sweet reason when they are gone.

What we are encountering with Ukraine is a Russia problem, not a Putin problem. Most Russians who grew up in Soviet times, if asked what they most regret about the USSR’s collapse, would say the loss of Crimea. Russians see the peninsula as ancestral territory; they have fond memories of childhood holidays there. As Italy is for northern Europeans, so Crimea is for Russians: the land of warmth and romance, “where the lemon trees bloom”. No clumsy propaganda campaign was needed to convince Russians they should seize the opportunity to “get it back”. Rather than understand this and look for a way out, British officials have been shouting their fury louder than most – perhaps to disguise their impotence, and with good reason.

Russia’s move has shown how much weaker the UK has become internationally over the past 20 years. In 1994, Britain joined the US and Russia in underwriting Ukraine’s security in return for Kiev giving up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons. Not only do Britain’s assurances look useless now, but they call into question the wisdom of any country giving up a nuclear capability – just as talks have opened with Iran. Hague’s rhetoric is in direct proportion to the UK’s incapacity, or unwillingness, to act.

The fracas over Crimea, however, is just the latest example of UK officials going the extra mile in condemning Russia, and thereby painting themselves into an anti-Russian corner. Each time it seems that a thaw with Moscow is in prospect, something happens on one side or the other to plunge relations back into the deep freeze.

Just as the worst of the Cold War seemed to be over, it was the UK (under Edward Heath) that expelled more than 90 Soviet diplomats. Other countries acted more discreetly. Having feted and flattered Mikhail Gorbachev, we failed to give him the economic support he had counted on at the 1991 London G7 summit, and he walked, dejected, away. Then, even as we boasted of our superior probity, we gave refuge to dubious characters, such as Boris Berezovsky, who used his millions to buy influence and sway opinion against his enemies in the Russian leadership at home.

And even as Berezovsky’s persuasive skills started to fade, the exiled Alexander Litvinenko died an agonising death in a London hospital – the cue for more denunciations of Putin and Russia, more diplomatic expulsions, and the patronising recommendation that Russia should change its Constitution to allow the extradition, on scant evidence, of the chief suspect. Meanwhile our supposedly model justice system has managed to delay an inquest, so far, by more than seven years. And now – just when the UK government seemed ready to turn the page, had restored intelligence co-operation, ended the visa war, and given its blessing to the Year of Russian Culture – we have this. Any goodwill generated by the Sochi Winter Olympics is forgotten; a powerless Britain is reverting to its role as chief anti-Russian cheerleader.

There is, it must also be conceded, a strange duality to our relations. A good many Britons are entranced by Russian culture; still more Russians adore the land of Shakespeare and Dickens, aspire to give their children an English public-school education and delight in their Home County estates. Alas, neither the growing Russian presence in Britain nor the mutual appreciation of each other’s culture has so far failed to lift that Cold War curse.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014 ... e-exercise
History repeating itself as farce? Are we to see this time round the "Charge of the Lightweight brigade?"

British military set for exercise in Ukraine
Personnel will be part of a group of about 1,300 troops who are taking part in Rapid Trident, a previously planned exercise
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Philip »

Excellent perspective from the Indian viewpoint by Sunanda Dutta Ray writing in the Pioneer.
Russia works on the ‘near abroad’ theory
Friday, 21 March 2014 | SUNANDA K DATTA-RAY |

The country would have been more mindful of regional sensibilities if the West had been less aggressive in trying to fill the space Soviet Union vacated, and if regime change wasn’t integral to Washington's agenda

Events in Crimea confirm that every large country must enjoy exclusive authority in its neighbourhood. The analogy that comes to mind is of Kolkata’s Fort William. The surrounding Maidan is the fort’s strategic glacis. Military historians agree that Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah captured the earlier Fort William so easily in 1756 because the glacis was crowded with houses which he took one by one. The possibility of an American-sponsored coup in Kiev holds a similar danger.

This is the logic of what Russia calls its Near Abroad. Actually, the Americans first enunciated the theory in 1823 with the Monroe Doctrine. China has tried to safeguard its glacis by swallowing up Tibet and Xinjiang, nibbling at the Paracel and Spratly Islands, designating the South China Sea a “core interest”, and unilaterally announcing an Air Defence Identification Zone restricting flights in international air space. India’s security demands international recognition of its own geopolitical ‘near abroad’. This means not only Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan, but also Sri Lanka, probably Myanmar and possibly parts of Tibet. I would have included Sikkim if India had not in this one respect self-defeatingly followed the Chinese example of annexing a fragment of the Near Abroad.

The main question revolves round Pakistan which is yoked with India in the American consciousness like unreconciled Siamese twins. As I noted in Waiting for America: India and the US in the New Millennium, sometimes the hyphenation is symbolic, like Harry Truman lavishing exactly the same hospitality on Liaquat Ali Khan immediately after Jawaharlal Nehru’s first US visit. Sometimes it is substantive like successive administrations building up Pakistan militarily. The latest instance of that is provided by the current talks to hand over to Pakistan $7 billion worth of mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles the US Army no longer needs in Afghanistan.

