Crimea troubles - start of something larger?

[jduff]

It will be a interesting week. When a grape is made to look like a orange and then someone threatens to take it away. Makes for a very very interesting outcome.

 

You should expect censorship here in the U.S soon Obama should have a speech by the end of the week. As the economy is not going to go the way it supposed to. Things are speeding up now! Damn those bankers!

Edited March 4, 2014 by jduff

[imatfaal]

So, how exactly does that effect Russia? Considering most of its transactions are through the Yuan? I dont think Russia cares about western currency so much. The only people who care about western currency in Russia are western investors. In the next few days you will see many western investors pull out. Russia is not dependent upon the west's currency. The west is not Russia's primary trade partner. In fact it is the opposite. The E.U depends heavily upon Russian oil and gas! In fact, you will see huge moves among the BRICS nations.

 

Also, all stock markets will take a hit. That includes our own!http://www.cnbc.com/id/101460178

 

Will you stop making factual assertions that are just plain wrong - and can be checked with a moments googling!

 

"Considering most of its transactions are through the Yuan?" - That would make me believe you assert that close to 50% of Russia's imports and exports are to China - this is so far from being the case that it makes me think you are being deliberately deceptive. China is Russia's second biggest trading partner (7% exports and 8.5% imports) - amazingly the Netherlands are the biggest - but China is nowhere near the majority partner of either export or imports.

[jduff]

 

Will you stop making factual assertions that are just plain wrong - and can be checked with a moments googling!

 

"Considering most of its transactions are through the Yuan?" - That would make me believe you assert that close to 50% of Russia's imports and exports are to China - this is so far from being the case that it makes me think you are being deliberately deceptive. China is Russia's second biggest trading partner (7% exports and 8.5% imports) - amazingly the Netherlands are the biggest - but China is nowhere near the majority partner of either export or imports.

Will you quit making opinions that have no links nor substance attached to them other than your own view. If you are googling, and have a different opinion, show it! Not just words because you dont like what is being said. Its all good! Also, your island needs to pay its bills! I would not mind seeing Russia cutting off gas to Europe. Sanctions, my arse! Good luck with that!

[CaptainPanic]

(completely re-edited - sorry if anyone is quoting me in the meantime)

jduff, instead of shouting you could of course just search for some information yourself.

The list of most important trade partners of Russia is hugely important in this discussion, so I looked it up.

I think this is the list imatfaal mentioned:

Russia’s Top Import Partners
Below is a list of Russia’s top 15 trade partners that imported the most Russian shipments by dollar value during 2012. Also shown is each import country’s percentage share of total exports from Russia.

• Netherlands: $75,782,135,000 (14.4% of total Russian exports)
• China: $33,557,799,000 (6.4%)
• Italy: $27,925,878,000 (5.3%)
• Germany: $23,384,745,000 (4.5%)
• Belarus: $20,764,371,000 (4%)
• Poland: $19,636,202,000 (3.7%)
• Turkey: $15,981,433,000 (3%)
• Japan: $15,143,228,000 (2.9%)
• Ukraine: $13,920,585,000 (2.7%)
• South Korea: $13,810,916,000 (2.6%)
• Kazakhstan: $13,177,021,000 (2.5%)
• United States: $12,025,220,000 (2.3%)
• Finland: $10,477,522,000 (2%)
• United Kingdom: $9,110,672,000 (1.7%)
• Latvia: $8,208,139,000 (1.6%)

[I have edited the text below, updating]

Finding the Netherlands at the top of that list was also a surprise to me (I'm Dutch). So, I looked into that.

One third of all oil imports into the Netherlands are from Russia. But you should realize that Rotterdam (which is in the Netherlands) is the largest port of Europe. So, huge volumes of oil are also traded there. In addition, the Netherlands have invested in gas storage. We're now using empty gas fields to buy Russian gas in summer, and sell it to other (mostly European) countries in winter. The Netherlands got a bunch of additional gas pipelines, and also a gas terminal in the harbor of Rotterdam. What I am saying is that it may be an economic trick, as the pipelines go through the Netherlands, and the Dutch act as traders.

