Protesters in Ukraine remind us of the priceless benefits of being EU members

[Ade]

The first really thought out analysis I've encountered on the topic to date. The voice of reason, finally


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html

Yes. Though unfortunately a message unlikely to be heard over the hyperbolic rhetoric and warmongering. All the chest beating and escalatory language is all just so much like petulant little girls pulling each others hair.

[cc3]

What makes you think Putin will stop at Crimea or that he gives one wit what the Ukrainians think of him or Russia. The Ukrainian military has no chance to ward off or defeat a Russian military. IMHO, Putin is testing the waters. If he can get away with Crimea, he can get it all and he knows it.

Furthermore IMHO, Putin wants his will emphasized in Kiev as well as Crimea. Whatever it takes for him to achieve that end is what he'll do.

Disagree. Have you been to Krim? It is and always has been an anomalous Russian presence at the nether extremity of Ukraine. Prior to being Russian, it was muslim Tatar, direct descendancy from the Mongol hordes who invaded almost 800 years ago. It has never really been 'Ukrainian'.
 
If Putin goes militarily adventuring in real Ukraine, he will initiate a repetition of CCCP's horrendous Afghan experience.

[krimster2]

Russia Invades Alaska!

Sarah Palin reported today that she has spotted Russian ships landing on Alaskan shores carrying military personnel in unmarked uniforms.
In a hastily scheduled press conference, Vladimir Putin informed the press that these were merely local volunteers protecting Alaska’s Russian minorities from “bandits and hooligans”. He further announced that Alaskans of Russian descent would vote on March 20, on whether to become part of Russia or remain part of the USA.

In response, secretary of state, John Kerry proposed that all Matryoshka dolls be banned from import to the United States from Russia, but only after approval by GazProm.

[JohnDearGreen]

A closer view.

[Faux Pas]

Disagree. Have you been to Krim? It is and always has been an anomalous Russian presence at the nether extremity of Ukraine. Prior to being Russian, it was muslim Tatar, direct descendancy from the Mongol hordes who invaded almost 800 years ago. It has never really been 'Ukrainian'.
 
If Putin goes militarily adventuring in real Ukraine, he will initiate a repetition of CCCP's horrendous Afghan experience.

No, and I have never been to Ukraine. I have been to Russia almost a dozen times and that doesn't qualify me as an expert on Russia either but, I am aware of the history. None of it is at play IMHO on Putin's masturbating on Ukraine. He wants Ukraine under his boot and marching lockstep to his order. When he achieves this in Crimea, he'll look to Kiev. He's done nothing at this point but make a play and see if he can get Crimea and it looks like he'll succeed. Europe is weak and leaderless, Obama and Kerry are buffoons. Nobody to stop him. We'll also disagree on Ukraine's ability for protection. They are no match for Russia

[lordtiberius]

Why hasn't Putin invaded Ukraine already?

[calmissile]

Why hasn't Putin invaded Ukraine already?

For the same reason kids pull the wings off insects........to prolong the torture (of the West).   

[JayH]

Freedom of speech under siege in Crimea

March 7, 2014, 4:21 p.m. | Ukraine — by Isaac Webb

A broken window is seen as journalists film outside the Crimean Parliament building in Simferopol on March 2, 2014. Armed pro-Russia men who had besieged Crimea's local parliament mysteriously vanished on March 2 but were still standing guard outside the regional government, as the capital of Ukraine's restive Black Sea peninsula remained calm but tense. AFP PHOTO/ GENYA SAVILOV
© AFP

In the past two weeks, Ukrainian and foreign correspondents have been threatened, attacked, and detained in Russian-occupied Crimea.

On March 7, Dunja Mijatovic, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Representative on Freedom of the Media, spoke with the Kyiv Post about the current “information crisis” in Ukraine after spending six hours on the peninsula.

Mijatovic compared the dangerous atmosphere for journalists in Crimea to that of her native Sarajevo before the Bosnian War: “In the air you can feel it…people are not free in their thoughts and in their movements.” She outlined a pattern of “attacks on journalists, hasty decisions to change legislation, banning [news] channels, [and] introducing other channels that are suitable for a certain group.” Mijatovic said that journalists in Crimea are facing constant “intimidation and harassment” from local self-defense groups.

On March 5, Mijatovic traveled with a team of advisors to Crimea to monitor the deteriorating situation. As they were leaving the peninsula, a local self-defense group that Mijatovic described as a “paramilitary” unit, offered to “escort” her OSCE team to the airport, making it obvious that international observers were not welcome in Crimea. Mijatovic said that the men “had clear orders” to make sure that she left.

Under former Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovich, journalists were occasionally harassed and beaten for publishing damning information about the ruling regime. Since Yanukovich’s fall, however, attacks on journalists have largely come from pro-Russian groups.


The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatović.
The people harassing journalists seem to be taking their cue from Moscow.