“Parity was extended to create the myth that if India’s neighbours were not its equal in every way (despite their combined area and population being a fraction of India’s), this invested India with a special responsibility to shrink to their level in all regional transactions.” Indians did not repudiate this theory, perhaps seeing in it a tribute to their own pre-eminence. In January 2002, China’s Foreign Minister, Tang Jiaxuan, advised Mr Jaswant Singh that “as a big country” India should “play a more positive role” in the subcontinent. No one asked Mr Tang what concession big China made to smaller Vietnam or to the even more vulnerable Philippines.

Some facts may have changed since I wrote, “Pakistan’s domestic product is one-eighth India’s; it has one-seventh the population and one-fifth the area. Pakistan’s Armed Forces are only between two-and-a-half to three times smaller than India’s because the military has been built up at the expense of social welfare. While India has sustained its parliamentary democracy through regular elections at several levels — from village council to Parliament — Pakistan had already known three prolonged spells of military rule before General Pervez Musharraf seized power.” Yet, Mr Henry Kissinger dared to argue that a strong and stable Pakistan threatened India with a psychological challenge!

The nation that invented the Monroe Doctrine and enforced it for nearly two centuries knows all too well why Moscow feels vulnerable as the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the European Union relentlessly push eastwards. Subsequent American Presidents refined and expanded James Monroe’s 1823 formulation. Some asserted the right unilaterally to intervene in small Caribbean and South American nations to stabilize their economic affairs (Theodore Roosevelt 1904); others to “isolate the Communist menace” (John F. Kennedy 1962). The 1928 Clark Corollary clarified the US didn’t need to hide behind the skirts of any doctrine: military intervention was its self-evident right. In 1954 John Foster Dulles specifically targeted the Soviet Union for allegedly violating the Monroe Doctrine, especially in Guatemala.

Claims of America’s “manifest destiny” further enhanced the Monroe Doctrine. This was facilitated on the ground by the construction of the Panama Canal which permitted US naval domination of both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. The manner in which this was achieved bears reiteration in light of the international furore over Moscow’s actions after the regime change in Ukraine. Bluntly stated, Washington promised to support a bunch of Colombian politicians representing the Panama secessionist movement on condition they allowed the US not only to cut a canal through the Isthmus of Panama, which was then part of Colombia, but to enjoy de facto proprietory rights over it. The treaty concluded in 1903 between John Hay, the US Secretary of State, and Philipe Bunau-Varilla, a French commercial adventurer in Washington’s pay, who had bought up a number of Colombian politicians, granted the US “in perpetuity the use, occupation and control of a zone of land” and further allowed it “all the rights, power and authority within the same….which the United States would have if it were sovereign of the territory… to the exclusion of the exercise by the republic of Panama of any such sovereign rights, power or authority”.

Panama retained titular jurisdiction, but nothing more. The US dismembered Colombia and created Panama to reinforce control over its ‘near abroad’. That was also the rationale for buying Alaska from Moscow, deposing independent Hawaii’s Queen Liliuokalani, and annexing Texas and California. It explained why Kennedy nearly plunged the world into a nuclear war during the Cuban missile crisis. Cuba lay within the American ‘near abroad’. Moscow was the trespasser.

Andrei Kozyrev, who became Russia’s Foreign Minister in 1991, used the term Near Abroad to mean the 14 countries that became independent when the Soviet Union disintegrated. They are economically and strategically important for Russia. Millions of Russians also live there. Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasised this political and economic importance by using Near Abroad interchangeably with “sphere of influence”. The Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation that third President and current Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, finalised in 2010 justifies intervening militarily in the Near Abroad to protect Russian minorities. A Russian passport-holder living in Georgia or Ukraine has the same claim on Moscow as a Russian citizen living in Russia. Mr Medvedev stated he would “protect the life and dignity of Russian citizens wherever they are”.

Perhaps Russia would be more mindful of regional sensibilities if the West were less aggressive in trying to occupy the space vacated by the Soviet Union and if regime change were not integral to Washington’s agenda.
PS:Would that the Indian govt. would echo Mr.Medvedyev's statement and that the GOI would “protect the life and dignity of Indian citizens wherever they are”.
Last edited by Philip on 21 Mar 2014 09:26, edited 1 time in total.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5405
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by ShauryaT »

^^good article. It is time that we move off this "sovereignty" principle imposed by our colonisers and adopt what we rightfully are a civilizational-state.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

ramana wrote:What is S&P rating for US? Based on that one can decide how objective it is.
IIRC when S&P Downgraded one notch below .....Ombaba came out and said US will always remain AAA :lol:

The top guy at S&P had to loose his job.

All Western Rating agency are Professional and BIASED .... like panduranghari mentioned an economic warfare tool used by them as per their convenience.

