I still stand by what I said. It appears that the most likely outcome will be what I predicted would happen at the time: That Ukraine and the West will be forced to tactly accept de-facto Russian control over Crimea, but still won’t recognize it. Ukraine obvioiusly won’t like it, but will be powerless to change it. The West will not back down from its position that Russia’s annexation was illegal for fear of setting a bad precident (and rightfully so IMO) but will not have the will to do what is necessary to change the de facto situation. So, essentially, Crimea will continue to exist in a sort of limbo à la Northern Cyprus or Abkhazia, appearing on western maps as “in dispute” or part of Ukraine “occupied by Russia.” And after a few years, no one outside of Crimea will feel any particular urgency to change the situation. I could see this lasting for decades. Thing is that as long as Russia’s de jour soverignty is disputed, the situation would be perceived as potentially unstable enough to deter outside investment. Think about it: Who would want to invest millions in a venture knowing that overnight it might end up in another country? Or knowing that your own government doesn’t officially recognize the legality of the country exercising de facto control of the site?
What I think is really sad is that I (and I suspect many other people) wouldn’t be opposed to Crimean self-determination (including annexation by Russia, if that’s what most Crimeans wanted) if it were the result of a legitimate democratic process. That is not what happened. Instead what we saw was a referendum held in obscene haste, with no time for meaningful campaigning, with the build-up to to the vote taking place under conditions of occupation by forces who were clearly hostle to the anti-annexation side, and which culminated in an implausible result. (97% my ass!!!)
And you are wrong about my not addressing the shooting of Maidan protestors:
On 03-04-2014 at 02:39 PM Malthus wrote:
On 03-04-2014 at 05:49 PM **I wrote **in response:
Wikipedia shows that February 18 was the day that 30 Ukrainians were killed. Twenty were protestors and ten were police. After that on the 19th and 20th there were 40 more killed, mostly protestors. A total of 17 police were killed during the protests. But on the 18th that was a high number of police getting killed in one day.
Lots of questions:
Having seen the Ukrainian armed forces in action this past week… that would be the worst possible outcome to this situation. Ukraine would join India, Pakistan and North Korea in the ‘countries too disorganised to possess nuclear weapons’. About their justification: it seems that every aggressive action in this crisis is being justified with the “previous agreements have been rendered void, so we can do whatever we want” excuse. Not the best attitude if we’re to find a solution to the crisis.
Having read the agreement, it seems to me that Russian diplomats have won this one (again). The Ukrainian government will have to kick protesters out of Maidan and other hot areas, and that will cause tension. Let’s hope this can be done in a civilised manner
The main things won here is that the interim government in Kiev has put aside military actions against the separatists for the time being. Putin has staked out his long term satisfaction with a constitutional change in Kiev federalizing the regions of Ukraine and giving them more autonomy including the economic freedom to partner with whatever nation the region’s industry and commercial interests decide.
It will be problematic however if the mobs of occupiers of government buildings are not being controlled by Putin sufficiently for them to trust that Kiev and the OSCE will follow through with Kiev’s side of the Geneva agreement.
This miner is having none of what Kiev and Moscow, Washington and London worked out in Geneva in his name:
Ukraine: separatists refuse to end occupation despite Geneva agreement
With all due respect to Mr ex-Miner, I don’t see how he’s going to get his referendum with all this craziness going on - including his occupation of government buildings.
The protest events in Eastern Ukraine need to be viewed in the west for what it is. **Its the economy stupid. **
From the following link: “people work, not protest,” residents often tend to vote with their stomachs.
I think most people understand that economics is a driving force here. Yes IMF money comes with some harsh costs/stipulations (as it does to every single country it’s loaned money to), but if people in the east think Russian money is going to pour in without costs they are deluded.
Of course a referendum will happen, Putin has plenty of ways to increase pressure until Kiev agrees. Not least participation by ethnic Russians in the May elections.
There is just quite a process to go through first.
The negotiations will have to include vacating government buildings. Since you seem to call the international negotiations a political circle jerk, who do you think the valid participants will be? Whoever happened to lead the charge on the buildings?
Well, the money that poured into South Ossetia seemed to produce limos for pro-Moscow politicians driving by ruined houses on shitty roads. I can’t say what exactly the money will produce or cost in Crimea or eastern Ukraine. I assume very Moscow friendly trade agreements but who knows? The Russians are of course presenting it as an act of generosity but taking that at face value would be to ignore human nature and history.
It appears that Putin is a villain to you no matter what. I thought you meant that the coal miner would have to give a virgin daughter to one of Putin’s oligarch entourage for the privilege of buying $285 per ton NG. So you have nothing but pro-Putin politicians driving limos in South Ossetia. So how many limos will snarl the streets of Khartsyzsk and Donetsk for economic aid from their Russian neighbor and spiritual friend?
Come on CarnalK, you’re being too cynical. We all know that Putin - the liberator of the Chechens, the Tatars and the Crimeans; who also negotiated with Yanukovych to offer him a great association agreement - acts out of generosity. Ukraine should be happy to have such a good neighbour
Kerry’s puppets from the west and Putin’s puppets from the east. The former is the ‘active government’, some of the latter are currently in prison - Putin will have to get all those ducks lined up in the next few weeks: the ethnic Russians need credible political leadership pretty soon, though, if Putin recognises the elections, they’ll presumably vote en masse for whoever is put up.
Putin will, I guess, need a very firm committment on a referedum before recognising the May process.
We’ll have to see the terms of the referendum, maybe a form of federalism …
Undoubtedly he wants a form of federalism. I am sure that Putin knows he bought himself a money pit in Crimea. A group of Russian leaning semi autonomous regions in the east is his goal now.Any more annexation would be a distant second choice I bet.
I can see how this move is not bigoted in the least, especially considering close to 30% of Ukraine’s population is either Russian or or direct Russian descent.
Now, Ukraine would have every right to not allow weapons into the country or decide on a case-by-case basis which Russians should be allowed and which ones shouldn’t be – e.g. the ones in active duty military or in intelligence services. But to say all Russians won’t be allowed entry is xenophobic and a textbook example of bigotry.
Democracy in Ukraine: alive and well. According to The West.