Post #387,703
3/18/14 10:28:50 PM
|
Boundaries rejiggered
I dislike Putin, and the Crimea takeover reeks of Anschluss (which was not entirely ill-received by Austrians at the time), but considering how freely the West has redrawn national borders in the former Yugoslavia—carving Kosovo out of Serbia, in particular—I think we are obliged to eat this goose with a generous ladling of sauce. There are indications that Putin regards the independence of the remainder of Ukraine as illegitimate. He would be unwise to act upon these impulses, but it would be not merely unwise but mad to mount a military response. Since the Baltic states are, for better or for worse, NATO members, any move to reclaim them (utter folly, as these provinces proved in the event to be bones lodged in the USSR's throat, ultimately setting in train the sequence of events culminating in a fatal choking spasm for Lenin's state) would have to be countered by armed forces. We may hope that matters do not come to this.
And so I find myself flying, if not exactly in formation with mmoffitt, at least along a similar heading. Geopolitics makes strange bedfellows.
cordially,
|
Post #387,705
3/18/14 11:13:14 PM
|
Putin's take
Disagreeable, but not altogether delusional.
http://www.nytimes.c...imea.html?hp&_r=0
cordially,
|
Post #387,751
3/20/14 1:15:37 AM
|
I knew a 'relative' of the co-author
of this piece, one Dalyta derVartanyan (a Princess, of her tribe.. I was told.)
She married a physicist I knew, (one whose social graces reminded me of a character in Breakfast at Tiffany's--the geekish '2nd-richest guy' Ms. Golightly was then pursuing.)
(Irrelevant to This 'Vartanyan' ... but I always look for synchroniciity, though--what else is 'memory' good for?)
There aren't enough hours/day for me to make substantial use of the cornucopia of info within The Times--so Thanks for culling this one.
(I met, chatted with one of your ex-Pats way-back--Cinco de Mayo celebration, IIRC. He corrected my impoverished elocution of my fav Russki saying, re. Kapitalichiiskaya.. Cousin?)
I derive from this (artfully concise) article that, much as in the dis-USA, the mythos of Capitalism is in danger of corrupting itsy-South Ossetia, as it has Putin's Russia.
That assumption leads to the obvious: unless/until both S.O. and Russia supersede un-regulated US-vulture-Kapitalismo, re. their social-financial principles:
Nothing useful will be buildable-upon. In either country.
Dunno the Russian word for corruption, but the piece illustrates how it cancels-out even the most sincere offers/actions of assistance.
Just like Here.
One can only empathize with the denizens of both, currently mis-guided 'Nations'. We are such babies, despite all that (unread) History.
{{sigh}}
|
Post #387,706
3/18/14 11:13:47 PM
|
my take
Putin will grab what he thinks he can get away with. He knows he owns the euro fuel supply and he perceives rightly or wrongly America is in no condition to roll troops at this time. I hope he is smart enough to stay his hand at this time.
If tanks rolled across the Ukraine plains folks would get nervous enough to fire shots and it would escalate badly. The germans have the same fear as the russians of each other and it would get ugly fast. Have a quick boo at Kursk and the battle there during ww2.
A friend of mine now deceased was seconded to the eastern front in ww2 as a driver for a colonel in a tank destroying German airforce battalion. They were using anti aircraft weapons as tank destroyers. he went along to Stalingrad and got a million dollar wound ride out of there. His stories and my extensive reading of the front prior to meeting him makes me realize it could be a horror pit again. All it takes is some minor players to get the lumbering mindless giants involved then katie bar the door.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #387,708
3/19/14 12:55:20 AM
|
The Red Army
...ain't what it used to be, and its "field position," as we say in American football, is nothing like as advantageous as it was back when Tom Clancy composed his elaborate fantasies. Western Europe, and even Eastern Europe, need not lie awake with visions of Russian tank battalions rolling over 'em. But if Putin absorbs Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, etc., this still leaves NATO in a more advantageous strategic position than when the Warsaw Pact was still a going concern.
cordially,
|
Post #387,709
3/19/14 2:46:44 AM
|
"owns the euro fuel supply"
Not as much as he would like to think, he doesn't.
Remember, the only reason Russia sells fuel to Europe is because they need to subsidise their internal market because the Russian public is, generally speaking, not able to afford it.
If that money tap gets turned off - shit gets real, fast.
And the gas thing gives him no leverage in the UK, because we don't important Russian gas (well, not very much, anyhoo). We do, however, handle an awful lot of Russian money.
|
Post #387,716
3/19/14 8:25:36 AM
|
Agreed that one has to worry about uncontrolled escalation.
Putin's strength is in getting what he wants by puffing up his muscles without actually fighting a major power. He doesn't want a shooting war with NATO.
I assume he will continue to pressure the Ukraine government and demand that it be weakened (e.g. via the federalism demands). So he'll get his compliant neighbor government again without having the cost and dangers of fighting for it. If Ukraine's government refuses to weaken its independence from the Kremlin in the process of forming a new government, then I expect more "spontaneous demonstrations" demanding that Putin intervene. And more violence, and a greater chance that he'll be "forced" to move in to more of Ukraine the way he did in Crimea. But he hopes it doesn't go that far - the other side will blink first.
If it comes to blows, it won't end well for anyone, least of all the crumbling Russian armed forces. But that doesn't mean either side would have an "easy" victory. It took up to 60,000 troops for Russia to sorta passivate Chechnya - an area with a tiny population. Ukraine has a long and bloody history with the USSR - if they choose to resist, it won't end easily.