I trust this source more, because it seems very closely linked to the trade missions of 2013 (2013 was the "Russia-Netherlands year").

The Netherlands is one of Russia’s biggest foreign trade partners; it's the biggest trade partner in Europe and the second-biggest (in terms of volume) two-way trade partner globally after China. In 2012, two-way trade went up by more than 20 percent year-on-year to a new record high of $82.7 billion.

This indeed suggests that China is Russia's single biggest partner if you add up both import and export, but only if you don't count the EU as a single economy. If you do count the EU as a single economy, it is about 4 times larger in trade as China.

 

Based on the list I just quoted, I don't think it is likely that (quoting) "most of its transactions are through the Yuan"? (Assuming "most" means >50%).

Still, reading the quote in CharonY's post, that China will stick to its principle of non-interference, I think we should close the topic of China really getting involved. I find it less and less likely.

Edited March 4, 2014 by CaptainPanic
Edited because I found much better information.

[imatfaal]

Will you quit making opinions that have no links nor substance attached to them other than your own view. If you are googling, and have a different opinion, show it! Not just words because you dont like what is being said. Its all good! Also, your island needs to pay its bills! I would not mind seeing Russia cutting off gas to Europe. Sanctions, my arse! Good luck with that!

 

http://atlas.media.mit.edu/profile/country/rus/ - Although the page linked by Capt above does just as well. So now can you either post your references to the factual claim which I have disputed or admit you were just making it up?

[Sensei]

I am not sure whether you saw this video, from today 4 march:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tFJKPHonm0

If I understood correctly they said "bitches are shooting" (at 0:40) and then continued walking to Russian's soldiers. "America is with us" (at 1:15). Officer tried to calm down his soldiers.

[DimaMazin]

I think similar referenda like in Crimea are forbidden in Russia.

[jduff]

Just a interesting item. Here is a quote and the link for the story.

 

"

Moscow (AFP) - Russia could reduce to zero its economic dependency on the United States if Washington agreed sanctions against Moscow over Ukraine, a Kremlin aide said on Tuesday, warning that the American financial system faced a "crash" if this happened.

"We would find a way not just to reduce our dependency on the United States to zero but to emerge from those sanctions with great benefits for ourselves," said Kremlin economic aide Sergei Glazyev.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/russia-warns-could-reduce-zero-economic-dependency-us-083926261.html;_ylt=AwrSyCVd_hVT7BUA4C3QtDMD

 

Funny when I see opposing views. They always link things related to western financial systems. In reality Russia can cut out the west entirely and still remain at a advantage. While the west would suffer hardship. Consider 30% of all natural gas in Europe comes from Russia. Like I stated in my wwIII piece. There are two sides. BRICS then the west under the IMF and company!

[imatfaal]

Just a interesting item. Here is a quote and the link for the story.

 

"

Moscow (AFP) - Russia could reduce to zero its economic dependency on the United States if Washington agreed sanctions against Moscow over Ukraine, a Kremlin aide said on Tuesday, warning that the American financial system faced a "crash" if this happened.

"We would find a way not just to reduce our dependency on the United States to zero but to emerge from those sanctions with great benefits for ourselves," said Kremlin economic aide Sergei Glazyev.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/russia-warns-could-reduce-zero-economic-dependency-us-083926261.html;_ylt=AwrSyCVd_hVT7BUA4C3QtDMD

 

Funny when I see opposing views. They always link things related to western financial systems. In reality Russia can cut out the west entirely and still remain at a advantage. While the west would suffer hardship. Consider 30% of all natural gas in Europe comes from Russia. Like I stated in my wwIII piece. There are two sides. BRICS then the west under the IMF and company!

This would be a Kremlin Economic Analyst from a long line of apparatchiks who have for decades misunderstood the ability of states to exist separately from the rest of the world (first through their perverted marxist-leninist commmunism and more recently in oligarchy) - need I remind you that the great advance of collective farming promulgated by the Kremlin in the 20th century led to the immensely fertile and productive Russia needing to import corn from its ideological enemies in the capitalist west (wiki).

