Ukraine-The Future

[krimster2]

according to this article:
http://off-guardian.org/2015/09/01/how-kolomoyskyi-siphoned-off-1-8-billion-of-imfs-rescue-money-for-ukraine/

we know at least $1.8 billion was stolen by Kolomoyskyi (owner of Privat Bank), unfortunately Ukrainian taxpayers are responsible for paying it back
this $1.8 billion fraud was uncovered by a group of Ukrainian journalists who have a web site written in Ukrainian called Znai nashih ("our money"), google them and you can find new corruption scandals every week on their web site

[JayH]

Does anyone have an accounting of how the aid and loans from IMF, EU, et al were  spent?

Without looking for  an answer my immediate thoughts were it would be paid into general revenue--and after looking it seems to confirm that. Based on meeting the IMF targets on key points-it seems to be the case-based on factual information.

This is a little dated but does deal with factual info-
IMF Executive Board Completes First Review of Ukraine’s EFF and Approves US$1.7 Billion Disbursement
Press Release No. 15/364
July 31, 2015
Ukraine’s four-year SDR 12.348 billion (about US$17.5 billion) EFF was approved on March 11, 2015 (see Press Release No. 14/189) to support the government’s economic program, which aims to put the economy on the path to recovery, restore external sustainability, strengthen public finances, maintain financial stability, and support economic growth by advancing structural and governance reforms, while protecting the most vulnerable.

http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pr/2015/pr15364.htm


More updates available here-
http://www.imf.org/external/country/ukr/index.htm?type=8

[AkMike]

Timothy Ash: Is Ukraine-Russian peace deal brewing behind the scenes?

Something significant might be happening in the Ukraine peace process.
First, we had the appointment of Boris Gryzlov, a real Kremlin heavyweight as Moscow’s representative to peace talks. One read is that the appointment of a serious Kremlin insider to such a role suggests that Russian President Vladimir Putin is now willing to seriously negotiate towards some kind of settlement, which might just be acceptable to Kyiv – rather than the previous policy which seemed to be to demand concessions which were never really deliverable in Kyiv, and which were just meant to destabilize domestic politics in Ukraine, or to undermine the security situation and macro stability and financing with it.
Second, President Petro Poroshenko last week spoke about securing control over Ukraine’s borders again this year – with some suggesting that he would not have made this claim unless he thought there was a reasonable chance of delivering on it.
Third, the U.S. assistant secretary of state, Victory Nuland, had a meeting late last week in the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, with Vladislav Surkov, another close adviser to Putin. The session was described as a “brainstorming” session over possible resolutions over the crisis in Ukraine, and generally feedback from both sides was that the discussions were “constructive.” U.S. officials also spoke about the prospect of sanctions on Ukraine over Donbas being relieved if they see Minsk implementation – albeit retaining those over Crimea.
Fourth, French and German envoys to the Ukrainian “Normandy” peace process are due in Kyiv this week for high-level discussions.
Fifth, Russia seems to be holding back from pursuing the nuclear, legal, card over the $3 billion in monies lent to the former Yanukovych regime, due in December, but now in effect in default.
Now both sides still seem to be maneuvering for position – e.g. with Russia’s imposition of a transit ban on Ukrainian exports to Kazakhstan, and Ukraine’s decision to hike gas transit fees on Russian gas transit to Europe – the latter bringing a tripling of the tariff, and hitting Russian when it is already smarting over the drop in oil prices. But we have consistently seen some escalation by the sides in the run up to key negotiations, and it might be the same this time around.


For more follow the link
http://www.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/op-ed/timothy-ash-is-ukraine-russian-peace-deal-brewing-behind-the-scenes-406166.html?utm_campaign=traqli&utm_source=traqli&utm_medium=traqli&source=traqli

[Muzh]

Ukraine, the future.


Another revolt to get the remaining rats off the ship starting with Poroshenko and Yatseniuk.

[Gator]

Does anyone have a better understanding of what is happening with regard to the sanctions against Russia?  Something is brewing.  Two days ago Secretary of State John Kerry said at the Davos World Economic Forum said, "... damaging sanctions against Russia could be removed within the next few months, provided Russia cooperates."

The articles I read talked only about cooperation in eastern Ukraine regarding the Minsk agreements.  It mentioned nothing about Crimea.  Financial Times gave more detail but still left open the issue of Crimea.

I thought sanctions also applied to the Crimea issue.  If sanctions were lifted without resolving Crimea, does this mean the West is conceding Crimea to Russia?  Maybe only some sanctions will be lifted?


My thought is that Crimea is still on the table and the West wants it settled quickly.  It can be settled quickly only if Ukraine accepts Russia's annexation and receives compensation for the loss.  Or Russia agrees to take the issue to the World Court.   

What is the fair price to compensate Ukraine for the loss of Crimea?  How about a guaranteed long-term supply of gas at greatly discounted prices if not free.  That could be worth many billions to Ukraine and cost Russia relatively little.     

[ML]

Does anyone have an accounting of how the aid and loans from IMF, EU, et al were  spent?

I can only attest that I didn't get any of the money.

[JayH]

Does anyone have a better understanding of what is happening with regard to the sanctions against Russia?  Something is brewing.  Two days ago Secretary of State John Kerry said at the Davos World Economic Forum said, "... damaging sanctions against Russia could be removed within the next few months, provided Russia cooperates."

The articles I read talked only about cooperation in eastern Ukraine regarding the Minsk agreements.  It mentioned nothing about Crimea.  Financial Times gave more detail but still left open the issue of Crimea.

I thought sanctions also applied to the Crimea issue.  If sanctions were lifted without resolving Crimea, does this mean the West is conceding Crimea to Russia?  Maybe only some sanctions will be lifted?


My thought is that Crimea is still on the table and the West wants it settled quickly.  It can be settled quickly only if Ukraine accepts Russia's annexation and receives compensation for the loss.  Or Russia agrees to take the issue to the World Court.   

What is the fair price to compensate Ukraine for the loss of Crimea?  How about a guaranteed long-term supply of gas at greatly discounted prices if not free.  That could be worth many billions to Ukraine and cost Russia relatively little.   

Gator- I attempted to start a specific thread on potential settlement terms but had thread title removed and neutered!!
UKRAINE  V RUSSIA --is it going to be a tko to UKRHere iare some of the posts( NB-- a lot of other non related posts got moved in here also)--

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=20479.0

The Minsk  terms are different to Crimean sanctions-- although obviously related.

The west is not conceding Crimea.

Ukraine has reasserted it's desire to recover control over the Crimea.In fact Poroshenko made the point loudly on learning of meetings taking place without Ukrainian presence. Putin/Kremlin/Russia is angling to get sanctions lifted/eased based on the Minsk agreements being enacted.

 Note- they still think they can control the terms in a way that leaves their options open.
Obviously enough-- the sanctions placed on Russia over the Crimean invasion should remain-- until Russia removes itself from Crimea.There is no point in partially removing anything--in fact--if it was my decision -I would be increasing the pressure on Russia.
 
 Russia giving up in the Donbass--where it has in fact already lost- to be allowed to keep the Crimea is not a deal Ukraine should even contemplate.Of course--the weak kneed western countries-will look at anything that makes their lives easier.It would be a huge mistake to attempt to appease Russia in any way now-and in the process sell Ukraine down the drain!!

There is no price acceptable for Ukraine to give up the Crimea. The price that should be discussed is how much compensation Russia should be paying for the dame to Ukraine caused by the invasions in the east and Crimea.

An interesting link that summarises more general situation and the progress that has been made.
The good and bad in Ukraine
http://www.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/op-ed/timothy-ash-the-good-and-bad-in-ukraine-403458.html

[BillyB]

The articles I read talked only about cooperation in eastern Ukraine regarding the Minsk agreements.  It mentioned nothing about Crimea.  Financial Times gave more detail but still left open the issue of Crimea.

I thought sanctions also applied to the Crimea issue.

The cooperation Kerry talks about is pertaining to the Minsk II agreement which doesn't ask Russia to return Crimea. If Russia abides by the Minsk II agreement, all sanctions will be lifted, included the sanctions that were applied during Russia's takeover of Crimea. The world has given up on helping Ukraine take back Crimea. Europe wanted the sanctions ended long ago since it's cuts them off from a major trading partner, Russia, and in turn hurts their economy. America needs Russia to be cooperative in Syria since that area is more strategically important to America than Ukraine is. Putin was brilliant when he got involved in Syria. It took attention away from Ukraine and pressured the West to ease up on Russia. The longer the Syrian war lasts, the more it's going to cost Europe when handling the refugees since none of the refugees think Russia is the best place to live.