On March 6, Russian State Duma representative Evgenii Fedorov proposed a bill to make media executives criminally responsible for allowing “the publication of false, anti-Russian information that provides information in support of extremist and separatist, anti-Russian forces, including portrayals of events beyond Russian borders.”   

Threats on members of the international media covering the Russian invasion of Crimea have been increasing over the past several days. On March 5, journalists from the BBC Russian service were threatened by Russian soldiers who told them “Don’t move or we’ll shoot.” The soldiers carried a Kalashnikov assault rifle, a sniper rifle, and a grenade launcher.

On March 6, a team of journalists from CNN was told to stop broadcasting or they would be told to leave their hotel in Crimea.

Ukrainian news outlets have also come under pressure.

Mijatovic said her office had been informed that the signals of TV stations Channel 5 and 1+1 had been cut off in Crimea on March 6, and would be replaced by Russian state-owned channels Rossiya 1 and Rossiya 2. Both channels are mouthpieces of Kremlin propaganda. Among other intimidations of Ukrainian journalists, Mijatovic said that journalists from Krim TV were “harassed constantly,” but were showing “tremendous courage” by continuing to report.

The threat to freedom of the press in Ukraine does not come exclusively from Russian sympathizers, however.

In the days following the collapse of the Yanukovych administration, lawmakers in Kyiv proposed banning broadcasts by companies from countries that are not party to the European Convention on Transfrontier Television. Russia has signed but not ratified the ECTT, meaning Russian companies would be barred from broadcasting in Ukraine under the bill. On March 6, Mijatovich met with one of the parliamentarians who proposed the legislation. The deputy promised to withdraw the bill.

Still, censorship of Russian media seems to be increasing in Kyiv. Reporters Without Borders reported that the cable and Internet provider Lanet had dropped three Russian TV stations for “broadcasting aggressive propaganda, calling for war and spreading hate.”

Mijatovic said that her job is not to monitor the content of media, but rather to ensure that journalists are able to express their views without censorship or interference, “no matter who is in charge.”

She said she had met with authorities in Kyiv, encouraging them to “show a clear political will to push for investigations of the brutal beatings of more than 170 journalists…and the murder of Vyacheslav Veremiy,” a journalist who was attacked and killed in Kyiv on Feb. 18.

On Friday, Reporters Without Borders secretary general Christophe Deloire released a statement detailing violations of free speech in Crimea: “At a time when the entire world is following events in Crimea, those who control the region have duty to allow local and foreign journalists to do their job. The obstruction and censorship taking place under their authority is unacceptable.”

The crackdown on journalists coincides with the Crimean parliament’s decision to move up the date of a referendum to decide whether Crimea will join Russia or receive greater autonomy from Ukraine. The referendum will now take place on March 16. The recent wave of attacks on journalists is likely intended to minimize the number of international observers of the referendum, which few believe will be freely or fairly conducted.

In response to the media crisis, Mijatovic said that the international community should “have a joint voice, and “engage all sides in dialogue.” She said that it was essential that international observers “maintaining a presence” in Crimea to ensure the freedom of speech for voices of all persuasions.
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/freedom-of-speech-under-siege-in-crimea-338728.html

[JayH]

Crimean Tatars fret over future in Crimea under Russian rule

March 7, 2014, 6:32 p.m. | Ukraine — by Christopher J. Miller

Eskander Japarov, 40, returned from exile in Russia to Crimea in 1992. He’s made his home in Ana-Yurt, a place he says is “beautiful.”
Christopher J. Miller joined the Kyiv Post in January 2013. He is an American journalist with experience as a reporter, web editor and business editor for daily, weekly and monthly newspapers and magazines in the U.S. He is a native of Portland, Oregon and a graduate of Portland State University. He is also a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer (Ukraine 2010-2012).

SEE ALSO

Ukraine's Foreign Ministry informs foreign embassies of illegitimacy of Crimean referendum

ANA-YURT, Crimea – Aziz Ziyatdinov says he doesn’t get much sleep at night these days.

“We don’t know who might come up this road,” says the 30-year-old, gesturing to a steep dirt pathway leading to the tiny pop-up village of Ana-Yurt. His eyes are dark with heavy bags, and he paces nervously, glancing at the horizon unremittingly while he speaks. He prefers when it rains, making it next to impossible for vehicles to ascend the hillside.

“We used to get a lot of sleep. It was very quiet until some weeks ago. Now it is very intense, and not safe for us,” he says.

 
Ana-Yurt resident Aziz Ziyatdinov, 30, describes the situation in Crimea as being "very intense, and not safe for us (Tatars).”
Here, beyond a maze of serpentine dirt and gravel roads, atop a grassy bluff Ziyatdinov calls “the mountain” some 20 kilometers from the autonomous republic’s capital city, 200 families of Crimean Tatars, a predominately Muslim people whose roots can be traced back to Turkic and Mongol tribes, are building a new life for themselves after decades of living in exile in far-flung corners of the Soviet Union.

