Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Guardian G.I.]

Freedom!

What an informative post. I've learned a lot of new things from it and it opened my eyes on the current global problems of humanity as a whole. Truly I am enlightened now, reveling in my newfound knowledge of Truth™ and running in majestic circles from overbearing joy.

No idea what the political situation in Dagestan, Russia is (I'm from the U.S.), but FREE DAGESTAN!

[GrizzlyAdamz]

I really hope they botch the referendum to the point where it's totally useless. Like 95% of yes vote or something.

The Western countries won't recognize it no matter how high the result will be, 51%, 68%, 95% or 413%.
They don't seem to be willing to recognize independence referendums in troubled regions that they want to take in their sphere of influence, unless the referendum and the independence movement in particular are organized and backed by them (e.g. Kosovo).

It isn't 109 out of 120 voting in favor, it's 36 pretending to be 61. With armed men (russian soldiers) in-command of the building for the last few days.
Cursory research makes one of these two situations look a bit less legitimate.

[Sergarr]

Like there weren't armed people in Kiev last month.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

/They weren't foreign soldiers/

[Sheb]

Not in Parliament as far as I know. You also don't hear stories about MPs having voted yes despite not being there at all. In Kiev you actually had what, 328 people out of 450 voting for the new government?

[Guardian G.I.]

Like there weren't armed people in Kiev last month.

Quiet, they were fighting for FREEDOM from bloodthirsty Russian orcs, they don't count. The free Western media said so (minus the orcs part), so it must be true.

[Sergarr]

/They weren't foreign soldiers/

Sooooooo a countrys own soldiers can stage coups in it with absolute legality. Oooooook.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

Care to show links to the armed presence in the kiev parliament, and the evidence they're soldiers of any kind?

[XXSockXX]

Sadly the problem now is less what actually happened (and we are probably not going to convince each other of our points of view in this thread), but the diplomatic stance on things. Both the West and Russia see the governments in Ukraine and Crimea respectively as illegitimate and armed thugs backed by the other side. At least for the illegitimacy part, good arguments can be made in both cases.

I don't think any progress will be made in that regard before the referendum is over. For practical purposes I don't think Crimea joining Russia can be prevented. This will result in some more sanctions and possibly isolate Russia diplomatically for quite a while. Ideally - if nothing else goes wrong - Russia will be more willing to negotiate (they are preparing their own proposals currently) after the referendum, and some arrangement will be found where they recognize the government in Ukraine.

BTW Yanukovych has given another press conference, he says he will return to Kiev. Yanukovych does sound a bit delusional, but the fact that Putin let's him talk through official channels underlines that currently there seems to be no progress in the diplomatic stand-off.

[GlyphGryph]

Well, if there's one thing this thread and the others I've read has convinced me of, it's that a great many Russians (real Russians, not Russians as claimed by Russia) seem absolutely desperate for their country to be a super power again, and are willing to make themselves look like a laughingstock on the world stage if they can convince themselves of that for just a little while longer.

Does anyone here have a pro-Russia argument that isn't just desperate finger-pointing at everyone that isn't Russia?

Sergarr, Guardian G.I. - Do you actually think a referendum in Crimea held under these conditions should be legitimate? Would you accept it if the people voted for Russia to skedaddle? What would it actually take for you to consider Russia's actions here to be wrong? What it would it take for you to believe that the results of the referendum should be illegitimate?

[Helgoland]

Well, if there's one thing this thread and the others I've read has convinced me of, it's that a great many Russians (real Russians, not Russians as claimed by Russia) seem absolutely desperate for their country to be a super power again, and are willing to make themselves look like a laughingstock on the world stage if they can convince themselves of that for just a little while longer.

That's a bit drastic, I think, but the gist of it is correct. To phrase it a bit more friendly: After 1990 the West made the same mistakes that the Allies made in 1919, leaving a proud and powerful country with a terrrible economy, a chronic inferiority complex and no chance to integrate themselves with the global community in a way that fits their self-image. And even though the ideologies are radically different, we can see some patterns repeating themselves: A strong leader, nationalist rhethorics, land grabs in border regions, and an appeasement policy from the other states...

The conclusion I'd draw fom this is that the West needs a two-pronged strategy for Russia: On the one hand, a military buildup and a strong defense cooperation of the other European states (minus Belarus, maybe) is needed to prevent further actions like the one against Crimea, to reduce the chance of further appeasement and to show that Russia has no right to a 'sphere of influence' in the sense of controlling its neighboring countries. On the other hand, Russia needs to be integrated into the European community through a system of official cooperation in most if not all fields to take away the perceived need for a 'buffer zone' and replace the idea of a 'sphere of influence' with that of good neighborship, hopefully strengthening the Russian civil society and helping its economy to become less reliant on the export of resources.

TL;DR: Russia post-1990 is like Germany after 1919. That means the West should stand strong against Russian expansionism and agression, but also acknowledge that Russia feels threatened; therefore we (the European states that are not Russia or Belarus) must strengthen our military cooperation and defence capacity while at the same time helping Russia with its economy and integrating it further with the community of European states to take away the cause of Russia's worries and phantom pain.

[Sheb]

But does Russia wants to be integrated? The reset proposed by Obama was a failure for example. I'm all for a Western Russia, but do the Russians wants it?

[scriver]

If there was any kind of doubt left that it isn't Russian military and not "self defence groups" behind the occupation of all those bases, here's a video (go to 2:40) of a Russian military fancypants (they call him "Commandant" in the video, but I don't trust their rank-telling abilities ) showing up at one of the occupied bases, and then promptly running away when some woman (among a group of people gathered outside the base to find out what is going on) told him to fuck off.

[Helgoland]

Sheb: Maybe I should have been more clear - 'integration' doesn't mean pressing Western standards on them, it means 'establishing a friendly (neighborly) relationship'. How can Russia exert influence in the world right now? By withholding gas, by supporting murderous dictators, by generally blocking stuff, and by military dickwaving. What's needed is a way for Russia to exert influence in a constructive way; giving it that opportunity is what I meant.

[Sheb]

And what would that entails? Giving them an observer seat in NATO to make them feel more secure? Try to negotiate trade deal with them? Include them in our various diplomatic process around the world?