5 Things You Should Know About Current Ukrainian Crisis

[ML]

You don't think there are such people at Euromaidan?

I was speaking in terms of persons who had already attained National leadership status . . .  and the traits they displayed after such attainment.

Wannabees can always look pure . . . the test is AFTER they attain positions of power.

[lordtiberius]

I was speaking in terms of persons who had already attained National leadership status . . .  and the traits they displayed after such attainment.

To clarify, when you say National leadership, you men those who attained leadership beyond the Members of Parliament?  Ministers?  Party Heads? or only Prime Ministers.  I see a lot of able leaders among the elected and activist communities in Ukraine.  George Washington, Franklin, Adams, Hamilton and Jefferson were men before we made them gods, no?

[Muzh]

To clarify, when you say National leadership, you men those who attained leadership beyond the Members of Parliament?  Ministers?  Party Heads? or only Prime Ministers.  I see a lot of able leaders among the elected and activist communities in Ukraine.  George Washington, Franklin, Adams, Hamilton and Jefferson were men before we made them gods, no?

I see a bunch of hustlers. Something like this:
 

[ML]

  I see a lot of able leaders among the elected and activist communities in Ukraine. 

I don't doubt you there.  But, as they move up in the ranks, the wealth transfer starts - - - toward them.

I am not expert in this area - - - but has there been any top Ukrainian leader (let's say top 3) who did not accumulate a substantial fortune while serving?

It seems to be genetic.  It is not for lack of a good reason that the top mob gangs in more and more cities around the world are run by FSU folks.

[lordtiberius]

Have you seen the movie?  I have.  David O. Russell has a sympathetic view of politicians like Jeremy Renner's character and a caustic one of bureaucrats.  A mediocre movie - not his best - though Bradley Cooper did an AWESOME job!!

[lordtiberius]

I don't doubt you there.  But, as they move up in the ranks, the wealth transfer starts - - - toward them.

I am not expert in this area - - - but has there been any top Ukrainian leader (let's say top 3) who did not accumulate a substantial fortune while serving?

It seems to be genetic.  It is not for lack of a good reason that the top mob gangs in more and more cities around the world are run by FSU folks.

Like you, I am not an expert.  Those that criticize the limits of my knowledge in this area do so on very solid ground.  Though I will brag that I speak Ukrainian better than the Russian, Polish, and Belarusian un-indicted rapist twice elected to President of Ukraine. 

Like you, I am a veteran.  We have practiced political behavior and leadership in our youth.  We understand strategic and geopolitical realities.  The Cold War shaped our thinking.  I concede to you that as a Navy man, you understand the importance of Naval choke points more than I do.  You understand that without those warm weather ports, Russia cannot be a superpower or a strong regional power and that Ukraine because of its population, culture and geography make it a very important acre of strategic real estate.

Politics shares a lot in common with show business.  When I was in politics, our trainers called politics show business for ugly people.  Politicians, journalists, candidates, party officials, they call practice this dark art of magic, religion, trickery and fraud.  That's why Muzh's allusion to the David O. Russell movie holds weight.

The problem that all the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries face is how to treat state owned industries.  I sure would be interested in how Mendeleyev answers this question if he chooses to answer it.  Those state owned industries Gas for Goldilocks and Candy for Poroshenko afforded the Oligarchs their rise to power.

Stalin killed private industry because he knew that independent sources of wealth like the Candy Industry in Ukraine or Klitchko's boxing success would challenge power.  As a historian this was true in American history.  New money Industrialists like clothing manufacturers in antebellum New England challenged landowners - the old money.  Stalin had to have all the power.  So he did to the Kulaks and industrialists what Putin did to Kordkovsky, Berezovsky and what Obama is doing main street and Wall Street dissidents like Jaime Diamond.  Stalin took over industries "legally" much like Obama legally nationalized the banking industry through Dodd Frank.

The question is how do you divest the state of these assets.  The way the Russians choose to do this and I am sure this is true in Ukraine to a degree is that they auctioned them off.  Kordkovsky, Berezovsky, Abramovich like Timoshenko and Poroshenko raised money and bribed the officials to own it.   We have state owned industries too that we privatized - California privatized the energy industry.  And we have politicians that make money off government.  Jim Peterson of Arizona is one as is Lamar Alexander is another.

How do you get rid of GM?  We technically own it?  How do you get rid of Cabrini Green - the slums or public housing that Valerie Jarrett made her fortune on?  How do divide that pie that doesn't create a situation where you have oligarchical rule?  How do you prevent oligarchical rule from coming into your country or dismantle it once it has taken shape?

To answer your question specific to Ukraine,

1) Klitchko

2) Yatensiuk

3) Tyagnybok

4) [deleted]

5) Poroshenko

6) Lutsenko

7) Andriy Shevchenko

8 )  Inna Bohoslovska

These I think are the next leaders of Ukraine.

 Klitchko

pros:  lived in and made a fortune in the West, originally a Russian speaking son of an ex-Soviet Army officer, lots of ties to the West including celebs like Hayden Panterrie and George Clooney, eloquent and witty English speaker. Popular among the young people. Consider this interview:



cons:   not a lot of political experience, cagey about his money (probably wants to protect it from people who want to take it away.)

