An excellent analysis (imo) of the causes and current state of conflict in Ukraine, originally posted by retsdon on theguardian website The Russian government knows what everyone else knows - that the legitimate and elected government of Ukraine was overthrown by a coup which was largely organized and financed by western spooks. Nothing new there - its been done countless times before.... https://youtube/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=aqIHKWd9rSc A democratic solution to avert the coup was rejected - Yanukovych Offers Early Presidential Vote to End Crisis ... - and the rest is history. The Russian government also knows that the underlying conflict is about control of the massive Caucasus hydrocarbon reserves. and US geopolitical ambitions to control - or at least prevent Russian control - of them. That is why Ukraine had to be forcibly extracted from the Russian orbit of influence by the coup before any new agreement with Russia could be signed. Russia believes that the west - and particularly the Americans - are playing a very dirty game and are not to be trusted. Evidence is on their side, quite frankly. Consequently, post-coup they were forced to make a decision. Do nothing - and risk having a US influenced Ukraine renege on the lease of Sevastopol, or secure a vital Russian strategic interest. They chose the latter course. That they did it with a local democratic vote is a propaganda plus, but theyd have likely done it anyway. They had no choice. The Donbas regional conflict is different in that its Ukrainian in origin. The people of the east had voted overwhelmingly for the Party of Regions, and had just seen their chosen government overthrown. So, emboldened by the Maidan coup and the Crimean annexation they pushed for some kind of autonomy. People took over buildings, waved flags, etc,etc, - Maidan style. In the heady days of early summer they held a shambolic local vote which was dismissed, not only by Kiev and the west, but also by the Russian government. The east then came out in open revolt, with locals armed with Baikal shotguns and Brno hunting rifles dressing themselves up and setting up checkpoints. Then came the massacre in Odessa and the mood got very ugly. New presidential elections were held, and Poroshenko was elected. His election was recognized not just by the west, but also by the Russian government. Now heres where it all went off the rails. Poroshenko initially seemed amenable to negotiation but then - almost certainly pushed by Brennan (shale oil deposits) - he changed his tune and the war began in earnest. Putin has maintained all along that the war is an internal Ukrainian dispute - and hes mostly right. That said, eastern Ukraine is largely Russian speaking; many locals have ties to Russia; and it was - and still isnt - possible politically for Putin, who also has a domestic audience, to simply leave the Donbas rebels to their fate. The Russian position all along has been that the solution is negotiation. But victory or defeat is no basis for negotiation. My guess is that the Russians have taken a decision to do as little as possible -commensurate with not allowing the rebels to be militarily defeated. They intend to make the war un-winnable for Poroshenko, forcing him to come to some kind of sensible accommodation. if this is actually the Russian position, it makes a lot of sense. Firstly, in the long run, a sensible compromise would be best for Ukraine as a whole - if not for Biden junior and Chevron. Secondly, the war - despite the gloss put on the cracks - is opening quite serious policy rifts between Europe and the US. And the longer the war goes on, the wider those rifts will become. As long as the Russians back the rebels, they wont lose militarily. In the end, the protagonists will have to negotiate and Russias position will be vindicated. And Brennans war will have proved a bust. theguardian/world/2014/aug/28/ukraine-russia-emergency-un-nato-eu-meetings-invasion-claim
Posted on: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:49:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015