Plus, Putin's economy is crashing and Crimea is becoming a basket-case (tourism is drying up for good reason). He doesn't have money for another Afghanistan-like adventure. He doesn't want a shooting war (neither do we of course).
What should we do? I think Obama is right. Economic and political pressure that continues to tighten if he doesn't back down.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #387,720
3/19/14 9:57:56 AM
|
Re: escalation and Sochi.
Emphasis Mine.
Sevastopol has been a seat of Russian naval power from the imperial 18th century to the Soviet era, giving its forces access to the Balkans, Mediterranean Sea and Middle East. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia began leasing part of the port from Ukraine. That deal, scheduled to end in 2017, was extended to 2042. The move was heavily criticized by the opposition forces now in power in Kiev.
Although Russia continues to construct a navy base in its own territory in Novorossisk, near Sochi, analysts agree that Sevastopol remains the navyÂs preferred base in the Black Sea region because of its size, location and infrastructure.
ÂItÂs hard to speculate on motivations, but it may be that one of the main reasons for the (events) in Crimea was, legitimately or not, they thought they might lose the base in Sevastopol, said Dmitry Gorenburg, who researches Russian military reform at the CNA Corporation, an analysis group.
The Black Sea Fleet remains the smallest of RussiaÂs four fleets, and one whose aging ships limit its capabilities. Of the fleetÂs 25 ships, 19 are corvettes and patrol craft, according to an analysis by Christian Le Mière, a researcher with the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Le Mière also counts two destroyers, a pair of frigates, a cruiser and a diesel-electric submarine.
Gorenburg said most ships date to the 1970s, with one of the frigates going back to the Â60s. Thomas Fedyszyn, a researcher at the Naval War College in Rhode Island, offered a similar assessment.
ÂTheyÂve got a smattering of older Russian ships, he said. ÂA couple of them are fairly big  a couple of Russian cruisers and destroyers. But mostly theyÂre fairly small.Â
The fleet remains operational, however. It played a role in the 2008 war with Georgia, when it destroyed GeorgiaÂs small patrol boats, Fedyszyn said. More recently, the fleetÂs flagship, the missile cruiser Moskva, was deployed off the coast of Syria as tensions rose last year.
Russia plans to gradually replace the ships in the coming years, analysts say, with three new frigates, new submarines and an amphibious ship. Gorenburg said the new ships will replace older, outdated vessels and should not increase the size of the fleet.
Even those changes would face restrictions under RussiaÂs basing agreement in Sevastopol, which requires Ukraine approve all ships based in the port or entering it. ThatÂs one more reason compelling Russia to complete its base at Novorossisk, where it faces no restrictions, Le Mière said in his analysis.
The fleet may also need to grow to support a new Mediterranean task force created by Russia last year, noted Fedyszyn, a move that comes as the U.S. increases its own Mediterranean presence with four destroyers in Spain.
ÂThere is certainly some increase going on because Russia is increasing its naval presence in the Mediterranean Sea, he said. ÂIn order to do that, they have to augment their fleet in the Black Sea area.Â
http://www.stripes.c...nterests-1.270904
<dons apologist hat again - or maybe not> Combine the NATO expansion (despite our assurances of no expansion) with the current regime's hostility toward Russia's BSF in Sevastopol with our increased Mediterranean presence and ask yourself, "Who is it that is escalating things in the region?" This is not as simple a situation as you might conclude from relying exclusively on the Western press.
|
Post #387,722
3/19/14 11:03:23 AM
|
One can always make arguments to justify one's actions.
http://www.cfr.org/a...ances-1994/p32484
[Russia, UK, USA] Confirm the following:
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine;
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;
It's pretty hard to square that with what Putin did.
The Black Sea was a bathtub as far back as 1905 - http://books.google....nned%20in&f=false . If a serious war ever breaks out, Russia's ships there will be stuck. The BSF is a convenient, but transparent, excuse.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #387,723
3/19/14 11:20:52 AM
|
I'm not saying the Russians are heroes.
Just that we aren't either.
|
Post #387,724
3/19/14 11:24:13 AM
|
Agreement. But that's not the topic, is it? :-)
|
Post #387,727
3/19/14 11:29:03 AM
|
Fine. We're picking nits now are we? :0)
|
Post #387,729
3/19/14 11:49:38 AM
|
That's what we do, especially in this forum! :-)
|
Post #387,731
3/19/14 1:11:10 PM
|
Ukraine would resist all right
in ww2 partisans fought the germans then continued to fight the soviets well onto the 1950's. Won't be easily pacified
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #387,733
3/19/14 3:32:19 PM
|
all sorts of sound reasons for behaving rationally
No national leader of sound mind wants a shooting war in Europe, still less a vigorous exchange of démarches between Washington and Moscow conducted over the North Pole. The problem lies with the miscalculations made by men of sound mind (see The Guns of August, and in that connection I do hope that no statesman of note takes it into his head to tour Sarajevo in an open car this summer, which of course marks the centenary of those selfsame opening rounds of The War to End All War).
cordially,
|
Post #387,737
3/19/14 5:31:08 PM
|
On that note, let us Here embark upon a similar
sane, peaceful means of re-forming our financial and related internecine Forces--without Molotov cocktails either stockpiled or ... thrown.
We need no shooting-war Here, either. Until the disUSA finally faces its own feet-of-clay, no sanctimonious pronouncements of this
or any Sec/State can hide the hypocrisy and just plain disingenuousness. All Around.
Goose/gander whether Sarajevo or Red State/Blue State formal dis-Recognition of each other--as now.
(Yeah, I know.. adolescents never do stop to Think. Until all other useless band-aids fall all the way off.)
Irascibly,
|
