Why don’t you tell us what you think Russia and Putin should be doing during this crisis.
Russia should be prepared to react if the central government decides to go all out Sakaashvilli on the Russian speaking people in Ukraine and prevent that from happening. I see no problem with Russia continuing trade and economic ties and cooperation with the Ukrainian people living in those regions.
I didn’t ask whether you thought that was the case, I asked, if it was, would the interim government (or whomever gets elected in a couple weeks) be justified in intervening with force?
Of course they would, but in that case it would not be productive to go all out ‘Sakaashvilli’ on the region because they’d be harming hundreds of thousands of pro-government folks too.
So, you think Russia should invade Ukraine if fighting breaks out?
Has a single person other than yourself proposed such a massive, indiscriminate attack?
So, stay with me here: the legitimacy of a forceful response thus hinges on what the people of Eastern Ukraine want. Therefore, the single most crucial issue is determining that, via a free, fair, transparent election. The upcoming election would do nicely, would it not? Separatists could vote for a separatist candidate, federalists a federalist candidate, and status-quo-ists a status-quo candidate.
Resolved: militia, and/or Russian, efforts to prevent that election from taking place would be prima facie evidence that the majority of Eastern Ukrainians don’t want to split up the nation. Just because one side is noisy and violent, doesn’t mean they represent the popular will. See The Road to Serfdom, (or the Bolshevik Revolution) for a discussion of what happens when violence and intimidation are used to determine who will rule: the rulers are those most able and willing to use violence and intimidation, not necessarily those who are popular or competent.
BTW, is that all you think Putin should be doing right now? Preparing to invade? How about toning down the separatist rhetoric and encouraging the “Russian Speakers” to work through the political system for change rather than forcibly splitting off?
It is already happening.
Evidently, holding an election is now contrary to the “will of the people” - according to some gunmen, and according to Russia.
Disgusting.
Well, there you have it. That’s what you do when you don’t think your side would actually win an election, and your only edge is having radical gunmen on your side. Again, prima facie evidence that the separatists are a minority.
How would this be different from what has already happened?
I don’t believe as you do that Russian speakers can be swayed by Putin to work through the political system and surrender to pro-Maidan authorities. The word out of Kiev is that the separatists are being led by terrorists that must be captured or killed. I’d guess that their terrorist status would have to be removed if Putin is to be given a chance to reason with the separatist leadership.
There is probably a magnitude and intensity of fighting that would bring Russian military intervention to stop it. That threshold would most likely be about the same level as Sakaashvilli brought to the low level of fighting between Georgia and South Ossetia in 2008 when Russian troops were sent in to stop the impulsive Georgian president from raining missiles onto civilian buildings.
But Russia should not invade Ukraine beyond taking out any rocket or artillery assets that would be firing at civilian buildings in cities held by separatists. As was the case in 2008 Russia would be justified to stop the firing on civilians as long as their military intervention was proportional to the need to stop civilian casualties.
The EU report determined that Russia in 2008 was originally justified to react to stop civilian casualties in South Ossetia but went beyond a proportional response after the civilians’ safety had been secured.
That EU report sets a precedent for what Russia would be justified to do ‘proportionally’ in the event that civilians were to be taking heavy bombardment and casualties as a result of the ongoing dispute and conflict taking place in eastern Ukraine.
I’m for the OSCE plan.
Well yeah. It doesn’t oblige Russia to do anything. I’m failing to see how it’s all that different than what’s already on the table, however. Could, instead of a drive by link, you discuss WHY you think that the OSCE roadmap/plan is something you feel would or could be successful? Reading over it, it seems like stuff that’s already been on the table (i.e. amnesty for the armed folks who have taken over government buildings and such in Luhansk and Donetsk and declared unilateral independence) or in the works (such as the elections and talks about greater autonomy). Ironically, from your article, it seems your valiant rebels in eastern Ukraine are the ones not too keen on this, unless the government comes to them. While the US is tepid on this (more because it looks pretty much like what’s already on the table, and so unlikely to do much of anything), the current interim Ukrainian government doesn’t seem opposed, though again doesn’t seem like it’s being looked at as having much of a chance to accomplish much of anything.
Do you see a better plan out there? Putin did not depose the elected president of Ukraine.
No, he didn’t. He merely used the resources of his nation state to take advantage of the situation and snag a large chunk of their territory, and continues to attempt to squeeze additional advantage if the opportunity presents himself by having his nations military do ‘training exercises’ on the border (while claiming they have been pulled back), killing two birds with one stick…the ability to threaten the Ukrainians and show them what could and would happen if they block his provocateurs in the eastern Ukraine and have it poised, just in case he can swoop in and snag some more.
As for a better plan, no plan is going to be optimal unless and until Russia is involved and agrees to start acting in a more civilized way. As long as they are there, poised like a circling shark, no plan is going to work out well. Like I said, it’s fairly obvious why you like the plan you linked too (though I note, you didn’t answer any of my questions, and merely continued playing the same game you’ve been playing), since it doesn’t require the Russians to do a damned thing, and leaves them free to continue doing what they have been doing.
Questions can be answered by a question. I do not see a better plan out there. As to this one being successful; it being the best plan should be the one that has the best chance of being successful. But it can’t be successful when Kiev officials continue to blame all their woes on Russia. That is why I pointed out that Russia did not violently depose the former elected president of Ukraine. And it was not the Russian-speaking folks in Ukraine either.
Russia didn’t decide on draconian measures to stifle protesters or start whacking them either…but their buddy (and yours) did, precipitating this entire cluster fuck. Happy to see you remain true to form though and continue to attempt to spin this the way you have since your first post in this thread.
You do understand that 90%+ of “folks” in Ukraine speak Russian, right?
Do you have a point regarding the issues being discussed.
I am referring to what is commonly referred to as the ‘folks’ who regard ‘Russian’ as their native language. There are political issues regarding the so-called official language of Ukraine which is not Russian. Your stat is quite meaningless. If it were meaningful that 90% can speak and understand some Russian then this type of political issue would not exist.