Russia has invaded Ukraine. How will the West respond?

[NotfooledbyW]

@Batistuta

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?

Sevastopol’s status has been in dispute for decades. The dispute is resolved. Sevastopol is back in the Russian Federation and so is Crimea. The West won’t recognize them but so what? They are not going back to Ukraine ever. That resolves the dispute and its how the world moves on.

[NotfooledbyW]

@CarnalK

This is an error. The mob did not renege on the lease agreement.

I wrote the mob in Kiev pissed on that December deal to lower Gas Prices even lower. And you reply that the mob did not renege on the lease agreement. Why would you reply in that way.

[CarnalK]

Because that’s what I was talking about. I brought it up and you tried to change the subject to this December agreement.

[John_Mace]

@NotfooledbyW

Sevastopol’s status has been in dispute for decades. The dispute is resolved. Sevastopol is back in the Russian Federation and so is Crimea. The West won’t recognize them but so what? They are not going back to Ukraine ever.

So you have changed your position from what you posted earlier:

@CarnalK

You think Moscow will ever let Crimea have another referendum if they want to separate from Russia in the future?

Perhaps Moscow would allow another referendum.

Or perhaps you meant that there might be a referendum, but Russia will rig it so that it can’t pass.

[CarnalK]

In his defense, Sevestopo had a special status within Crimea. Sort of like DC, it was a federal city.

[John_Mace]

@CarnalK

In his defense, Sevestopo had a special status within Crimea. Sort of like DC, it was a federal city.

He said both Sebastopol and Crimea will never go back.

[CarnalK]

Oh right. I already caught him on that when I called him on what he meant by “perhaps”.

[NotfooledbyW]

@CarnalK

Read more: http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/russias-gazprom-announces-40-percent-jump-in-gas-price-for-ukraine/article17752094/?service=mobile

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.

Here’s the Globe and Mail AP report that **Carnalk cited **on 04-12-2014 at 11:38 AM:
**Russia sharply hikes gas price for Ukraine **Vladimir Isachenkov And Peter Leonard MOSCOW — The Associated Press Published Tuesday, Apr. 01 2014, 4:09 AM EDT Last updated Tuesday, Apr. 01 2014, 8:01 AM EDT

Russia on Tuesday sharply hiked the price for natural gas to Ukraine and threatened to reclaim billions previous discounts, raising the heat on its cash-strapped government, while Ukrainian police moved to disarm members of a radical nationalist group after a shooting spree in the capital.

Alexei Miller, the head of Russia’s state-controlled Gazprom natural gas giant, said Tuesday that the company has withdrawn December’s discount that put the price of gas at $268.50 per 1,000 cubic meters and set the price at $385.50 per 1,000 cubic meters for the second quarter.

Read More: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/russias-gazprom-announces-40-percent-jump-in-gas-price-for-ukraine/article17752094/

And here is the part that matches what I am saying, not what Carnalk is saying:

The discount was part of a financial lifeline which Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to Ukraine’s President, Viktor Yanukovych, after his decision to ditch a pact with the European Union in favour of closer ties with Moscow. The move fueled three months of protests which led Yanukovych to flee to Russia in February.

Radical nationalist groups played a key role in Yanukovych’s ouster, but they quickly fell out with the new government. Many activists are still encamped on Kiev’s Independence Square, known as the Maidan, and have signalled their intent to remain there until the election of what they deem to be a legitimate government

The above “financial lifeline” is what I have been talking about as the accurate record shows:

On 04-12-2014 at 11:22 AM** I precisely explained **to Carnalk exactly what “negotiated rates (Dec 2013) that I am referring to. Also , I provided a Reuters cite (February 24 this year which is prior to the annexation of Sevastopol) as anyone can see right here:

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.

What Carnalk wrote on 04-12-2014 at 11:08 cannot be supported with any facts:

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.

Carnalk is entirely wrong because the Link to the Globe and Mail AP report explains why Gazprom charged a higher rate during the second quarter:

Gazprom’s Miller said that the decision to charge a higher price in the second quarter was made because Ukraine has failed to pay off its debt for past supplies, which now stands at $1.7 billion.

And all this is entirely coming about as a result of mobocracy in Kiev that pissed on a very good deal because of Ukrainian nationalists trying to pull all of Ukraine into the western sphere and joining up with the EU. And that mob got its way when Yanukovich had to flee for his life from them.

[CarnalK]

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.

that’s what I am talking about.

