But I don't understand why many people just can not see the obvious:
Ukraine can hardly survive economically without Russia. Even she can, in long term Ukraine can not be prosperous and peaceful without Russia being a friendly neighbor. On the other hand For EU, Ukraine is just another Greece waiting for bailout.
(no message)
It is just part of today's Ukraine (mainly western) belong to Poland etc. central European countries. They are artificially merged by Stalin's Russia. Their culture is closer to Central European. But the rest of Ukraine is much closer to Russia than to central Europe including religion (Greek orthodox).
They are culturally and ethnically sympathetic to Russia. The rest of the country isn't. It is a complicated situation and Putin is more reactive than proactive here.
Prior to the unrest, he has a friendly government in the Ukraine and de facto control over its policy. Now that government is overthrown and potentially another unfriendly EU and NATO member will be on his border. Even if he salvages the ethnically Russian East and Crimea, he will still lose 2/3rd's of the Country and have to deal with worse relations and possibly sanctions from the West. How does he win by that? Seems to me he is salvaging what he can from a stunning reversal of his fortunes in that country.
of Russians living there. The Russians could invade the Ukraine on a ruse to protect the Russian sympathizers in the east and south, and to protect their gas pipelines to Europe which run through the Ukraine. IMO, Putin wants to make Russia a superpower like it was when he was in the KGB, and expanding the Russian borders back into countries that were previously part of the old USSR. Putin needs us as much as we need him. The U.S. needs Putin because he was instrumental in setting up the U.S. negotiations between Iran and in Syria. He needs us and the EU for trade in order to finance the build-up of his aging fleet and upgrade his army/air force. We can't send in troops. That could cause WW III. Tough diplomacy is our only way out. Not good but not bad either. Glad I'm not the president and have to negotiate with the likes of Putin and some of the other despots we have to deal with.
(no message)
(no message)
Protecting the retirement community and warm water port for their rusting and outdated Navy seems like a foolish play considering the economic punishment Russia will feel.
"The (ironically named) United Kingdom is the first to openly raise concerns over trade sanctions against Russia. As The Telegraph reports,"Britain is preparing to rule out trade sanctions against Russia amid fears that the Ukraine crisis could derail the global economic recovery"
"Perhaps it is the fear of a massive liquidity suck out from London's real estate market (or its banking system) that has the Brits on edge. We suspect Germany will be close behind as they eye exploding gas and oil prices and their dependence on Russia's marginal production."
"It would appear, just as in the case of Syria, that Obama may find himself alone among his allies..."
(no message)
He can't let a hostile Ukraine which could even join NATO control the Crimea, the Black Sea, and Eastern Ukraine for ethnic and strategic purposes. No Russian leader would. He is the big loser in all this and is salvaging what he can from a bad situation for him.
But the Russian economy outside of oil and gas sucks. I think Putin also wants to be sure Russia does not see the kind of "Orange Revolution" that got rid of Yanukovich the first time. Unfortunately for the Ukraine, their leadership has been totally corrupt and their economy has been horrible.
No strategic planning or diplomatic strategy by EU and USA for the last many years has given Putin freedom to do whatever he wants. Economic isolation of Russia at this point is not going to happen because EU does not want to make the sacrifice it would require. Plus they know USA is a totally unreliable ally that has spent itself into a black hole.
So Kerry is going to Kiev in a couple days and I suppose he will find some pretext to announce "peace in our time". Lucky for us Obama told Vlad that he would have more flexibility after his second election. Now we can all see what he meant.
This is understandable if you consider the history in which the part of Western Ukraine used to be Hitler's Axis ally and very hostile to Russia.
rather than engaging in bombastic rhetoric. Would any Russian leader let an unfriendly Ukraine control the Crimea, Black Sea, or Eastern Ukraine? The answer is no. What parts of the old Soviet empire has he absorbed? Virtually none. He wants a Ukraine that he can control, not absorb. He did this in reaction to events that he didn't want. It was a very logical step, a reactive step and not a planned one to reconstitute the Soviet Union.
Yes though, I agree it was a logical step for a megalomaniacal corrupt dictatorial thug who knows he can operate with no restraint.
If Putin didn't want these problems he should have been more cooperative with Ukraine instead of supporting their most corrupt leaders and being the adversary of the Ukrainian people by cutting off or threatening to cut off their gas supply at his whim. Again Russia has a long term lease to protect their Black Sea ports- which Putin broke as soon as he sent Russian troops to surround the Ukraine military bases and civilian airport.
You really think he set this up to reconstitute the Soviet Union? He is going to have another EU NATO country on his border. How is that for empire building? And does the Western part of Ukraine have the right to force the East and Crimea into the EU against their will? Cause they don't wanna join.
"While Putin has described the end of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century", Putin denies he is seeking to resurrect it. The west is not so sure; former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has described the Eurasian Union as "a move to re-Sovietise the region", adding ominously: "We know what the goal is."
by events putting another EU nation on his border? He wants to control the Ukraine as a buffer, no mystery there. He had no annexation plans until it became obvious that there would now be a hostile Ukraine next to Russia. He won't let that state control the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. The population there will agree with him. What's so hard to understand about that?
The rhetoric from the West not withstanding, it was a very predictable move by someone who will react when it's in his interest to do so.