 

Russia just cannot cut out the west entirely - for starters the Chinese, other Brics, and Aseans (whom I assume you and that fool from the Kremlin think could take up the slack) would see Russia as a wounded animal who no longer had a choice of trading partners. And once I know that you have no choice but to work with me - then I put up prices for my goods and offer you less for your goods.

 

Your continued division of the world into BRICS and the West is facile, incorrect, and misleading.

[CaptainPanic]

I get the feeling that the situation is not escalating anymore in the Ukraine. The EU support Ukraine with 11 billion, which is sufficient to keep the Ukraine going for months. (I could have linked to any newspaper, but thought it would be funny to link to the Kiev post). The huge pockets of the EU may actually be a powerful weapon if this crisis turns into a financial crisis instead of a military crisis.

 

I am happy to see that there is no large scale violence anywhere in the Ukraine... the Russians have no excuse to invade. The only news I read about violence today is about Russian-minded men attacking protesting women in Simferopol. I admit that this particular article (also Kiev post) is probably biased. Still, this is all peanuts, and as long as the pro-Russians are the aggressors, Russia have no easy excuse to invade.

 

The fact that the tense situation lasts for a few days now means that both parties have time to talk. That's very good news.

[DimaMazin]

I get the feeling that the situation is not escalating anymore in the Ukraine. The EU support Ukraine with 11 billion, which is sufficient to keep the Ukraine going for months. (I could have linked to any newspaper, but thought it would be funny to link to the Kiev post). The huge pockets of the EU may actually be a powerful weapon if this crisis turns into a financial crisis instead of a military crisis.

 

I am happy to see that there is no large scale violence anywhere in the Ukraine... the Russians have no excuse to invade. The only news I read about violence today is about Russian-minded men attacking protesting women in Simferopol. I admit that this particular article (also Kiev post) is probably biased. Still, this is all peanuts, and as long as the pro-Russians are the aggressors, Russia have no easy excuse to invade.

 

The fact that the tense situation lasts for a few days now means that both parties have time to talk. That's very good news.

You are right, but professional American politicians are more correct, because they do not lose vigilance.

[CaptainPanic]

You are right, but professional American politicians are more correct, because they do not lose vigilance.

 

LOL... 'Sleeping US senator' gets me 7 million hits in Google.

[DimaMazin]

 

LOL... 'Sleeping US senator' gets me 7 million hits in Google.

[CaptainPanic]

Right... just as I thought things are calming down, this news breaks: "Crimea votes to join Russia, accelerating Ukraine crisis"

 

Basically, the Crimean government has voted to join Russia. Apparently they couldn't wait for the referendum in just 10 days (fearing an undesirable outcome?). They also said that Ukrainian troops would be treated as occupiers and be forced to surrender or leave.

 

So, since the Ukraine has (off the top of my head - no link to back it up) about 10,000 troops there, this could turn nasty quickly, especially since the Ukrainian government says this is illegal, and will probably try to fight it.

[Delbert]

Basically, the Crimean government has voted to join Russia. Apparently they couldn't wait for the referendum in just 10 days (fearing an undesirable outcome?). They also said that Ukrainian troops would be treated as occupiers and be forced to surrender or leave.

What else? After all as I tried to mention in my reply #19, if one party decides to operate outside the accepted rules of democracy, others may well feel so inclined to do the same and operate outside the accepted rules.

 

You may not like the leader, he or she may be repugnant, but if they were elected they are rightful occupants of office.

 

So they didn't like the government, but if they were elected the error is in voting preferences. Voting is a serious business, ignore completely any baubles offered near or at election time. Anyway, they then appeared to operate beyond accepted protest (throwing hand grenades causing serious injury from what I saw on TV) and effectively brought down an elected government. I'm sorry, but that is not how democracy works.

 

If one lot can feel justified to operate outside accepted democratic process, then doubtless others might feel they're justified to push and shove outside accepted protocol as well.

 

It seems to me that Crimea is probably lost to Ukraine, and Ukraine may well be in sight. Perhaps Russia will wait awhile until Europe has lent them a shedload of money!! As for sanctions, that can be a tit-for-tat process. Apparently Germany does a fair amount of business with Russia!!