In 1944, under the pretext that they had aided the Nazis during World War II, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin deported more than 200,000 Crimean Tatars to Central Asia, where they remained until they began returning shortly before the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 to the land they once ruled.

About half of them died of disease and starvation during their journey to the Far East. Today, around 300,000 call Crimea home. But most believe their livelihood is in danger, now that Russia effectively controls the peninsula and is seeking to take Crimea under its governance.

Since Feb. 27, heavily armed Russian troops – up to 30,000 over the course of the week, according to the State Border Service of Ukraine – have besieged Ukrainian military bases and government buildings, and even closed road access from mainland Ukraine. For at least a day they managed to shut down Simferopol’s airport, and this week took control of media, including main radio and television stations, which now air Russian state-sponsored news in place of Ukrainian news.

The Russian troops are joined by thousands of pro-Russia Crimean militiamen – some with automatic weapons – who are less disciplined and have attacked several pro-Ukraine demonstrators and journalists in recent days.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has denied that the soldiers on the ground are Russian, noting that they wear unmarked uniforms. But he justified asking parliament to vote to allow him to send troops here under the pretext that they would be peacekeepers working to protect ethnic Russians, who account for nearly 60 percent of the population of Crimea, from Kyiv extremists who have seized power of Ukraine through a coup d’état. Russian deputies voted unanimously last week to allow Putin the option of sending military forces onto the territory of Ukraine.

As Crimean lawmakers voted in Simferopol for secession on March 6, pushing up a referendum previously scheduled for the end of the month to March 16, Ildar Ibraimov fretted over what might become of him and his fellow Crimean Tatars should the autonomous republic join Russia.

“It has taken more than 20 years to rebuild our lives, and we are very worried it could all be taken away again,” Ibraimov, a local member of the Mejilis, the governing body for the Crimean Tatars, who returned to Crimea from Uzbekistan in 1991, told the Kyiv Post on March 6.

Already the Tatar’s lives have been made more complicated, with pro-Russia militia targeting and intimidating them. Several homes of Crimean Tatars in Simferopol and the city of Bakhchisaray have reportedly been marked by gouges or painted with a large “X” similar to that used by police under Stalin’s order in 1944 to mark the homes of those to be deported. Some Tatars have found their homes broken into and vehicles damaged.

“In such dark times appear hooliganism, robberies and general destabilization,” Ibraimov says. None of the homes in Ana-Yurt have been tagged with such marks, but at least one wall of a Tatar restaurant in the valley below appeared to have been marked in black paint.

 
A Crimean Tatar family walks together up the road from the valley to the town of Ana-Yurt, some 20 kilometers from Simferopol.
Eskander Japarov, 40, returned from exile in Russia to Crimea in 1992. He’s made his home in Ana-Yurt, a place he says is “beautiful.” But due to the escalation in violent rhetoric against Tatars and the vandalism, he is afraid to stray too far from his modest village home.

“I don’t go into Simferopol, because I believe these people will attack me,” he said.

Both he and Ibraimov said that they were strongly against Crimea joining Russia, as it would mean “more repression,” and that the referendum was illegal, a sentiment echoed by U.S. President Barack Obama on March 6, who said it “would violate the Ukrainian Constitution and international law.”

Crimean Tatar chairman Refat Chubarov urged residents of the peninsula to boycott the referendum scheduled for March 16 and called the pro-Russia parliament members who voted for separating Crimea from Ukraine “lunatics” who had “lost their minds” and were “fulfilling someone else’s will” in a post on Facebook.

“The Mejlis (parliament) of the Crimean Tatars does not recognize this referendum,” he said.

Ibraimov says the hopes the referendum fails, but he’s not holding his breath.

“We want peace, prosperity and development… and for Crimea to remain with Ukraine,” he said. “But we are preparing for the worst – that we will wake up in Russia one day.

Ziyatdinov and others at Ana-Yurt aren’t taking any chances. They have assembled a security team of men within the town which patrols its streets day and night in rotating shifts, scrutinizing every new car and each strange face that emerges from the valley below.

They know they don’t have the man power or the weapons to stave off an organized attack by the pro-Russia militia groups should they come for them. But they can at least keep a curious few away.

“You can see, we’re not going to win a fight against 100 (men),” Ziyatdinov said. “But we have men on the streets and in each yard, and we can protect from provocateurs.”

Kyiv Post editor Christopher J. Miller can be reached at millerjchristopher@gmail.com, and on Twitter at @ChristopherJM.

Editor’s Note: This article has been produced with support from the project www.mymedia.org.ua, financially supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, and implemented by a joint venture between NIRAS and BBC Media Action.The content in this article may not necessarily reflect the views of the Danish government, NIRAS and BBC Action Media.
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/crimean-tatars-fret-over-future-in-crimea-under-russian-rule-338743.html

[JayH]

For those who keep persisting with the nonsense that Crimean people will be able to choose which direction they take.The only intent is to get this done so Putin can sprout his legitimacy nonsense.

