Ukr. PM bows to Putin's demand to shift power to regions

[Larry1]

Ukrainian Prime Minister Offers to Devolve Powers to Regions

DONETSK/LUHANSK — Ukraine's prime minister on Friday offered to boost local powers in the regions in an effort to undercut pro-Russia separatists who have occupied official buildings in Russian-speaking cities in eastern Ukraine.

But separatists still occupied the main regional offices in Donetsk, while in Luhansk armed rebels were refusing an offer of non-prosecution by the Kiev authorities in exchange for them laying down their weapons and quitting the regional offices of the state security service.

... Touring Donetsk and the eastern city of Dnipropetrovsk, Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk said under a blueprint for a new constitution "a significant number" of powers would devolve away from the Kiev government to Ukraine's regions.

These would allowing regions to plow back a portion of state taxes into the local economy and infrastructure.

These 'de-centralization' proposals appeared in part designed to meet separatists demands for self-rule, though they differ from calls by Russia for Ukraine to adopt a "federalized" model.

Kiev sees federalization, as proposed by Moscow, as part of a deeper Kremlin plan which would be manipulated by Russia in vulnerable Russian-speaking areas like Donetsk and Luhansk to bring about the break-up of Ukraine.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/ukrainian-prime-minister-offers-to-devolve-powers-to-regions/497934.html

We'll see if this placates the aggressor's appetite.  Appeasement didn't work too well in the 1930s.  I hope it works better here now.  But I fear a slower-motion repeat of the late 1930s:

Early 1938 Hitler sent troops into Austria.  A plebiscite was then held and it showed more than 99% of Austrians wanted to unite with Germany (the Crimeans voted 97% in their plebiscite, didn't they?).  Hitler promised that this was the extent of his ambitions to gain more territory.

Six months later he broke his promise and demanded that the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia be surrendered to him in exchange for his promise that he would not seek additional territory from neighboring countries.  The Western countries agreed that they would not try to stop him from taking the Sudetenland.  That was when British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain returned from his meeting with Hitler waving an agreement with Hitler that he said brings "peace in our time".  A few months later Hitler invaded and conquered the rest of Czechoslovakia.  Then Poland. 

Putin originally said that he had no intention to take Crimea.  But he took it anyway.  Then he said he had no intention to invade the rest of Ukraine.  I hope he stops here and the parallels with the 1930s don't continue.

[Muzh]

Heh BOHICA
 
Larry, don't you know this is a win/win for Ukraine?

[fathertime]

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/ukrainian-prime-minister-offers-to-devolve-powers-to-regions/497934.html

We'll see if this placates the aggressor's appetite.  Appeasement didn't work too well in the 1930s.  I hope it works better here now.  But I fear a slower-motion repeat of the late 1930s:

I really don't think that this will be the case. For one thing, the stakes are much higher.  Nuclear war can ruin the world permanently so that is a big deterrent to getting TOO crazy with land grabs in potentially volatile regions.   Russia has obtained it's vital ports...it appears to me that they are free rolling now. Ultimately I don't picture them ruling over what would likely be hostile regions..just not worth it.

Someday down the road there will probably be a disastrous war over resources, but this doesn't appear to be that time or place...imo.
Fathertime!

[fathertime]

Heh BOHICA
 
Larry, don't you know this is a win/win for Ukraine?

You have 'miscalculated' just about everything else so I'd say it is quite likely you will miscalculate this too.

Fathertime!

[Daveman]

I really don't think that this will be the case. For one thing, the stakes are much higher.  Nuclear war can ruin the world permanently so that is a big deterrent to getting TOO crazy with land grabs in potentially volatile regions.   Russia has obtained it's vital ports...it appears to me that they are free rolling now. Ultimately I don't picture them ruling over what would likely be hostile regions..just not worth it.

Someday down the road there will probably be a disastrous war over resources, but this doesn't appear to be that time or place...imo.
Fathertime!

I don't see any form of nuclear aggression or response coming from either USA or Russia, even in a worst case scenario of war in that region.  Neither of those administrations are that stupid. Sure, they'll bluff and threaten, but that's about it.

The only idiots who would possibly be stupid enough to launch (or otherwise deliver) a WMD would be the muslim fundies if Russia happened to sneak them one.

[TBear]

I don't see any form of nuclear aggression or response coming from either USA or Russia, even in a worst case scenario of war in that region.  Neither of those administrations are that stupid. Sure, they'll bluff and threaten, but that's about it.

The only idiots who would possibly be stupid enough to launch (or otherwise deliver) a WMD would be the muslim fundies if Russia happened to sneak them one.

Pretty sure more than one muslim nation already has nuclear capability. Or at the very least, fairly easy access to them.

[Daveman]

Pretty sure more than one muslim nation already has nuclear capability. Or at the very least, fairly easy access to them.

Yes, but those aren't (yet at least) controlled by the bizarre ranks of fundamental extremists openly calling for the annihilation of other nations. 

[Larry1]

Pretty sure more than one muslim nation already has nuclear capability. Or at the very least, fairly easy access to them.

Only one I think: Pakistan.

[GQBlues]

Though provisional: Turkey

[fathertime]

I don't see any form of nuclear aggression or response coming from either USA or Russia, even in a worst case scenario of war in that region.  Neither of those administrations are that stupid. Sure, they'll bluff and threaten, but that's about it.

Man Daveman I'm not so sure about that one....but lets say you are correct and tactical nukes wouldn't be used....I would still be concerned about other weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical biological...  If one side is going to win a conventional war, I would not automatically expect the other side to adhere to international laws...I think there has to always be a compromise nowadays because of this threat incredible destruction in very little time...we are far away from many of these wars, but an opponent could really shock the bejesus out of us by dropping some bombs on american cities... We don't need to be involved, that just ups the ante too much, and I can see us getting called when we are near Russian turf..


Fathertime!   

[Muzh]

Man Daveman I'm not so sure about that one....but lets say you are correct and tactical nukes wouldn't be used....I would still be concerned about other weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical biological...  If one side is going to win a conventional war, I would not automatically expect the other side to adhere to international laws...I think there has to always be a compromise nowadays because of this threat incredible destruction in very little time...we are far away from many of these wars, but an opponent could really shock the bejesus out of us by dropping some bombs on american cities... We don't need to be involved, that just ups the ante too much, and I can see us getting called when we are near Russian turf..


Fathertime!

Now, that's what I call a win/win.