Rating agency credibility is as good as Top 10 Assault Rifle Rating on Youtube.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

Fitch downgraded Russia rated "BBB" to negative
MOSCOW, March 21 - Prime. Fitch Ratings has downgraded long-term issuer default rating of the Russian Federation "BBB" to negative from stable, according to a press release from the agency.

In this short-term rating "F3" and the country ceiling for ratings 'BBB +' have been confirmed.

"The deterioration of the forecast due to the possible impact of sanctions on the economy and the business climate in Russia", - the report says.
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by TSJones »

More problems for Russian economy? Maybe...maybe not.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russian-e ... nance.html
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

I think from Russian POV ... an opportunity came in unexpectedly and unplanned and they made most from it by getting back Crimea which was like home coming for most people there.

I am sure sanctions will impact in some way but as we know from our own experience post 1999 N Test ...Sanctions are just temporary phenomena and eventually it would fade away when business interest over whelms political ones.

10 years down the line people would remember Ukranian crises for Russian taking back Crimea than for Sanctions or Ukr joining EU AA.

Sanctions would also serve as lesson for Russian leadership to diversify their customer base and trade relations with ROW more with China and India.

I wonder with NATO in crisis how this will Impact US Pivot to Pacific ......there are already noises by Nato member to rethink US Pivot to Pacific to its traditional NATO commitment .....Well China wont complain for sure.
sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1546
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by sooraj »

Obama & Putin Phone Conversation comedy skit :rotfl:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmIUm1E4OcI[/youtube]
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

Russian PM Medevdev statement today on FB

BTW his FB Page has good pics https://www.facebook.com/Dmitry.Medvedev/photos_stream
Today the Russian Federation had adopted all the necessary decisions for reunification with Crimea and Sevastopol. They have been approved by the Federal Assembly and President Vladimir Putin. These decisions were not easy. Political and legal evaluation of the causes of the return of historical parts of our country in the modern Russia is highly specific and at the same time emotionally was given by the head of State in his message. It does not require decryption. Therefore, as the Prime Minister of Russia and Chairman of the party "United Russia" I will mention only a few points.

The First Thing. The crisis of the Ukrainian State is not accidental. And we all had the worst experience. The political impotence of the authorities, personal weakness and indecisiveness of President Yanukovych forced the people of Ukraine to great suffering. People who are on the streets, had the right to peaceful protest against corruption and arbitrariness of the authorities. But that does not negate the fact that the seizure of power by an armed rebellion. Through violence and murder. Yanukovich has been legally dismissed. So, is the legally elected President, had been forcibly deprived of their power. And this need to understand everything. Including representatives of Maidana, sitting in the Government and the Parliament, political officials in Kiev and our Western partners. The new authorities did not have the necessary legitimacy. And what is worse-generally have no real levers of influence on the situation in the country. Power of radicals, militant thugs. They shall take the final decision. And most likely will take them and after May 25. It makes no sense to share power with others. They are the hosts in the streets and entrances to government buildings. And that is extremely dangerous. This method of control is bound to a collapse of the State. This situation contributed to the absence of normal relations between our Governments. Although, of course, working-level contacts are saved.

The Second. The people of Crimea (Russians, Ukrainians, Tatars) expressed their views in a referendum. The referendum is already history. As its solution. It is important now to think how to build a life on. In view of the prevailing political and legal realities. This applies to all. The new Government in Kiev. Guide of Western countries. Russia as a whole and its new territories. We have no one wants the aggravation of the situation. On the contrary, our goal is friendly relations with Ukraine and other neighbours of Russia. And, of course, the harmonious development of Crimea and Sevastopol in the structure of our State. This is a key challenge for the Government of our country. We will do everything for the socio-economic development of his State and his new regions.

On Monday I plan to meet with members of the Government, where we discuss the first steps towards living in the Crimea and Sevastopol. The Government needs to be a large and important work, made possible by the suggestion made at the referendum will of crimeans to join Russia. Expect to be treated with respect for the will of our people. The course, which elected the Russian Federation.

And the third. In the history of the peoples of entire continents there are very difficult situations. I perfectly remember August 2008 when I had to take a decision on the use of the Russian armed forces on the territory of a foreign State. And then recognize the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Difficult decisions. But subsequent developments proved: no way. Then the international community had to just discuss about how to build relations with Russia. And, it must be recognized that all of our partners, albeit not without difficulty, managed to find a balanced line of conduct with Russia at that time. This provided a sustainable international development in subsequent years. Including our work in the top twenty for overcoming the global economic crisis. Provision of security issues. The solution of regional problems. I hope that reason will prevail today.
Russia cannot be punished. But with Russia you can line up the right relationship.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Eastern Europe/Ukraine

Post by Austin »

BRICS remain a viable option for Economic Growth

Sanctions effect: Russia to change its economic partners…for the better
Post Reply