Two choices in Crimean referendum: yes and yes

March 7, 2014, 7:04 p.m. | Ukraine — by Katya Gorchinskaya

The ballot for March 16 Crimean referendum gives two choices, to join Russia or become independent.
© Kyiv Post

Voters in Ukraine’s Russian-occupied Crimea who vote in the March 16 referendum have two choices – join Russia immediately or declare independence and then join Russia.

So the choices are “yes, now” or “yes, later.”

Voting “no” is not an option.

The lack of choice wouldn’t surprise anyone familiar with how Soviet or Russian elections are run.

The Crimean parliament released the design of the ballot that will be used for the referendum, which will be taking place as thousands of Russian soldiers are in control and – it appears – Russian President Vladimir Putin is calling the shots..

Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov has annulled the referendum as illegal and unconstitutional, but the pro-Kremlin Crimean authorities who took power on Feb. 27 do not recognize the legitimacy of central government and have said they will proceed with the vote.

The ballot asks two questions and leaves no option for a “no” vote. Voters are simply asked to check one of two boxes:

Do you support joining Crimea with the Russian Federation as a subject of Russian Federation?

And:

Do you support restoration of 1992 Crimean Constitution and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?

That Constitution declares that Crimea is an independent state.

The questions are written in Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar, the three most widely spoken languages on the peninsula, and the paper carries a warning in all three languages that marking both options will invalidate the ballot.

Volodymyr Yavorkiy, a member of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group, says that not only is the referendum completely illegal, the ballot for it doesn't stand up to any criticism.

“There is no option for ‘no,’ they are not counting the number of votes, but rather which one of the options gets more votes,” says Yavorskiy. “Moreover, the first question is about Crimea joining Russia, the second – about it declaring independence and joining Russia. In other words, there is no difference.”

He says with no choice available, “it's clear what the result will be.”

Mykhailo Malyshev, head of the Crimean parliament's commission on referendum, said the election will have 1,250 polling stations equipped with web cameras for the vote.

“We have a desire and preparations for installing web cameras at polling stations. They can play a great role during the vote, and if technically it is possible, the web cameras will be installed,” UNIAN news agency quoted him as saying.

Malyshev also said that 2.5 million ballots will be printed. However, according to the Central Election Commission data, as of Feb. 28, 2014 there were only just over 1.5 million voters in Crimea.

The Central Election Commission, which has also said that the Crimean referendum is illegitimate, took an emergency decision on March 6 to close off the state register to all authorities of the autonomy. In its ruling, the commission said it was doing it “to protect the database of the State register of voters from unsanctioned use of personal data and unsanctioned access and abuse of access.”

Kyiv Post deputy chief editor Katya Gorchinskaya can be reached at katya.gorchinskaya@gmail.com
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/two-choices-in-crimean-referendum-yes-and-yes-338745.html

[Belvis]

I'll add a few words to keep the discussion balanced.
Lots of propaganda and misinformation flow from both sides of conflict, we have to remember about, first of all. I sum up the russian point of view.

  Ukraine was never existed as a state before breakup of SU, Ukraine was integrated part of Russia for 400 years. Separation of Ukraine from Russia was viewed as semi-forced division of the same nation performed to fulfill the interests of local political elites.  Because Ukraine was born under not quite natural circumstances, the people of Ukraine is extremely non-uniform. The inner antagonisms in Ukraine seems only to grow up with time, nevetheless Russia never interfered in inner affairs, even during so called Orange revolution. Russia has acknowledged the right of ukrainians for independent way. Please, don't confuse russian efforts to defend economic interests in Ukraine with political pressure. Money is money, Russia is not obliged to pay for and support Ukraine forever though Russia used the option to help friendly side.

  However, Crimea was continuing to be the Russian land in minds of Russians all these years. It's just history, I don't want to dig so deeply.
Why has Russia changed its long-term stand  to Crimea? Answer: geopolitics.

  I guess Putin come to conclusion that new Ukrainian rulers who get power in coup with full support of USA will bring their country to NATO. There is an agreement that Ukraine has to stay  beyond any military blocks. Putin don't trust agreements as he remember  NATO broke promises to curb NATO extension beyond East Germany. EU side broke the agreement between opposition and Yanukovich for political reform and peacful transfer of power at elections. There are nobody to trust and time to defend themselves using opportunities.

  Crimea became such opportunity. Population is pro-Russian except Тatar minorities, and even more russian than Russians in Russia. Constitution of Ukraine was raped by new Ukrainian authorities so Putin feel comfortable to break the law following them.

I view the events as the last agony of SU. After Crimea  reunite with Russia there are no potential territorial conflicts left from SU breakup.
Can Crimea be irritating factor for Ukrainians? For sure it will be for politiciants who exploit it in political struggle. As for ordinary people I doubt, Crimea never was ukranian in minds of people who share the same motheland for 400 years.

[Chelseaboy]

Is there an any verifiable proof that the EU broke the agreement between Yanukovich and the opposition. ?