[CarnalK]

Two discounts were also cancelled this week: one given while Ukraine allowed Russian Navy to use Crimea’s Sevastopol port; and the other as part of the loan deal Russia gave to Ukraine when former president Viktor Yanukovych turned down a trade deal with the European Union in November.

www.thewire.com/global/2014/04/ukraine-might-sue-russia-over-gas-price-hike/360223/

[John_Mace]

I really feel sorry for those “Russian Speakers” in Ukraine being subject to so much violence. And they’re so stoic about it, too! Not a peep from them. Probably because Putin is doing such a good job of advising them to keep a cool head and avoid actions that might lead to war.

[kurtisokc]

@NotfooledbyW

Sevastopol’s status has been in dispute for decades. The dispute is resolved. Sevastopol is back in the Russian Federation and so is Crimea. The West won’t recognize them but so what? They are not going back to Ukraine ever. That resolves the dispute and its how the world moves on.

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.

[BrokenBriton]

Amused by the way Putin is giving USAID some of its own medicine with these occupations - in another universe this is actually installation art.

Impressed by how the breakup has remained this peaceful, at least so far.

[Inbred_Mm_domesticus]

I used to always laugh at the phrase “reflexively hate America” and thought it generally to be a cheap way to categorize and ignore people’s beliefs. Now I see its merits. BrokenBriton, I am certain you will hear a lot about problems in Crimea from the legendarily free press of Russia if such problems do come to pass.

[Batistuta]

It appears that Iran has offered to sell its gas to Europe. Nothing ground-breaking yet, but it has got me thinking. What if the current events in Crimea not only pull Europe (and Ukraine) away from Russia, but also closer to Iran? There’s already been signs that Iran will leave the ‘axis of evil’ in the short term, I wonder if the gas issue will be a catalyst for that transition

[NotfooledbyW]

@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.

If Ukraine were true friends with Russia there would never been a threat to not renew the lease.

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.

An example is that Yanukovich extended the lease to 2042 but anti Russian Ukrainians violently removed him from office.

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
NRO’s The Corner ^ | 8-14-08 | email to Rich Lowry

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. In the short term, Rice should include a visit to Berlin in her travel; that is where the obstacle to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia resides; she should convince them that Russian alteration of international borders through violence must have strategic consequences for Russia. And I don’t mean expulsion from the G8 or boycotting the Olympics. I mean something more like … losing Sevastopol.
The Russian Black Sea fleet is based at Sevastopol (as it has been for eons) under a 20-year lease that expires on 2017. The Ukrainian government has made it clear that Russia can forget about renewing the lease. Sevastopol is on the Crimea peninsula, which is majority ethnically Russian (unlike Abkhazia or South Ossetia, which are not actually Russian) and many leading Russians have said they will never give it back. Fast-tracking NATO membership for Ukraine and stationing significant NATO forces there, and making clear that the defense of Ukraine’s territorial integrity is their role, will guarantee that the Crimea stays Ukrainian and that Sevastopol passes from Russian hands within 10 years. There may not be a suitable alternative deep-water port on the Black Sea large enough to base Russia’s Black Sea fleet. Russia’s ability to dominate the Black Sea and project force into the Eastern Mediterranean could be turned back to the 18th century.

We are not going to go to war over the secession of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In our rash recognition of Kosovo, we embraced the principle that justice and self-determination can trump the territorial integrity of sovereign states; in so doing we killed the Helsinki Accords (under which the Soviet empire in Europe was liquidated without any revision of borders) and can no longer stand on them. When the Russians now say “justice” and “self-determination” they are slapping us with our own text.

But there is another dimension to this — the balance of power. Russia knows that its invasion of a democratic U.S. ally and forcible alteration of its borders is a heavy strategic blow to the United States: it makes a mockery of the value of an alliance with us. Russia must be made to see that its action will be answered by an even more grievous strategic blow. The loss of Sevastopol — Russia’s equivalent of Norfolk — is the perfect punishment. And what a great new base it would make for the U.S. Sixth Fleet.

Ukraine, Georgia — welcome to NATO.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2062167/posts?page=1

[RickJay]

@NotfooledbyW

If Ukraine were true friends with Russia there would never been a threat to not renew the lease.

So Ukraine is only a friend as long as it does what Russia wants?

[XT]

@RickJay

So Ukraine is only a friend as long as it does what Russia wants?

And only the anti-Russian Ukrainians were violent. That whole shooting the protesters thingy didn’t actually happen, or it was actually the anti-Russian Ukrainians who perpetrated that…or something. And they removed the rightful king…er, I mean president…because the EU, NATO and the US wanted to prevent the Russians from having a warm water port on the Black Sea. Or something.

[BrokenBriton]

Those Eurasians, eh.

[XT]

@BrokenBriton

Those Eurasians, eh.

Yeah man…good, um, point. Never get into a land war with a Sicilian when DEATH IS ON THE LINE!