“… in** negotiations **over the new power structure.”
My impression was that Putin has been masterfully setting up his negotiating position from the start. The control that has been exhibited on both sides to avoid serious deadly confrontation tells me that both sides have known that all along.
That confrontation in front of the air base yesterday was interesting in that it kind of shows me that the "Pro-Russian Forces/Russian? Forces guarding that air base have been in control of perhaps up to 45 Ukrainian MIGS as Russian TV News said. That is significant because control of that base I’m sure made the West’s side in all this understand who weak their position is going to be… for Ukraine to get it back. If a referendum passes for Crimea to secede and become autonomous on March 30th … The West will be so pitifully weakened in the NEGOTIATIONS that are coming … Putin will get much of what he wants in the form of guarantees… like Ukraine never joins NATO and No US Missile Defense get’s built on Ukraine soil… Putiin is not ‘mad’… as in nuts or lost touch with reality… That’s an out for Merkel and anyone who thinks he is… because they know they’ve got nothing to deal with… specifically if Crimeans decided where their preference lies… and that is with Russia.
He was my take on it… "let the negotiations begin:
Kerry and Lavrov meet in Paris today… on schedule…
Conspiracy theories, conflicting news reports and other subjective information noise aside, I think we’ve lost track of the only things we know for sure about this situation:
Ukraine has ousted it’s oligarch president because he was not acting in the best interest of the people who elected him. They are maintaining peace admirably under very tense circumstances and are moving forward towards establishing a new gov’t through an election process.
Russia/Putin saw it as a problematic situation and acted in self interest to protect its assets/interests in an unpredictable political climate. Any nation would do likewise under similar circumstances.
The United States, good intentions aside, has over-reacted with some of the particularly aggressive rhetoric because people (politicians esp.) love to rush to conclusions and to action before gathering all the necessary facts.
We should wait and see how things play out instead of making wild and baseless assumptions (of which I’ve done my share).
Yes, occupying a foreign country can fall under “protecting your interests”. Doesn’t mean it is any less illegal or that protesting it is an “overreaction”.
This is mildly amusing, and adds to the bemusement at John Kerry statement the other day about Putin’s “bogus pretexts” (still haven’t been able to stand up straight since then) :
I never claimed that the occupation was legal, but I do understand that Russia has interests in the region. It’s not so much legal as it is predictable.
As to the ‘overreaction’, I do think that the West was too quick to declare victory after Yanukovich was overthrown. Seeing that the West was already counting him out, Putin may have realised that he had to take desperate measures in order to stay in the game.
That’s fascinating. No really. I particularly like the idea of “sins” like this is some kind of bible study.
Back to John Kerry’s lies and bullshit, and his, erm, clumsy attempt to portray, contain and morally judge Putin’s actions in a vaccumn.
Of course, it’s now clear Putin’s forces are actually in Crimea by legal agrereement so comparisons with various and ongoing US invasions of sovereignty are not relevant.
: