Ukraine Crisis - Page 510

On May 08 2014 03:30 DeepElemBlues wrote:


no that isn't my logic and i wonder how you could have arrived at that conclusion. it would require placing a step in my reasoning that doesn't exist. there are plenty of apparatchiks who most russians have never heard of who are intimately involved in the ukraine crisis, does saying that mean that by its logic any russian is a potential coordinator? come on now.

ultranationalists having links with other ultranationalists would tend to support the idea that barkashov could be helping coordinate between moscow and donetsk. ultranationalist rank-and-filers probably don't have direct connections to and communications with ultranationalists in other countries, but an ultranationalist politician - no matter how allegedly old and outdated - probably does.

On May 08 2014 03:46 Ghanburighan wrote:
With the update on no troop movement, the pessimistic story says that Putin hasn't reconsidered, he just can't run a referendum on the 11th if his separatists don't control the territory of the referendum.

The recognition of the may 25th elections would then merely be a red herring as it doesn't matter what he says about the elections now, he can always claim an excuse later why he can't accept the result.

On May 08 2014 05:59 kukarachaa wrote:
So much for good news.

http://mfa.gov.ua/en/press-center/comments/1251-zajava-mzs-ukrajini-z-privodu-vislovlenih-prezidentami-rosijsykoji-federaciji-i-shvejcariji-golovujuchoji-v-obse-namiriv-dejeskalaciji-situaciji-v-ukrajini

On May 08 2014 06:53 radiatoren wrote:
Pentagon, Ukrainean military and OTAN all make that observation. None of them can be said to be unbiased, but it seems sufficient to suggest that the situation is largely unchanged.

On May 08 2014 07:00 zeo wrote:

Is OTAN NATO? if so then all three of those sources answer to the pentagon.

edit: do the Ukrainians have satellites?

On May 08 2014 07:09 radiatoren wrote:

OTAN is NATO and now you are just spreading a conspiracy theory (NATO was declaring it before Pentagon). I don't think Ukraine has satellites, but they do have the possibility of confirming information otg.

Edit: And when it comes to the big "german plan" you said Putin found reasonable, the sources I have indicated it was "quashed" by Russia.

On May 08 2014 07:43 zeo wrote:

Saying that NATO doesn't hop when America says 'hop' is a tad hmmmm. Whatever sources you might have it should be clear that germany is trying the hardest to calm things down and mediate.

On May 07 2014 15:39 Mc wrote:


My original point was that the article is wrong. Which I still stand by, and you didn't seem to counter. I never stated that I don't understand Russia's concerns about NATO/Western encirclement or imply they don't exists.

It's funny how you say "... what Russia have to do in order to protect it's *culture*". Culture in theory shouldn't be dependent on politics, but you seem to be saying it is..... And maybe you're right Russian culture is dependent on a feeling of imperial greatness and power. So, Russia is ironically not only defending it's geopolitical/military concerns by actively destabilizing Ukraine, but it's defending it's "culture" as an aggressive anti-Western foreign power.

Everyone (I hope) knows that to some extent this is a struggle between East and West. It's an internal East-West struggle in Ukraine (both in geography and in culture). AND it's a struggle East-West between Russia and EU/USA. However, I disagree how much of the West cares about using Ukraine as a pawn. The US/Europe see Ukraine as a problem child which will just be annoying to deal with if it tries to go West. No real benefit for the West to have Ukraine "join". However, the West is forced to support Ukraine because : part of the country is aspiring to European values of democracy and it'd be hypocritical to deny them this right AND it needs to tell Russia not to interfere with the boundaries of E. Europe. So Europe, is almost unwillingly supporting Ukraine because it's "European" values tell it to do so (and responding to Russian aggression). I guess you could say Russia is also supporting the pro-Russian Ukraine "unwillingly", but it's intentions aren't democracy/freedom and stopping European aggression - it's intentions are as you pointed out (maybe unintentionally), defending "Russian culture" (i.e. imperialism, anti-West, etc.).

edit: I'm skipping over some of the other factors (like EU dependence on Russian gas), and Russian historical ties to Ukraine as part of its' "culture". It's for the sake of having a succinct argument, and I don't want to write an essay but a forum post

On May 08 2014 07:44 LegalLord wrote:

The Crimean referendum, fascists grabbing power in Ukraine, and a Russian military presence nearby is a pretty good reason.

The current government of Ukraine is a far better provocateur than Russia could ever be.

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

I want to start by welcoming once more our guest, the President of Switzerland and current head of the OSCE, and I want to thank him for the attention he is giving to settling this acute crisis in Ukraine. None of us are indifferent to what is happening there. The situation has us all very concerned.

Let me repeat once more that in Russia’s view, the blame for the crisis that emerged in Ukraine and is now taking the worst direction in its developments lies with those who organised the coup d’etat in Kiev on February 22-23, and have not yet taken the trouble to disarm right-wing radical and nationalist groups.

