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.
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?
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.
As Yanukovich was the elected president of Ukraine and having to escape to save his life, I don’t see how escaping with his life in that chaotic moment in time should be disparagingly viewed as giving up the ship. I agree with much other than that with you you are saying.
And Yanukovich was run out of office because of protests turned violent for his rejecting the EU offer and going with the Russian deal. If it was about corruption impeachment should followed the constitutional route in order to deal with that.
That deal was in 2010 with the elected president of Ukraine and the rest of the government. I was talking about the deal to cut prices made last December that went lower yet. The mob in Kiev pissed on that deal.
I’m sure if Kiev offers to pay the billions it owes for gas the Russians could honor the 98 million yearly deal for the Navy or deduct it. But there is no longer a dispute over which nation Sevastopol is a part of anymore is there?
You ignore that Sevastopol’s status has been disputed for years.
No I mean the constitutional process that involves the courts. And one that does not involve a violent mob forcing the president to flee for his life over a policy dispute on how to resolve the nations economic problems.
Not magically. The Crimean popular uprising and revolt in response to constitutional lawless and the chaos and violence in Kiev ended the disputed status of Sevastopol.
I’m not sure you’re understanding the meaning of “disputed”. Since well over half of the world does not recognise Sevastopol as a Russian city, it’s status is very much disputed. And there’s very little Putin can do about that
This is an error. The mob did not renege on the lease agreement. Russia seizing the base is clearly the pissing on the deal. There can be no rational argument otherwise.
You are in error. Reading further does not disprove my point. And replacing a word in WIKI with one’s own word surely shows how desperate some are to find me to be wrong about something.
Russia didnt sieze their own base. What on earth are you telking about? Gas rates set in December 2013 had nothing to with lease amount for base through 2040.
The mob violence coup of Yanukovich led to the end of those rates and now the same mob is complaining because they have to pay what the EU pays and now they can’t pay or don’t want to oat their bills.
You know perfectly well what I am talking about. Why did Russia agree to the lease agreement if it was already theirs? Quit clowning. The mob governement specifically said they would continue respecting the agreement. Russia annexed Crimea and said “fuck you” to the agreement. As I said, there is no rational argument against that. That’s why you’ve switched to irrational argument.
I have witnessed them and have come to grudgingly accept the current reality. That doesn’t change the fact that only a dozen of countries recognise Sevastopol’s current status. Is that not the definition of a disputed status?