[lordtiberius]

Arseniy Yatseniuk:
pros: young, # 2 in Block Timoshenko, ran for President in 2010, anecdotes are that he is an approachable man

cons:  I can't say for sure. I don't know his background very well. But he lost the election.  No one likes a loser unless the loser is right and he gains political capital for being right which he might have.

[lordtiberius]

Oleg Tyagnibok
pros: from Lviv, leader of the nationalist party Svobody, represents the West, made his bones in the West, charismatic, has a lot of poise

cons:  I don't think he speaks English, or made his money outside of politics, maybe backed or controlled oligarchs, his party has a reputation for beating up pensioners and associated with the Nazis.  He will have a difficult time uniting the country - but if anyone from his party could do it, he could.  He might be the Abraham Lincoln of his country meaning if he is the leader of Ukraine, pro-Russian provinces may secede.

[lordtiberius]

Petro Poroshenko:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Poroshenko
He is my favorite.  He has a lot of pro-business views that I like.  But he is an Oligarch.  He has ties to the West and a business need to go West sell to chocolates.  I don't know if he can connect with the pro-West millennials who are and will be more politically active



you can look up the others or follow up a query me later.  But wacth out for Andriy Shevchenko look how he man-handles the Rusky info-babe from RT:



He kills her with kindness.

[Muzh]

Like you, I am not an expert.  Those that criticize the limits of my knowledge in this area do so on very solid ground.  Though I will brag that I speak Ukrainian better than the Russian, Polish, and Belarusian un-indicted rapist twice elected to President of Ukraine. 

Like you, I am a veteran.  We have practiced political behavior and leadership in our youth.  We understand strategic and geopolitical realities.  The Cold War shaped our thinking.  I concede to you that as a Navy man, you understand the importance of Naval choke points more than I do.  You understand that without those warm weather ports, Russia cannot be a superpower or a strong regional power and that Ukraine because of its population, culture and geography make it a very important acre of strategic real estate.

Politics shares a lot in common with show business.  When I was in politics, our trainers called politics show business for ugly people.  Politicians, journalists, candidates, party officials, they call practice this dark art of magic, religion, trickery and fraud.  That's why Muzh's allusion to the David O. Russell movie holds weight.

The problem that all the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries face is how to treat state owned industries.  I sure would be interested in how Mendeleyev answers this question if he chooses to answer it.  Those state owned industries Gas for Goldilocks and Candy for Poroshenko afforded the Oligarchs their rise to power.

Stalin killed private industry because he knew that independent sources of wealth like the Candy Industry in Ukraine or Klitchko's boxing success would challenge power.  As a historian this was true in American history.  New money Industrialists like clothing manufacturers in antebellum New England challenged landowners - the old money.  Stalin had to have all the power.  So he did to the Kulaks and industrialists what Putin did to Kordkovsky, Berezovsky and what Obama is doing main street and Wall Street dissidents like Jaime Diamond. 
 

I thought you were serious. You had me going until you got to this part.
 

Stalin took over industries "legally" much like Obama legally nationalized the banking industry through Dodd Frank.

And the rambling rant that followed.
 
Your list of candidates look like hot wet spaghettis. Throw them to the wall and see which one sticks.
 

[Boethius]

Though I will brag that I speak Ukrainian better than the Russian, Polish, and Belarusian un-indicted rapist twice elected to President of Ukraine. 

I doubt that.  Yanukovych speaks broken Ukrainian.

Stalin killed private industry because he knew that independent sources of wealth like the Candy Industry in Ukraine or Klitchko's boxing success would challenge power.

No.  It was ideological.  NEP was contrary to Marxist ideology, and was only intended to remain in place until the nationalities were fully subdued.

1) Klitchko - Independently wealthy, but empty headed.  He does not have the acuity to run a country.

2) Yatensiuk - Another common thief.  He once bragged, during a television interview, that he made $2.4 million in a month.

3) Tyagnybok - A former commie.  An ultranationalist with Komsomol leadership and communist party background (as is the case with most of those shouting "mova, mova").  These types usually would sell their mother to get ahead.

4) [deleted]

5) Poroshenko - Another multi millionaire former commie.

6) Lutsenko - Former minister of internal affairs under Yushchenko.  Another millionaire.  Bought an ultra prestige apartment in Kyiv with state funds, but to hide its true ownership, he registered it under his employee's (a driver from his native village) name.  On his arrest, he was mocked mercilessly about this ham handed attempt to hide ill gotten gains.  He was an alcoholic, and went through withdrawal when jailed.  I don't know if he drinks now.

7) Andriy Shevchenko - No interest in a political career.

8 )  Inna Bohoslovska  - Yet another high ranking former commie, from an "ideologically correct" family.  To become a lawyer in the USSR required obkom approval.  This was a faculty reserved only for the most ardent communists.

[jone]

Just an observation:

It would seem that most of these individuals were active in society prior to 1991, wouldn't that make most of them former commies?

[Boethius]

The Ukrainian Communist Party had six million members, out of a population of 54 million.  One could not just "join" the Communist Party.  The Party approached you to join.  Your family background was examined, as far back as archives would allow.  You had to come from the right class.  You had to have demonstrated dedication to the proletarian cause, the ideals of Marxism-Leninism, and the proletariat as the one and only ruling class.  And now, all these people who had no problem informing on their classmates, neighbours, workmates, and even family members, have transformed themselves from dedication to Marxist-Leninist ideology to capitalism and nationalism.  From being informants, they are now all concerned with the rights of their fellow citizens and wish to build a strong and independent nation.  Yeah, right.    Their characters have not changed, and this is why, in power, they are wreaking havoc on Ukraine.


 

[lordtiberius]

Muzh and Boethius are correct.  I apologize for injected US comparisons to Ukraine.  Boethius argues rightly that those who made the trains run on time have Soviet hands.

We could try what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan which is to replace the current leadership with diaspora pro-westies like Chalabi and Karzai.  Shadow's prohibition, philippic and caution toward superhero rules apply.   Diaspora pro-westies though ideologically pure aren't typically competent or popular at home and in Chalabi's case shady and should be behind bars.  Also though they are nostalgic and loyal to their home countries, returning when it is safe, they expect the country to be as it was when they left and not what it is today. 

Why Ukraine did not choose dissident leaders like Vaclav Havel, I do not know.

Patton saw the Nazi's like Republicans and Democrats and wanted to re-arm SS divisions to face the Soviets.  There are limits to de-Nazification just as there were limits to Reconstruction.  You could have a truth and reconciliation boards.  Those help the country to heal and move on.  But move on to what?  A united Germany or an uncertain South Africa. The realist school of foreign policy is that you deal with what you have on the ground. 

I like Klitchko.  Whatever you want to say about a man's intelligence, he made his money the old fashioned way - he earned it.

[Boethius]

Why Ukraine did not choose dissident leaders like Vaclav Havel, I do not know

All the true dissidents were dead.  The Soviets really controlled dissent in Ukraine, by placing informants amongst them.  Rukh, for example, was established by the KGB in 1989, and was headed by a former dissident, Vyacheslav Chornovil.  He too was a former high level communist, who had done time during the Soviet era for writing about Ukrainian dissidents.  He was killed in a very suspicious car "accident".

[TS]

 Klitchko was not born in Ukraine - can he really be President of Ukraine? 

[lordtiberius]

This just in.  Unconfirmed sources within the Polish diplomatic corps report that Yanukovych to deploy a nonlethal weapon to disperse young people At Euromaidan - McCain is on a plane.

[Boethius]

Klitchko was not born in Ukraine - can he really be President of Ukraine?

An individual need not have been born in Ukraine to be president.  Under Ukraine's constitution, he/she must be over 35, be eligible to vote in Ukraine's elections, have a command of the Ukrainian language, and have resided in Ukraine in the 10 years immediately preceding the election.

[SANDRO43]

McCain is on a plane.

He looks a lot like :

But not as funny, probably .

[mendeleyev]

Similar requirements for Russia. You must have been a citizen for at least ten years, cannot hold dual passports, and cannot of had a criminal record for the immediate four years prior to running.

The way that most candidates are blocked out of the process is the additional election commission requirements that one must be free from hate speech or revolutionary  political rhetoric. The Russian Supreme Court has ruled against those additional rules but the Federal Election Commission has chosen to ignore the Court and uses this as a filter to get rid of "unacceptable" candidates.

Additionally candidates must collect two million signatures from registered voters and have twenty days in which to collect the signatures, of which no more than 50,000 can come from any one federal district.

[lordtiberius]

He looks a lot like :

But not as funny, probably .

we agree Sandro

[lordtiberius]

Given the preference among the membership for the ideologically pure while suspending super hero rules, you are not going to like this. 

You don't get more gangster than Rinat.


cue the music:


Exercising realpolitik, the West has reached out to Rinat Akmetov.  Who's Rinat Akmetov?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinat_Akhmetov

 . . .  47th richest man in the world with an estimated net worth of US 15.4 billion  . . .


 . . .   claims Akhmetov has been involved in organized crime.   . . .

"I have earned my first million by trading coal and coke, and spent the money on assets that no one wanted to buy. It was a risk but it was worth it"

Akhmetov has been noted as a financier and unofficial leader of the Party of Regions political party. [rumored to control between 30 to 40 MPs - the magic number to bring the government down]

Oh that gangster . . .

http://www.radiosvoboda.org/content/article/25199370.html

«Те, що в ці дні постраждали люди, це неприпустимо. Я переконаний, що зараз, у складний момент для нашої країни, дуже важливо мати холодні голови і зважений підхід», – зауважив Ахметов.

«Я – за стіл переговорів. Щоб політики, влада, опозиція, моральні лідери країни сіли за стіл переговорів і ухвалили те рішення, яким ми будемо пишатися»,

We will see the weight of his words.

[lordtiberius]

My own view:

[Muzh]

He looks a lot like :
 

But not as funny, probably .

You would not say that if you had seen his Presidential campaign.

[Boethius]

He should have lost his seat for unleashing Sarah Palin on an unsuspecting world.  Thank goodness she now is fading into irrelevancy.