Compelling. Where did they get those taped telephone conversations? Many respected US academics believe that Putin has been pushed up against a wall by what he feels is a drive to put NATO on his doorstep. He apparently became disillusioned by the lack of reciprocity in his dealings with West, which made him angry and might explain his more recent foreign policy stance (eg Syria). But I think this is a geopolitical game of chess, as the Ukraine has no natural resources, and presents no terrorist threat. Energy, however, passes through it from Russia to Europe, which might explain Europe’s hesitance.

Crimea is the elephant in the room. It is an autonomous region within the Ukraine, originally inhabited by Tartars who are Turkic people. The country really belongs to them if anyone. It wasn’t that long ago that Crimea was a part of Russia, and it’s strategic importance can’t be that great (IMHO) since whoever controls the Bosphorous, controls the Black Sea. If most of the inhabitants side with Russia, they won’t give Ukraine an easy time if it remains part of the Ukraine. So why would they want it?

It’s ironic that the influx of eastern Europeans into western Europe has given rise to nationalist parties in the latter.

The link, or video, appears to have changed. This one is better. The last one seemed more like a conspiracy theory.

Good one CAR. I like this:

How this plays out is anybody’s guess right now, but this much I know: one should NEVER underestimate the ability of the average Russian to bear hardship, nor should one ever underestimate the West’s lack of fortitude once any situation becomes politically unpalatable.

What else do I know? Well, I know that neither Russia nor China feels the US’s place at the top of the food chain is either justified or indefinitely sustainable, and they both smell weakness.

I ask myself what is all the fuss over Crimea? If Europe had come to Ukraine’s aid when they wanted it, none of this might have happened. They’re now moaning about Russia breaking international law, and refuse to put this into any kind of context other than “the club disapproves”. I think the shifting sands are indeed relevant. How much and how soon is (as the author points out) anyone’s guess, but that middle finger to the West is getting braver. China’s territorial claims are definitely one to watch. The Yuan is probably one to watch. But against the backdrop of dwindling resources, climate change, and global indebtedness there’s enough distractions to occupy policy-makers for a few decades to come.

I think it’s not so much about whether Russia did wrong, but about whether her adversaries are as guilty of these kinds of infractions. Nobody is squeaky clean when they know they can get away with it. In the Crimea case, it’s a bit like someone offering a room to friend to use, but that arrangement gets complicated when the friend sublets the room.

[quote=CA renter]Right. Though it’s not politically correct to say this, I see no problem with what Russia did. The people voted. Done deal.[/quote]

Umm… are you serious? However one feels about what happened, it clearly wasn’t a fair vote. There was no “status quo” option on the ballot! More objections are outlined in this discussion: http://www.reddit.com/r/NeutralPolitics/comments/216ltf/why_is_the_international_community_opposed_to_the/

[quote=jeff303][quote=CA renter]Right. Though it’s not politically correct to say this, I see no problem with what Russia did. The people voted. Done deal.[/quote]

Umm… are you serious? However one feels about what happened, it clearly wasn’t a fair vote. There was no “status quo” option on the ballot! More objections are outlined in this discussion: http://www.reddit.com/r/NeutralPolitics/comments/216ltf/why_is_the_international_community_opposed_to_the/%5B/quote%5D

They had the option to join Russia or become an independent state. They opted to join Russia in overwhelming numbers.

Here’s another good article, also from John Mauldin’s site (awesome contributors and articles there, whether or not one agrees with everything they say) about some of the history in the region and thoughts on why Russia is taking these actions:

————

Reasoned paranoia

Put yourself in Russian shoes for a brief instant: over the past two centuries, Russia has had to fight back invasions from France (led by Napoleon in 1812), an alliance including France, England and Turkey (Crimean War in the 1850s), and Germany in both world wars. Why does this matter? Because when one looks at a map of the world today, there really is only one empire that continues to gobble up territory all along its borders, insists on a common set of values with little discussion (removal of death penalty, acceptance of alternative lifestyles and multi- culturalism…), centralizes economic and political decisions away from local populations, etc. And that empire may be based in Brussels, but it is fundamentally run by Germans and Frenchmen (Belgians have a hard enough time running their own country). More importantly, that empire is coming ever closer to Russia’s borders.

https://www.mauldineconomics.com/editorial/outside-the-box-gavekal-on-russia-and-japan

If Putin uses the recent disturbances in eastern Ukraine to annex them, that is a game changer in my view. There’s no historical precedent to exclude these areas from the Ukraine that I am aware of. If it goes that way, granting some autonomy to them may avoid confrontation.