[Bill Angel]

Crimea is supposed to hold a referendum soon on whether or not to become part of Russia. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/crimea-sets-referendum-on-joining-russia/2014/03/06/d06d8a46-a520-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html

 

There is still military conscription in Russia. If the Crimea became part of the Russian Federation, its young people would be subject to conscription into the Russian army. That to me sounds like a good enough reason for a Crimean to reject annexation by Russia in the upcoming referendum.

[DimaMazin]

 

 

It seems to me that Crimea is probably lost to Ukraine, and Ukraine may well be in sight. Perhaps Russia will wait awhile until Europe has lent them a shedload of money!! As for sanctions, that can be a tit-for-tat process. Apparently Germany does a fair amount of business with Russia!!

People of development will brake development of Russia and its allies.Germany should be cautious,because it isn't scientific empire as was in beginning of twentieth century.

[vordhosbn]

So they didn't like the government, but if they were elected the error is in voting preferences. Voting is a serious business, ignore completely any baubles offered near or at election time. Anyway, they then appeared to operate beyond accepted protest (throwing hand grenades causing serious injury from what I saw on TV) and effectively brought down an elected government. I'm sorry, but that is not how democracy works.

 

Just to give you some perspective:

1. Yanukovich was elected with strong pro-Russian campaign, but still promising of bringing Ukraine closer with the EU.

2. When approaching a date for signing a previously negotiated trade association agreement with the EU, he suddenly shifted his position and turns 180 degrees, speaking of prospects about joining the Eurasian Economic Union instead - a position affected by Russia, undoubtly, as Putin promissed $15 billion economic aid with 1/3 gas price discount.

3. People get angry at the democratically elected president (who already changed the constitution to gain more power) and go to the Independance Square to hold a peaceful protest, numbering arround 2000 people (21 Nov 2013).

4. In the next few days, people organize with social networks and on the 24th of November about 100 000 people gather at the square to protest. This time as they try to "occupy" a government building, there are clashes with the police, about 400 people are injured. (Here's a random video from this day, just to give you a perspective about the type of people on these protests and the kind of atmosphere there)

5. Protests continue in lower numbers in the following week, when on the 29th as protesters learn the news that the EU Trade Association has not been signed, people gather again and they begin to ask for the resignation of the Parliament and the President.

6. Early in the morning on 30 Nov the Berkut special riot police, executing orders of the legitimately and democratically elected President of Ukraine, disperse the non-resisting protesters. Here's another video, which I think really describes this better than any words I can think of...

7. The next days, people are outraged about the actions of the President and gather in larger numbers culminating on the 8 Dec, when about half a million people hold peaceful protest on the now dubbed Euromaidan (maidan = square in ukrainian). (video)

 

Without going into further details the next few months, people persist with the protests, eventually turning violent and toppling the President and the Government. When a president begins shooting at people, who want just his resignation, he ceases to be a democratically elected official and turns into a dic(k)tator.

 

I am deeply passionate about this topic, because here in Bulgaria, we also held for months everyday, popular protests against the blatant and corrupt government, against the oligarchs and against the government propaganda. We did so peacefully - I stood in live chain holding hands with others, while police in riot gear was beating unarmed old people and women in front of me, so I can not judge too hard people like the ukrainian citizens, who respond with violence.

 

Because democracy, my friend, is NOT voting for a ruler, who can do whatever he wants for his term, including breaking his promisses, which elected him in first place.

It is NOT sitting passively to wait for election day, when you see corrupted officials trying to boost their power and wealth.

It IS the combination of informed society, independant media and separation of powers to act as check and balances that best implement a modern day democracy.

[Delbert]

Because democracy, my friend, is NOT voting for a ruler, who can do whatever he wants for his term, including breaking his promisses, which elected him in first place.

It is NOT sitting passively to wait for election day, when you see corrupted officials trying to boost their power and wealth.

It IS the combination of informed society, independant media and separation of powers to act as check and balances that best implement a modern day democracy.

