# Russia has invaded Ukraine. How will the West respond? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Tags:** ukraine-invasion\ **Created:** [February 28, 2014, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513 "2014-02-28T15:06:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 124
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2014, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2461 "2014-04-14T23:00:31Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Sevastopol has been a source of multinational tensions when the west works zealously to pull Ukraine into NATO and out of Russia’s trading sphere. > [@](#): > > Rich, I have advocated not pushing NATO membership for Ukraine or Georgia against Russian objections, but if Russia detaches the two breakaway provinces from Georgia, I think fast induction into NATO should be the centerpiece of our response Do you not understand English at all? look up “zealously”. Look up “not pushing”. See how one is not the same as the other before you post your next killer “proof”. ---
**Author:** ![kurtisokc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbce88/32.png) [@kurtisokc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kurtisokc)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2014, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2462 "2014-04-14T23:41:17Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > If Ukraine were true friends with Russia there would never been a threat to not renew the lease. So what? If it belongs to Ukraine, it is their prerogative not to renew the lease if they don’t want to. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > If Sevastopol has been a source of multinational tensions when the west works zealously to pull Ukraine into NATO and out of Russia’s trading sphere. I don’t necessarily agree with your characterization of the situation, but setting that aside nothing you’ve said shows that, before the current crisis, Russia ever disputed Ukrainian sovereignty over Sevastopol. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > An example is that Yanukovich extended the lease to 2042 but anti Russian Ukrainians violently removed him from office. Once again, so what? The fact that Ukrainians disagree among themselves over whether to renew the lease proves nothing. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > This link provides an insight into those tensions over the years; > > Losing Sevastopol is Russia losing it here: > > [Losing Sevastopol - Ukraine in NATO removes Russian Black Sea fleet's port](http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2062167/posts?page=1) I link to 6-year-old message board posts by people engaging in idle speculation proves nothing. Nothing you have said are posted has responded to my question: What evidence is there that, prior to current crisis the status of Sevastopol was “in dispute?” The fact that Russia believed it had a strategic interest in maintaining a base there doesn’t mean that it disputed Ukrainian sovereignty. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2463 "2014-04-15T00:55:50Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Do you not understand English at all? look up “zealously”. Look up “not pushing”. See how one is not the same as the other before you post your next killer “proof”. Do you ever read more than just the first line or two? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2464 "2014-04-15T01:08:45Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Do you ever read more than just the first line or two? Did you read the first line or two? This is obviously saying “I don’t think it’s a good idea but it is a good chess move in response to Russian expansionism”. That is not zealous. You understand that right? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2465 "2014-04-15T04:32:01Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > So Ukraine is only a friend as long as it does what Russia wants? No. That is a poor interpretation of my point. Sevastopol has a special status that means it should be mindful even to distant observers that to Russians it is a Russian treasure of historical nationalistic pride. And this is why in proper context that Sevastopol should be treated by Ukraine as a friend would respect the Russian-ness of that historic port city: > [@](#): > > The population of Sevastopol proper is 342,451 (2001), making it the 15th largest city in Ukraine and the largest in Crimea. City agglomeration has population 961,885 (2008). According to the Ukrainian National Census, 2001, the ethnic groups of Sevastopol include Russians (71.6%), Ukrainians (22.4%), Belarusians (1.6%), Tatars (0.7%), Crimean Tatars (0.5%), Armenians (0.3%), Jews (0.3%), Moldovans (0.2%), and Azerbaijanis (0.2%).[31] > **[Sevastopol](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sevastopol)** > > Sevastopol (/ˌsɛvəˈstoʊpəl, səˈvæstəpoʊl/),\[a\] sometimes written Sebastopol, is the largest city in Crimea and a major port on the Black Sea. Due to its strategic location and the navigability of the city's harbours, Sevastopol has been an important port and naval base throughout its history. Since the city's founding in 1783 it has been a major base for Russia's Black Sea Fleet. During the Cold War of the 20th century, it was a closed city. The total administrative area is 864 square kilome... Here’s an historic perspective for those who like to view current events balanced with a deeper historic perspective than what out western media is reporting; > **[Russia and Ukraine](http://russiaandukraine.blogspot.com/2010/06/sevastopol-ukraine-glory-tragedy-and.html?m=1)** > > SEVASTOPOL, Ukraine — Glory, tragedy and an army of ghosts haunt this great naval base that commands the Crimea and surrounding Black Sea. ... It ends with this: > [@](#): > > .Sevastopol has belonged to Ukraine since the 1954. But its soil is soaked deep by Russian blood, and in spirit, Russian it will always remain. That is what I meant when I wrote my view that the dispute is now settled. Russians no longer will be negotiatiating or paying rent for a place that was for most of recent history - theirs. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2466 "2014-04-15T04:46:33Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Did you read the first line or two? This is obviously saying “I don’t think it’s a good idea but it is a good chess move in response to Russian expansionism”. That is not zealous. You understand that right? No. What I see is that this was an anti-Russian zealot’s knee jerk response in the immediate aftermath of Georgia’s unjustified massive artillery attack on South Ossetia that led to a justified Russian counter attack. The zealot did not have the advantage of reading the EU commissioned report that cane out a year later. On the issue of lack of proportionality of the Russian counter attack the EU report’s authors did admit that it is difficult to draw that line. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2467 "2014-04-15T05:11:12Z")
> [@kurtisokc](#): > > Please provide a cite that Sevastopol’s status was “in dispute for decades” before the current crisis, because it was my understanding that as per the Budapest memorandum and the 1997 Russian-Ukrainian Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation, Russia explicitly recognized that Sevastopol was a part of Ukraine. An excerpt from the following link ((“Under such circumstances, implicitly at least, the Russian Black Sea Fleet would form a part of a hostile military bloc and occupy the same port as the smaller Ukrainian Black Sea Fleet. Could it be evicted physically if the Russian government refuses to remove? While Ukraine remains outside NATO it seems unlikely. It seems equally implausible that the two countries would go to war over the status of the city and its fleet. But time is running out for a solution”)) RUSSIA AND UKRAINE DISPUTE OVER SEVASTOPOL. David Marples. (This article appeared originally in the EDMONTON JOURNAL, 28 June 2008) > **[RUSSIA AND UKRAINE DISPUTE OVER SEVASTOPOL](https://ukraineanalysis.wordpress.com/2008/07/13/russia-and-ukraine-dispute-over-sevastopol/)** > > David Marples At the entrance to Sevastopol harbor a giant monument commemorates the city’s attainment of “hero” status during the Second World War. Closer to the shore one sees a… > [@](#): > > In 1954, to mark the 300th anniversary of the so-called Treaty of Friendship between Ukraine and Russia at Pereyaslav–the goal was to prevent Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s Cossack army from being overrun by the Poles–Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev made Ukraine a gift of the Crimean peninsula. Ostensibly that gift also included Sevastopol. When Ukraine became independent in 1991, it also laid claim to the city as well as the Soviet Black Sea fleet. Russia demurred and serious conflict ensued. > > In May 1997 that dispute was resolved temporarily by a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation between Russia and Ukraine that seemed comprehensive. The fleet by then was already divided–Russia had 83% of the warships–and the Russians agreed on a 20-year lease of three main harbors and two airstrips for a payment of about $100 million. The treaty stated expressly that Sevastopol belonged to Ukraine. > > Many Russian leaders have never accepted the loss of Catherine’s port. In early June, Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov demanded the withdrawal of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol from Ukraine and their transferal to Russia. His comments, which earned him a ban from traveling to Ukraine, followed a statement from the Russian parliament that Ukraine’s potential entry into NATO would terminate the 1997 Friendship Treaty. Ukraine is concerned also about territorial violations in exercises involving the sailors. The latter are also housed thanks to subsidies from Moscow. > > On June 24, a spokesperson for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, clearly following directions from President Viktor Yushchenko, declared that the lease on Sevastopol would not be renewed and the Russian Fleet must leave the city by May 29, 2017. > > There is another dispute concerning the possible expansion of the Russian fleet. At its peak in the 1980s the Black Sea Fleet had over 630 warships and submarines with a maximum of 70,000 sailors and other personnel. Today the fleet is a shadow of its former self with 35 warships and 11,000 personnel. Russia would like to increase those figures respectively to 100 and 25,000, which it claims is permissible by the terms of the 1997 treaty. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, on the other hand, claims that no increase in warships is allowed. > > From Ukraine’s perspective it is illogical to raise the size of the Russian fleet prior to its withdrawal in less than nine years’ time. Russia claims the fleet is vital to its national interests. It pays for the lease through the cancellation of Ukraine’s energy debts and would likely demand immediate payment were the fleet ejected. It has begun construction of a new naval base on the eastern seaboard at Novorossiisk but the location is less ideal and lacks the spacious harbors of Sevastopol. > > The city itself is composed predominantly of ethnic Russians (over 70%) and is virtually 100% Russian speaking. It was a closed city during the Soviet period and close to a weapons base, the remains of which are visible on the hillside overlooking the port. In elections it has consistently backed the pro-Russian Regions Party led by Viktor Yanukovych. > > The problem has no easy solution. Sevastopol is a cradle of Russian imperial ambitions and of Russian “military golory.” It was founded by Russia. But legally Crimea, though autonomous, is Ukrainian. And Ukraine’s strategic interests–at least as long as Yushchenko remains president–are with the West and NATO, membership of which is anticipated in the near future. > > Under such circumstances, implicitly at least, the Russian Black Sea Fleet would form a part of a hostile military bloc and occupy the same port as the smaller Ukrainian Black Sea Fleet. Could it be evicted physically if the Russian government refuses to remove? While Ukraine remains outside NATO it seems unlikely. It seems equally implausible that the two countries would go to war over the status of the city and its fleet. But time is running out for a solution. > > (This article appeared originally in the EDMONTON JOURNAL, 28 June 2008) ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2468 "2014-04-15T12:23:38Z")
You are proving that the extension and terms of the lease were contentious and Ukraine joining NATO would be considered hostile by Russia. Not that Sevastopol’s status was in dispute. Also, as the lease was extended and Ukraine didn’t join NATO both those issues were resolved. So what’s your point? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2469 "2014-04-15T17:32:43Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > You are proving that the extension and terms of the lease were contentious and Ukraine joining NATO would be considered hostile by Russia. Not that Sevastopol’s status was in dispute. Also, as the lease was extended and Ukraine didn’t join NATO both those issues were resolved. So what’s your point? The essential status of Sevastopol was never meaningfully settled between Ukraine and Russia until last month with the referendum. The lease deals etc did not resolve the issue of whether Sevastopol was controlled by Ukraine in any practical way because the city’s populace have never assimilated into a Ukrainian identity. That issue is no longer in dispute between Ukraine and Russia. ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2470 "2014-04-15T17:43:02Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > The essential status of Sevastopol was never meaningfully settled between Ukraine and Russia until last month with the referendum. Uhm… Russia took Sevastopol illegally, therefore the status was not **meaningfully settled**. You seem to have a very weird concept of what the word ‘settled’ means. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > The lease deals etc did not resolve the issue of whether Sevastopol was controlled by Ukraine in any practical way By leasing the base from Ukraine, Russia recognised Kiev’s legitimacy over Sevastopol. Just like when you rent a house, you recognise the fact that it belongs to the landlord. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > That issue is no longer in dispute between Ukraine and Russia. Yes it is. Or do you somehow think that Ukraine magically accepts Sevastopol’s change of hands? ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2471 "2014-04-15T19:52:12Z")
> [@Batistuta](#): > > Uhm… Russia took Sevastopol illegally, therefore the status was not **meaningfully settled**. Illegality is a meaningless concept between nations. Sevastopol is part of Russia now and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Nothing you can do to change that fact. Its status is meaningfully settled. Move on. Even most Ukrainians, as far as I can fathom, are ready to accept it as a fact and to move on. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2472 "2014-04-15T20:12:23Z")
As a matter of principle though, the actually complaint that it was illegal will not be dropped in the foreseeable future either. Sure we can “move on” but you can bet your boots it will figure in people’s figuring for some time to come. ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2473 "2014-04-15T20:22:30Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Illegality is a meaningless concept between nations. Sevastopol is part of Russia now and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Nothing you can do to change that fact. Its status is meaningfully settled. Move on. Even most Ukrainians, as far as I can fathom, are ready to accept it as a fact and to move on. No. The issue can’t be settled when most of the world’s countries do not recognise Sevastopol as part of Russia. International recognition is a key part of the game - just ask Taiwan. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2474 "2014-04-15T20:51:24Z")