Plenty of stories and hearsay from the Russian media and the pro-Russians on here that the dastardly EU is at the bottom of the coup,along with the evil USA,to justify their invasion of Crimea,but the only people to be proven as liars  so far is ...Russia.

We KNOW Russia has invaded Crimea,despite Russia's laughable claims the troops are not actually theirs..a blatant lie,which is despite Putin getting permission from the Russian parliament to use military force in Ukraine...therefore breaking international treaties and the agreement given to Ukraine when they gave their Nuclear arms up.

And now we have a rigged referendum about to take place on the future of Crimea,overseen by a brand-new quickly -appointed Crimean "leader" who isn't even a citizen of Ukraine.

Russia and their fanboys/girls can BS as much as they like,but the fact is Ukraine hasn't invaded Russia..Russia has invaded part of Ukraine,with the intention of taking part of Ukraine's land,and is interfering with the business of another country.

The feeble excuse about protecting the ethnic Russians on Crimea against  yet to be seen attacks from far-right extremists is the same protecting their own people excuse Germany used to invade Poland...and look how that went.

No doubt if there were husbands of German women or German women on here,they'd have been justifying the actions of Hitler too.

The only attacking I'm seeing in Ukraine now is from the pro-Russian extremists attacking Ukrainians physically and verbally.

[jone]

I enjoyed reading Belvis' thoughts.  They mirror many of the people in Russia. 

From my perspective, of someone who loves both countries, Ukraine and Russia, I have to ask myself some questions:

1.  Isn't having Crimea a part of Russia going to aggravate the rest of Ukraine?

2.  Isn't there anyone in Russia who believes that Russia is taking Crimea by force?  By invasion?

3.  When a blatant lie is told over and over again:  "We do not have troops in Ukraine!"  don't the people of Russia know how disdainful telling this lie is to the rest of the world?  Don't they know how such lies diminish Russia to the point of being a laughingstock?

Having Crimea being part of Russia will not change the geopolitical landscape.  Honest answers to the questions above will.

[lordtiberius]

For the same reason kids pull the wings off insects........to prolong the torture (of the West).   

So he is negotiating?

[Belvis]

Though questions below were addressed to jone  I dare to express my personal point of view which can be pretty typical as well for other Russians.

I have to ask myself some questions:

1.  Isn't having Crimea a part of Russia going to aggravate the rest of Ukraine?

That's the crucial question for us. We see some basement to believe that reaction of the rest of Ukraine will be temporary and limited in rage. West of Ukraine hates Russia anyway, a few weeks ago they declared independence from Ukrainian state. Their political victory was in doubt at that time, and they did not care about the rest of Ukraine, pro-Russian in their view.
Reaction of East Ukraine we can see in many videos. They hold demonstrations under Russian banners even now.

2.  Isn't there anyone in Russia who believes that Russia is taking Crimea by force?  By invasion?

The invasion was welcomed by overwelming majority of locals. There are many independent communication  channels to confirm this fact. For example I can get info from a guy who has returned from Crimea a week ago. 
I agree that the "invasion" would look much more acceptable for West after a bloodshed happens like in  Yugoslavia or Syria.  Should Putin wait slaughters there  before invasion?

3.  When a blatant lie is told over and over again:  "We do not have troops in Ukraine!"  don't the people of Russia know how disdainful telling this lie is to the rest of the world?  Don't they know how such lies diminish Russia to the point of being a laughingstock?

In response to this petition I want to remind about recent talk in Congress when one US official sweared there is no Al Qaeda in Syria. Oh, wait, better I show one picture:

[missAmeno]

Why hasn't Putin invaded Ukraine already?

Because too many Ukrainians will prefer stand up and even tho they are unarmed walk at shooting at them bullets rather than become part of Russia.

[jone]

Chrystia Freeland / Special to the NY Times

KIEV, Ukraine — OVER the past two weeks, residents of Kiev have lived through its bloodiest conflict since the Second World War, watched their reviled president flee and a new, provisional team take charge, seen Russian troops take control of part of the country, and heard Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, assert his right to take further military action. Yet the Ukrainian capital is calm.

Revolutions often falter on Day 2, as Ukraine has already bitterly learned twice — once after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union and then again in 2005 after the Orange Revolution. That could happen again, but the new revolution is enjoying a prolonged honeymoon, thanks to Mr. Putin, whose intervention in Ukrainian foreign and trade policy provoked the uprising in the first place, and whose invasion has, paradoxically, increased its chance of long-term success.

Kiev smells like a smoky summer camp, from the bonfires burning to keep the demonstrators still out on Independence Square warm, but every day it is tidier. Sidewalks in the city center are checkerboarded with neat piles of bricks that had been dug up to serve as missiles and are now being put back.

The police, despised for their corruption and repression, are returning to work. Their squad cars often sport Ukrainian flags and many have a “self-defense” activist from the protests with them. A Western ambassador told me that the activists were there to protect the cops from angry citizens. My uncle, who lives here, said they were also there to stop the police from slipping back into their old ways and demanding bribes.

This revolution may yet be eaten by its own incompetence or by infighting. A presidential election is scheduled for May, and the race, negative campaigning and all, has quietly begun. The oligarchs, some of whom have cannily been appointed governors of the potentially restive eastern regions, are jockeying for power. But for now, Ukrainians, who were brought together by shared hatred of the former president, Viktor F. Yanukovych, are being brought closer still by the Kremlin-backed invasion.

“Yanukovych freed Ukraine and Putin is uniting it,” said Iegor Soboliev, a 37-year-old ethnic Russian who heads a government commission to vet officials of the former regime. “Ukraine is functioning not through its government but through the self-organization of its people and their sense of human decency.”

Mr. Soboliev is a former investigative journalist who grew frustrated that carefully documented revelations of government misbehavior — which he says “wasn’t merely corruption, it was marauding” — were having no impact. He and a few friends formed Volya, a movement dedicated to creating a country of “responsible citizens” and a “state worthy of their trust.”

“People in Odessa, Mykolaiv, Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk are coming out to defend their country,” Mr. Soboliev said. “They have never liked the western Ukrainian, Galician point of view. But they are showing themselves to be equally patriotic. They are defending their country from foreign aggression. Fantastical things are happening.”

This conflict could flare into Europe’s first major war of the 21st century, and Crimea may never again be part of Ukraine. But no matter what happens over the next few months, or even years, Mr. Putin and his vision of an authoritarian, Russian-dominated former Soviet space have already lost. Democratic, independent Ukraine, and the messy, querulous (but also free and law-abiding) European idea have won.
 
So far, the only certain victory is the ideological one. Many outsiders have interpreted the past three months as a Yugoslav-style ethno-cultural fight. It is nothing of the kind. This is a political struggle. Notwithstanding the bloodshed, the best parallel is with Prague’s Velvet Revolution of 1989. The emphasis there on changing society’s moral tone, and each person’s behavior, was likewise central to the protests that overthrew Mr. Yanukovych.

For Ukraine, as well as for Russia and much of the former U.S.S.R., the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 was only a partial revolution. The U.S.S.R. vanished, but the old nomenklatura, and its venal, authoritarian style of governance remained. Mr. Putin is explicitly drawing on that heritage and fitfully trying to reshape it into a new state capitalist system that can compete and flourish globally. An alliance with Mr. Yanukovych’s Ukraine was an essential part of that plan.

That effort has now failed. Whatever Mr. Putin achieves in Ukraine, it will not be partnership with a Slavic younger brother enthusiastically joining in his neo-imperialist, neo-Soviet project.

The unanswered question is whether Ukraine can be a practical success. The economy needs a total structural overhaul — and that huge shift needs to be accomplished while either radically transforming, or creating from scratch, effective government institutions.

This is the work Central Europe and the Baltic states did in the 1990s. Their example shows that it can be done, but it takes a long time, requires a patient and united populace, and probably also the promise of European partnership.

The good news is that Ukraine may finally have achieved the necessary social unity. The bad news is that it isn’t clear if Europe, struggling with its economic malaise and ambivalence toward its newish eastern members, has the stomach to tutor and support Ukraine as it did the Visegrad countries — Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland — and the Baltic states.

THIS should be Ukraine’s biggest problem. But with Russian forces in Crimea, the more urgent question Kiev faces is whether it will find itself at war.

The answer depends in large part on Russia. Sergei Kovalev, a former dissident who became a member of the Russian Parliament in the 1990s, once told me that a good rule for understanding Russian strongmen was that “eating increases the appetite.” Mr. Putin has thus far lived up to that aphorism.

Thanks to his agility in Syria, his successful hosting of the Sochi Olympics and even, at first, his masterful manipulation of Mr. Yanukovych, Mr. Putin has won himself something of a reputation as a master strategist. But he has made a grave miscalculation in Ukraine.

For one thing, Mr. Putin misunderstands the complexities of language and ethnicity in Ukraine. Certainly, Ukraine is diverse, and language, history and culture play a role in some of its internal differences — just as they do in blue- and red-state America, in northern and southern Italy, or in the north and the south of England.

The error is to believe there is a fratricidal separation between Russian and Ukrainian speakers and to assume that everyone who speaks Russian at home or voted for Mr. Yanukovych would prefer to be a citizen of Mr. Putin’s Russia. The reality of Ukraine is that everyone in the country speaks and understands Russian and everyone at least understands Ukrainian. On television, in Parliament, and in the streets, bilingual discussions are commonplace.

Mr. Putin seems to have genuinely believed that Ukraine was Yugoslavia, and that his forces would be warmly welcomed by at least half of the country. As Leonid D. Kuchma, a former president of Ukraine and once a senior member of the Soviet military-industrial complex, told me: “His advisers must have thought they would be met in eastern Ukraine with flowers as liberators. The reality is 180 degrees opposite.”

Many foreign policy realists wish the Ukrainian revolution hadn’t happened. They would rather Ukraine had more fully entered the corrupt, authoritarian zone the Kremlin is seeking to consolidate. But we don’t get to choose for Ukraine — Ukrainians do, and they have. Now we have to choose for ourselves.

The author of “Sale of the Century: Russia’s Wild Ride From Communism to Capitalism” and a Liberal member of the Canadian Parliament.

*********************************************************************************

This woman is a little more strident, IMHO, then I would care for.  But she angles in on what most of us have known:  The invasion by Russia has polarized Ukraine and will have long term consequences.  Putin is now in a situation where he either invades ALL of Ukraine or walks away with the (consolation) prize of Crimea. 

I especially loved the idea that activists are riding in the police cars to insure no bribes are being extracted.

I also loved the quote:  "Yanukovych freed Ukraine and Putin is uniting it."

What are your thoughts?

[jone]

Because too many Ukrainians will prefer stand up and even tho they are unarmed walk at shooting at them bullets rather than become part of Russia.

Hear, hear!  Welcome back, MissA!

[lordtiberius]

Because too many Ukrainians will prefer stand up and even tho they are unarmed walk at shooting at them bullets rather than become part of Russia.

Why doesn't the rest of the West have that kind of courage?

[LAman]

I enjoyed reading Belvis' thoughts.  They mirror many of the people in Russia. 

From my perspective, of someone who loves both countries, Ukraine and Russia, I have to ask myself some questions:

1.  Isn't having Crimea a part of Russia going to aggravate the rest of Ukraine?
     Maybe .... maybe not

2.  Isn't there anyone in Russia who believes that Russia is taking Crimea by force?  By invasion?
     you mean .... Isn't there anyone in Crimea who believes that Russia is taking Crimea by force?

3.  When a blatant lie is told over and over again:  "We do not have troops in Ukraine!"  don't the people of Russia know how disdainful telling this lie is to the rest of the world?  Don't they know how such lies diminish Russia to the point of being a laughingstock?
      ever heard of hint, hint, wink, wink ??

Having Crimea being part of Russia will not change the geopolitical landscape.  Honest answers to the questions above will.

[calmissile]

So he is negotiating?

It was meant as a joke (sort of).

It's been demonstrated that neither Europe nor the US is going to do anything militarily to oust the Russian invaders from Crimea.  Putin played his hand by using both military and propaganda to achieve his goals.  Putin only understands physical force, all the blabbering by the rest of the world only gives him something to laugh about.

It's unfortunate that Obama shot his mouth off for months yet Putin knows that the US will not provide military assistance to oust him from Crimea.  It's somewhat embarrassing to have Obama generate all this talk and no action.  It's true that the average American has no interest in sending troops anywhere.  America is tired of spending money and blood in places they can't even locate on a map.  It's just a reality.

Generally, I think that America sees this as a Europe problem.  If Europe does not have the will to stem Russian aggression on their own continent, why should the US be leading the charge to do so.  I was surprised that the UK and Germany do not even have the will to impose economic sanctions. They claim that the business dealings with Russia are so extensive that it would hurt their economy.  So be it.

When the Russian expansionism ends up on the doorstep of other European borders, perhaps they should be reminded of the help they provided Ukraine when it was most needed.  The time to have stopped Putin has past.  It is history.

The big question now, is who is next!

[jone]

Though questions below were addressed to jone  I dare to express my personal point of view which can be pretty typical as well for other Russians.

That's the crucial question for us. We see some basement to believe that reaction of the rest of Ukraine will be temporary and limited in rage. West of Ukraine hates Russia anyway, a few weeks ago they declared independence from Ukrainian state. Their political victory was in doubt at that time, and they did not care about the rest of Ukraine, pro-Russian in their view.
Reaction of East Ukraine we can see in many videos. They hold demonstrations under Russian banners even now.

The invasion was welcomed by overwelming majority of locals. There are many independent communication  channels to confirm this fact. For example I can get info from a guy who has returned from Crimea a week ago. 
I agree that the "invasion" would look much more acceptable for West after a bloodshed happens like in  Yugoslavia or Syria.  Should Putin wait slaughters there  before invasion?

In response to this petition I want to remind about recent talk in Congress when one US official sweared there is no Al Qaeda in Syria. Oh, wait, better I show one picture:

From any perspective, someone invading another country and having the leader of the country claiming that they didn't is a helluvalot different then posturing, from any country (and the US is certainly guilty of it) about diplomatic nuances.

1.  The demonstrations done under Russian banners are done by an extreme few.  They are supplemented by Russian 'Tourists' who have been bused over to Ukraine to incite the locals.  It ain't working.  It is polarizing people in the opposite direction.  And you, like the Russian leadership, don't get it.

2.  What happened in Crimea was a coup.  Plain and simple.  The parliament was taken over, we are now learning, at gun point, and voted to invite Russia in.  Legislators are still being told that if they talk, their families will be killed.  That is why the reporters are being sent out of the region and the UN observer was almost stoned - as if the world won't eventually learn the truth.   

Your claim that many of the locals support the coup may indeed be true.  But it is empty support, created by the blocking of access to the rest of the world, fed only the lies told by Russia to justify its invasion.  If it were truly supported, then free press, and a fair plebiscite would be in play.  What does Russia have to be scared of?  Obviously, that the truth will be learned by the local population.

3.  Russia tried to do the same thing in Donetsk.  Russian 'Tourists' surrounded the government building with the legislators inside and demanded, in a siege, that Donetsk call a referendum of Ukrainian secession.  The legislators, smarter than the people surrounding them, called for the referendum.  They just forgot to say what the referendum was for and what date it would be held ... making it useless.  At this exact moment in time, Putin's coup of the rest of Ukraine was already over.  The supposed Russian stronghold of Ukraine, the Donetsk region, voted to thwart Russian intervention. 

4.  What you folks cannot understand, and it is time to wake up and smell the coffee, is that Russia has a 90 year history of invading countries around it.  Poland was catatonic when this began, calling for emergency meetings of NATO, because they saw propensities that could lead to the dismemberment of the Polish state. 

5.  While I agree that Russia and Ukraine should be big brother and little brother, Big Brother has a problem.  If Big Brother doesn't get his own way, then it invades.  More and more, Russia is seen as a Kleptocracy by the rest of of the world.  Ukraine was a kleptocracy and now it isn't. 

[JohnDearGreen]

[Shadow]

What happened in Ukraine was a coup, no more and no less.
Now let the people of Ukraine use the DEMOCRACY they are able to use in order to solve this.
It is very funny to read that a referendum isn undemocratic just because the result may not fit the agenda.

Let te people decide, do not decide what is the desired result for them.

[JayH]

I'll add a few words to keep the discussion balanced.
Lots of propaganda and misinformation flow from both sides of conflict, we have to remember about, first of all. I sum up the russian point of view.

  Ukraine was never existed as a state before breakup of SU, Ukraine was integrated part of Russia for 400 years. Separation of Ukraine from Russia was viewed as semi-forced division of the same nation performed to fulfill the interests of local political elites.  Because Ukraine was born under not quite natural circumstances, the people of Ukraine is extremely non-uniform. The inner antagonisms in Ukraine seems only to grow up with time, nevetheless Russia never interfered in inner affairs, even during so called Orange revolution. Russia has acknowledged the right of ukrainians for independent way. Please, don't confuse russian efforts to defend economic interests in Ukraine with political pressure. Money is money, Russia is not obliged to pay for and support Ukraine forever though Russia used the option to help friendly side.
Ukraine became a sovereign country-at unilaterally agreed boundaries-the nonsense of what you have written ignores that fact.Russia has no right to interfere in ANY way with Ukrainian affairs.FULLSTOP.

  However, Crimea was continuing to be the Russian land in minds of Russians all these years. It's just history, I don't want to dig so deeply.
Why has Russia changed its long-term stand  to Crimea? Answer: geopolitics.
Too bad if Russia changes it's mind--too late.On the same basis you suggest every native people in the world has the right to reclaim land they occupied centuries ago--cleary a ridiculous argument to put.

  I guess Putin come to conclusion that new Ukrainian rulers who get power in coup with full support of USA( You imply the USA was behind a change in government direction-that is simply not the case) will bring their country to NATO. There is an agreement that Ukraine has to stay  beyond any military blocks. Putin don't trust agreements as he remember  NATO broke promises to curb NATO extension beyond East Germany. EU side broke the agreement between opposition and Yanukovich for political reform and peacful transfer of power at elections. (EU had zero to do with the change of circumstances- and having an earlier election is preferable-- as was removing Yanukovich in the short term)There are nobody to trust and time to defend themselves using opportunities.

  Crimea became such opportunity. Population is pro-Russian except Тatar minorities, ( you do not know that-it is promoted idea by Russia--why not allow a free and fair vote that is not at the point of a gun)and even more russian than Russians in Russia. Constitution of Ukraine was raped by new Ukrainian authorities so Putin feel comfortable to break the law following them. ( that is just a ridiculous statement)

I view the events as the last agony of SU. After Crimea  reunite with Russia there are no potential territorial conflicts left from SU breakup.
Can Crimea be irritating factor for Ukrainians? For sure it will be for politiciants who exploit it in political struggle. As for ordinary people I doubt, Crimea never was ukranian in minds of people who share the same motheland for 400 years.

You show the contempt for Ukraine and Ukrainians that we so often hear and see from Russians.Your entire comments are based on Russian rights-- and you choose to totally ignore that Ukraine was invaded--an act of war by Russia
What price do you expect to pay for that Russian treachery?A return to the cold war?  What are you going to say if this turns to a shooting war? You are presuming Russia is going to win this battle for Ukraine-- and I am 100% certain they will not win it-- my worry is the cost to human life-- and what for> the answer is to satisfy Putins ego.