I'm sorry, but it seems to me you're missing the point. You cannot have a stable system if it is the case that should a leader do something he or she said they wouldn't justifies a rioting mob (because whatever the reason that's what it was) bringing down an elected government. Again, I'm sorry, but that is anarchy which has no place in democracy. Democracy cannot the predicated on the threat of a rioting mob.

 

As said, voting is a serious business. One has to try to peer into the mind of the candidate and not baubles offered.

 

But if you think it is justified, then that opens up a very dangerous door, if only by creating a precedence for others to do the same if they feel things aren't going their way. The end result will be the almost certain collapse of society as we know it.

 

From what you seem to be saying, the effective take over by violent action (rioting mob I call it) was justified. If that is the case, and as I tried to suggest previously, that gives the green light for others to transgress the rules as well - which, I think, is what we saw with the outcome we now see.

 

All the things you list are doubtless correct and I certainly wouldn't argue with them, but if we believe in democracy, then we have to go the democratic route.

 

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying, but immediately following overthrow a power vacuum existed for a period. Someone else took advantage of that and maybe similarly operated outside the accepted rules of democracy and did a land grab. Momentary power vacuums are very dangerous, and are a certain consequence of rioting overthrow.

[hypervalent_iodine]

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm mistaken here, but was the violent action taken by protestors not a response to the escalating and violent / extreme actions taken by the riot police against what was originally a very peaceful demonstration?

 

For instance,

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/30/world/europe/ukraine-eu-protests/

 

This was back in November when protests had really started to gain momentum, but there was no widespread violence by the protestors at that time (that I am aware of). There were also reports of police / armed government forces taking some of the protestors and beating them for no reason. One person I heard of, who was a key figure in the protest movement and whose name I forget, ending up fleeing the Ukraine altogether for fear of his life after such an event. And this was before violence really erupted.

 

Do these people not have a right to peacefully demonstrate and speak up for legitimate concerns about the running of their country? And what exactly do you do when the government's response to that peaceful (and IMO, perfectly warranted) act is violence and aggression? Do you let them win because they're the government? That doesn't sound like democracy to me.

[Unity+]

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm mistaken here, but was the violent action taken by protestors not a response to the escalating and violent / extreme actions taken by the riot police against what was originally a very peaceful demonstration?

 

For instance,

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/30/world/europe/ukraine-eu-protests/

 

This was back in November when protests had really started to gain momentum, but there was no widespread violence by the protestors at that time (that I am aware of). There were also reports of police / armed government forces taking some of the protestors and beating them for no reason. One person I heard of, who was a key figure in the protest movement and whose name I forget, ending up fleeing the Ukraine altogether for fear of his life after such an event. And this was before violence really erupted.

 

Do these people not have a right to peacefully demonstrate and speak up for legitimate concerns about the running of their country? And what exactly do you do when the government's response to that peaceful (and IMO, perfectly warranted) act is violence and aggression? Do you let them win because they're the government? That doesn't sound like democracy to me.

That is one of the factors, but another factor would be their former President not even presiding by the citizens even when Ukraine is supposed to be a democracy.

[StringJunky]

Do these people not have a right to peacefully demonstrate and speak up for legitimate concerns about the running of their country? And what exactly do you do when the government's response to that peaceful (and IMO, perfectly warranted) act is violence and aggression? Do you let them win because they're the government? That doesn't sound like democracy to me.

In the beginning, i think, democracy has to be fought for in the literal physical sense if that is the overwhelming popular feeling in Ukraine ...forcing square pegs (pro-Russians) through round holes just like the pro-Russian faction are trying to do now to pro-democrats. The pro-Russian government, by locking the door behind them and securing their position, are seriously cheating and I sympathise/empathise that Ukrainian pro-democrats feel they must use any means, including violence, to avoid more decades of communist-type autocratic oppression.

[AtomicMaster]

I suppose I will do this in parts:

 

Part 1

 

So much misinformation in the media, so many lies from the politicians to push their own agenda; but then again, this is typical politics. Luckily I have the ability to read news in multiple languages from multiple sources, including local sources (blogs, forums, personal media), which actually paints a contrasting picture, and it usually does, but man, this one is just so black and white, but about all of this in turn.