> [@Batistuta](#): > > No. The issue can’t be settled when most of the world’s countries do not recognise Sevastopol as part of Russia. International recognition is a key part of the game - just ask Taiwan. You cannot have an antagonized, isolated Russia forever. It’s just not in your own interest, and for that reason you’ll have to come to terms with the fact eventually. The longer it takes the more of a pain it’ll be. It seems to me the American government doesn’t have a realistic exit strategy, and few of its actions are helpful for the resolve that is going to come eventually. As for most countries. If you want to go beyond the raw power aspect then it doesn’t really make much sense to go by numbers as if the voice of Luxembourg or the USA carries as much weight as China. And as far as I remember neither China nor India have not voted in favour of any sanctions against Russia. That’s one third of the world population right there. Neither have Indonesia, Brazil or Nigeria. Another good chunk. I’m certain Venezuela and Syria have not. Representatives of a majority of the world’s population just doesn’t appear to have take a firm stand against Russia. Taiwan and Kosovo don’t appear to have more widespread worldwide recognition than does the Crimea situation. So what? It’s not like we actually give a damn. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2475 "2014-04-15T20:53:37Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > As a matter of principle though, the actually complaint that it was illegal will not be dropped in the foreseeable future either. Sure we can “move on” but you can bet your boots it will figure in people’s figuring for some time to come. Yes. Past actions carries consequences. The same way Kosovo was a big part in the path that led to Crimea and figures strongly in people’s minds at this very time. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2476 "2014-04-15T21:25:37Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Yes. Past actions carries consequences. The same way Kosovo was a big part in the path that led to Crimea and figures strongly in people’s minds at this very time. I suppose, if you look at the world as Russia vs the West. But the fact is that the Ukraine didn’t bomb Yugoslavia. So there is no straight line here. It’s merely the Russians saying “You fucked with them, so it’s cool if we fuck with these other guys”. So you think it’s perfectly rational for the Ukraine to pay the price for NATO’s actions of almost 20 yrs ago? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2014, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2477 "2014-04-16T01:06:20Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > [www.thewire.com/global/2014/04/ukraine-might-sue-russia-over-gas-price-hike/360223/](http://www.thewire.com/global/2014/04/ukraine-might-sue-russia-over-gas-price-hike/360223/) The record shows that on 04-12-2014 at 11:08 AM you posted a comment that was out of the context of the discussion that preceded it. This is what I had in mind when I responded to kurtisokc’s comment: **Russia gives Ukraine cheap gas, $15 billion in loans** Dec. 17, 2013, 5:53 p.m. | Ukraine — by Darina Marchak, Katya Gorchinskaya - Kyiv Post > [@](#): > > Russia gave Ukraine a steep discount on gas, and promised to buy $15 billion worth of the nation’s bonds in a deal struck during President Viktor Yanukovych’s trip to Moscow on Dec. 17. The deal is expected to give a short-term boost to the nation’s crippled finances, but it’s unclear what concessions Ukraine had to make in exchange. > > Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the new price for Ukraine will be around $268.5 per 1,000 cubic meters of natural gas, about $150 cheaper than the current price. This could save Ukraine $3.5 billion per year at current consumption rates of 26-27 billion cubic meters per year. Read More: [Russia gives Ukraine cheap gas, $15 billion in loans - Dec. 17, 2013 | KyivPost](http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/russia-gives-ukraine-cheap-gas-15-billion-in-loans-333852.html) At the time when the protestors in Kiev rejected the deal in December 2013, their rejection was not based one iota on Russia terminating the lease for the Navy Base in Sevastopol. But Carnalk goes on and on about the 2010 negotiated deal that was tied to the long term lease deal for the Navy base in Sevastopol. Here’s the record: On 04-11-2014 at 02:05 PM \*\*I asked \*\*a general question: > [@](#): > > Does anyone think Russia is wrong to demand overdue payments (in $tens of billions) for Ng or it gets shut off until payments are made? To which on 04-11-2014 at 02:24 PM \*\*Rune responded \*\*quite intelligently: > [@](#): > > Yes. The Ukrainian people have enough problems as is, and it’s still their brothers. Russia should show greatness not pettiness. Btw. they started handing back Ukrainian naval vessels from Sevastopol. The next day on 04-12-2014 at 10:40 AM \*\*kurtisokc provided this response \*\*to my general question: > [@](#): > > Nothing inherintly wrong in demanding overdue payments, but it is curioius that Russia never demands that Ukraine pay its bills whenever there is a compliant (i.e. pro-Russian) government in Kiev. It is only when the Ukrainian authorities start acting independently of Moscow that Russia suddenly remembers that the bill is past due. On 04-12-2014 at 11:03 AM \*\*I responded \*\*directly to kurtisokc’s comment: > [@](#): > > Moscow/Gasprom sold gas under the market value of the price that EU negotiated. The Ukrainian nationalists rejected that discount when they violently discarded the elected president of Ukraine for the privilege of chumming up with the EU. Yanukovich was trying to get a