But no matter what the case, we must look for ways out of the situation as it is today. We all have an interest in ending this crisis, Ukraine and its people above all. Thus I say that we all want the crisis to end as soon as possible and in such a way that takes into account the interests of all people in Ukraine no matter where they live. The discussion with Mr President showed that our approaches to possible solutions to the crisis have much in common.

Russia urgently appeals to the authorities in Kiev to cease immediately all military and punitive operations in southeast Ukraine. This is not an effective means of resolving internal political conflicts and, on the contrary, will only deepen the divisions.

We welcome the release of Mr [Pavel] Gubarev, but we hope to see all the other political prisoners released too. We think the most important thing now is to launch direct dialogue, genuine, full-fledged dialogue between the Kiev authorities and representatives of southeast Ukraine. This dialogue could give people from southeast Ukraine the chance to see that their lawful rights in Ukraine really will be guaranteed.

In this context, we appeal too, to representatives of southeast Ukraine and supporters of federalisation to hold off the referendum scheduled for May 11, in order to give this dialogue the conditions it needs to have a chance.

Let me stress that the presidential election the Kiev authorities plan to hold is a step in the right direction, but it will not solve anything unless all of Ukraine’s people first understand how their rights will be guaranteed once the election has taken place.

In this respect, I hold the same position as Mr President, because we both believe that direct dialogue between the Kiev authorities and representatives of southeast Ukraine is the key to settling this crisis.

But one of the essential conditions for getting dialogue underway is an unconditional end to the use of force, whether with the help of the armed forces, which is completely unacceptable in the modern world, or through the use of illegal armed radical groups. Russia is ready to contribute as it can to resolving the Ukrainian crisis and playing an active and positive part in the Geneva process.

QUESTION: President Putin,

The Ukrainian government has made recent statements to the effect that they are ready to begin broad decentralisation in the country. First of all, does this decentralisation suit you?

Second, we hear that the violence must end and we must settle the conflict. We already heard similar words in Geneva.

My question therefore is what concrete steps can you take, because the experts all say that Moscow holds the key to resolving the conflict. How can you influence people in eastern Ukraine, the so-called separatists? What concrete steps are needed to de-escalate the conflict?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: First, the idea that Russia holds the key to resolving the problem is a trick thought up by our Western partners and does not have any grounds in reality. No sooner do our colleagues in Europe or the US drive the situation into a dead end, they always say that Moscow holds the keys to a solution and put all the responsibility on us.

The responsibility for what is happening in Ukraine now lies with the people who carried out an anti-constitutional seizure of power, a coup d’etat, and with those who supported these actions and gave them financial, political, information and other kinds of support and pushed the situation to the tragic events that took place in Odessa. It’s quite simply blood-chilling to watch the footage of those events.

Russia will take every necessary step of course and do everything within its power to settle the situation. I can understand the people in southeast Ukraine, who say that if others can do what they like in Kiev, carry out a coup d’etat, take up arms and seize government buildings, police stations and military garrisons, then why shouldn’t they be allowed to defend their interests and lawful rights?

As for whether proposed measures suit Russia or not, we are not a party to this conflict; the parties to the conflict are in Ukraine itself. We were told repeatedly that our forces by the Ukrainian border were a source of concern. We have withdrawn our forces and they are now not on the Ukrainian border but are carrying out their regular exercises at the test grounds. This can be easily verified using modern intelligence techniques, including from space, where everything can be seen. We helped to secure the OSCE military observers’ release and I think also made a contribution to defusing the situation.

You asked what we can do now. As I said, what is needed is direct, full-fledged and equal dialogue between the Kiev authorities and the representatives of people in southeast Ukraine.

I spoke recently with German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel, who proposed organising this dialogue in the form of a round table. We support this. I think it is a good idea and we will do everything we can to help make it happen. We must do everything possible to ensure that people in southeast Ukraine understand, feel and believe that after the Ukrainian presidential election on May 24 or 25 their lawful rights will be reliably guaranteed.

This is the real issue, not the presidential election, but ensuring that people in the southeast know that they won’t be abandoned and deceived. This is the crux of the matter, and it is for this that we need the dialogue we have been talking about today.

QUESTION: How realistic is a second round of talks in Geneva, Geneva-2? And how realistic is it to launch internal talks between the different groups in Ukraine in a situation when the parties have diametrically opposed positions to a degree never seen before in Ukraine’s history?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I don’t know how realistic a Geneva-2 round of talks or even internal political talks in Ukraine itself would be. I simply believe that if we want to find a long-term solution to the crisis in Ukraine, open, honest and equal dialogue is the only possible option.

Thank you.

Source

On May 08 2014 09:31 m4ini wrote:
Just as a sidenote, since it didn't really pop up so far..

The MFA confirmed now that they welcome international observers, allow monitoring of the voting. You know, the dudes who russian seperatists actively tried to scare away even back in crimea, apart from the creme de la creme of international nationalists, actual fascists and ex-communists.

That's something to keep in mind.