 

I will start with personal surprise; Russia, for the first time in 2 dozen years, did not abandon their own people in a foreign territory, and prevented the armed, US-backed nationalists (and dont get any funny ideas here, they are US-backed and they are nationalists) from Maidan, from following up on their moto 'Moskoli na nozhi' (literal translation: Moscovites onto knives), and prevented a genocide in Crimea by voting to support, if necessary, the use of the Russian army to protect Russian people in Northern Ukraine and Crimea. But Instead of sitting and waiting for Maidan to happen in Odessa, crimeans mobilized making any attempt to send armed forces to overthrow locally-chosen government quite a costly endeavor. To reiterate, physically it is the armed eastern-ukranians who are defending their own homes.

 

I would like to start by clearing out a misconception, what is happening in the Ukraine is not a revolution. A revolution, which comes from latin "revolutio" meaning a turn around, is a fundamental change of power or organizational structure. When people denounce a monarch that governs across the the ocean, and establish a republic, that is a revolution, or when socialism is changed out for democracy, those are examples of a revolution. What we observe in Ukraine is no change in the government type, no change in structure, no change in constitution, merely the change of people in control from people-appointed individuals to pretty much self-appointed oligarchs who are bank-rolling a some part of the rebellion. There is an armed rebellion, forcibly taking control of the government and ousting anyone who does not side with them. And where as if the rebellion was stopped, these people would be rightfully convicted for their actions and thrown in jail according to law (any sensible law, US-law included), they are now the law, so, yeah...

 

There is this thing in the US media that drives me insane; sources are taking about Russian invasion of the Crimea. To the point of if you read the news, you get this picture like everywhere you look, there are Russian tanks pushing into Ukraine. But the articles are talking about Pro-Russian forces controlling the airpots, or blocking a military base. But Pro-Russian forces and the armed forces of Russian Federation are quite different things. So where is the diconnect? I have not found a single article where any Russian forces were actually seen outside of their officially-rented naval bases in Crimea. So if there is nothing to substantiate the claims; stop saying that Russia is invading Ukraine, if they were, there would not be a Ukraine already, Georgia only took 3 days... And they totally do have a claim to Ukraine, Russia started in Kiev...

 

While on the topic of history, I saw some very disturbing images of people vandalizing monuments, such as monuments to WWII heroes, somehow rationalizing this. There is nothing that can rationalize destroying or vandalizing monuments to soldiers who died defending your land, your people, regardless of where they came from, they stood, often to the last, to protect the land, the people behind them, and it didn't matter if they were Russian, Tatar, Ukranian or any other (of over a hundred?) people, they did not care. What their political views would have been I don't know, what I do know is that they did not elect the current president, they did not not contribute to the poor economy, they were dead long before there was Ukraine as an independent country; so then who are the people and what are their views that they are destroying history, especially this piece of it?

 

*all i have time for for the moment, so end of part 1*

[Sensei]

I have not found a single article where any Russian forces were actually seen outside of their officially-rented naval bases in Crimea. So if there is nothing to substantiate the claims; stop saying that Russia is invading Ukraine, if they were, there would not be a Ukraine already,

 

 

I am really surprised by your statement..

Have not I showed in post #31 video where Russian soldiers took control over Crimean airport, and then Ukrainian soldiers, without weapons, tried to retrieve it back. And Russian soldiers started shooting to scary them.. ?

[jduff]

Looking more and more like WWIII Russians took down a U.S survelliance drone without firing a shot. Just jammed the signal between the operator and the drone.. Fully intact even!https://news.yahoo.com/russia-says-intercepted-us-drone-over-crimea-arms-180430584.html;_ylt=At_B0i8Ttqvgrn8ZH8ESDpzQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTBsdmNodWplBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMzBHNlYwNzcg--

 

You guys can keep the debate up. I know better! I really should do my part II of why we are in WWIII. But havent had much time! Monday should be interesting!

 

Also, gotta love our lame duck president! And the lame duck, incompetent, low information citizens that voted Obama in!

Edited March 15, 2014 by jduff