better deal from the EU before taking that gas price hit. > > It’s hard to blame Russia for a hard line against mob rule in Kiev that did not seem to be concerned with paying the nations bills as long as they could poke a sharp stick in Putin’s eye. Then five minutes later on 04-12-2014 at 11:08 AM in a response to me, \*\*Carnalk wrote \*\*: > [@](#): > > Part of the Russian gas hikes is because they gave a break for the navy base lease deal. They yanked those cuts because they stole the base. How fair is that? On 04-12-2014 at 11:22 AM \*\*I precisely explained \*\*to Carnalk what “negotiated rates" (Dec 2014) that I am referring to. Also I provided a Reuters cite (February 24 this year which is prior to the Annexation of Sevastopol): > [@](#): > > I’m talking about rates negotiated by Yanukovich with Moscow before and I believe were in effect until around the time the Crimean Parliament ‘decdided’ to conduct a popular uprising and separate Crimea from Ukraine. Also The Russian Port had some kind of special autonomy and has little to do with the negotiated gas price that was pissed away by mobocracy at the end of February 2014. > > > [@](#): > > > > UPDATE 1-Ukraine hopes Russia will not change gas price Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:13am EST Feb 24 (Reuters) - Ukraine hopes the price it pays for Russian gas will not change, Acting Energy Minister Eduard Stavytsky said on Monday, following the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovich as president. “We hope that the price (of Russian gas) will be stable,” Stavytsky told Reuters by telephone. > > > > Russia agreed in December to reduce the gas price for Kiev to $268.50 per 1,000 cubic metres, a cut of about one third from around $400 which Ukraine had paid since 2009. The reduction was part of a wider financial deal Moscow signed with Kiev after Ukraine spurned an EU trade deal. On 04-12-2014 at 11:38 AM Carnalk wrote: > [@](#): > > Read more: > > > [@](#): > > > > [http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/wo...service=mobile](http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/wo...service=mobile) > > > > Preparing to further raise the heat on Kiev, the Russian parliament moved to annul agreements with Ukraine on Russia’s navy base in Crimea. In 2010, Ukraine extended the lease of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet’s base until 2042 for an annual rent of $98 million and price discounts for Russian natural gas supplies. The lower house voted to repeal the deal Monday, and the upper house was to follow suit Tuesday. > > Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has said that Russia had given Ukraine $11 billion in gas discounts in advance and should claim the money back once the lease deal is repealed — a threat repeated Tuesday by Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin. ” > > hey we advanced you money on that base. Now that we took it from you, we want that money back. Nice. But “boo to the IMF gas hikes” of course. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2014, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2478 "2014-04-16T03:36:20Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > The record shows that on 04-12-2014 at 11:08 AM you posted a comment that was out of the context of the discussion that preceded it. > This is what I had in mind when I responded to kurtisokc’s comment: Why would I give a crap what you had in mind while responding to someone else? I brought up the subject of Russia reneging on the lease based gas rebates. You then proceeded to assert we were talking about another set of rebates. Well guess what? We aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2014, 11:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2479 "2014-04-16T11:21:04Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Why would I give a crap what you had in mind while responding to someone else? I brought up the subject of Russia reneging on the lease based gas rebates. You then proceeded to assert we were talking about another set of rebates. Well guess what? We aren’t. See your post 2419 right here: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17281775&postcount=2419](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17281775&postcount=2419) If you didn’t and don’t give a crap what I had in mind why did you quote what I had in mind on April 12 at 11:08 AM which was your response to what I wrote in response to another poster? Why did you cite my words and then proceed to diverge onto a different issue altogether? Post 2419 certainly looks like you were trying to challenge what I wrote. Do you not have a challenge to what I wrote a response to kurtisokc? In the future if you don’t give a crap about what I have in mind when I post something - don’t cite my words and then respond. That’s fair and it certainly would maintain an orderly debate or discussion about this topic. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2014, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2480 "2014-04-16T12:22:45Z")
Here’s the “context”: You: Pulling these rebates is totally reasonable Me: What about these other rebates? You: No, the other ones are reasonable. I never argued against your point, I asked your opinion on my point - if you don’t want to answer then fine but you just seemed to act like we were arguing about your point. I wasn’t. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=123) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=125)