What is the fair price to compensate Ukraine for the loss of Crimea?  How about a guaranteed long-term supply of gas at greatly discounted prices if not free.  That could be worth many billions to Ukraine and cost Russia relatively little.   

Billions in compensation is an insult to Ukraine. When Russia took over Crimea, they gained territory in the Black Sea 3 times bigger than the land they took. Oil and natural gas experts say there are hundreds of billions of dollars in natural resources in that water at a minimum. Some say there are trillions of dollars in there. Ukraine also lost any hope of energy independence and an opportunity to be an exporter of fossil fuels when Russia took Crimea.

[JayH]

Gator-- I am ignoring BillyB's once again useless comments-he needs to actually read some of the links  posted to get some of his misguided conclusions adjusted.

What is of interest? here is an article that deals with how some myths get perpetrated( and people like Billy believe and repeat) . In retrospect with the benefit of more information becoming available many things become clearer- and myths corrected. During Maidan and subsequently events moved at an incredible pace- and a lot of errors were made  at the time that now we have the benefit of more information.

A curious compendium of disinformation

I prefer the reality that 45 million Ukrainian people are deciding their own fate, they did so in a revolution that brought down a corrupt regime, now they are doing so democratically and peacefully, the process is often flawed and there are problems with some of the old guard holding out and carrying on as if nothing has changed, but, things are changing.

http://www.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/op-ed/paul-niland-a-curious-compendium-of-disinformation-406590.html

Another interesting current article that covers some of the ground. There is no simple answer to any one problem in Ukraine-- as it is n overall  collective series of change-reforms if you like- that will create a new sustainable Ukraine.I can keep rep[eating partial ideas in posts-- but the various writers addressing many issues represent excellent think pieces.
Once again-

Ukraine has made gains, but the fight isn’t over yet

http://business.financialpost.com/diane-francis/diane-francis-ukraine-has-made-gains-but-the-fight-isnt-over-yet

[BillyB]

I prefer the reality that 45 million Ukrainian people are deciding their own fate, they did so in a revolution that brought down a corrupt regime, now they are doing so democratically and peacefully,

If Ukrainians want Crimea back, they aren't going to get it done peacefully, they need to pick up a gun.  After watching Russia take Crimea and enter into Eastern Ukraine, I wasn't impressed by their desire to pick up guns to change the situation. If America has a Pearl Harbor or World Trade Center bombed, we'd have all out war with the offenders. Many Americans have a point when they say "Why should we shed blood and help Ukrainians and Syrians when the majority of those people aren't helping themselves?" The only answer I can give them is because the bad guys will win and eventually we will eventually have to answer to a stronger foe. 

[JayH]

Like I said BB-- start reading and get with program.You seem to have missed the part where US is not being asked to send frontline fighting  troops. have a nice argument with yourself about it !

[fathertime]

Gator-- I am ignoring BillyB's once again useless comments-he needs to actually read some of the links  posted to get some of his misguided conclusions adjusted.

Billy's comments are more in line with reality than yours....Russia is not giving back Crimea, and Ukraine will not be retaking it.


Fathertime!   

[BillyB]

You seem to have missed the part where US is not being asked to send frontline fighting  troops.

Hello? Anybody home?


US troops are in Ukraine. Poroshenko invited US troops into Ukraine. Obama didn't send those troops there uninvited. Those troops mission is to train Ukrainian troops simply because that's all Obama will allow them to do. Poroshenko would like more of course. During Poroshenko's visit to D.C., you don't think behind closed doors he asked Obama for American troops to help him regain his country? You're dreaming. You better believe he reminded Obama about the Budapest Memorandum and our responsibilities to protecting Ukraine's borders. Any leader of a country facing getting wiped off the map will ask for all possible help. It's common sense that you don't seem to get. Just because Poroshenko's not getting front line American troops doesn't mean he didn't ask. What are you going to tell us next? Assad didn't ask for Russian troops to fight in Syria when he went to Moscow?

[JayH]

If Ukrainians want Crimea back, they aren't going to get it done peacefully, they need to pick up a gun.  After watching Russia take Crimea and enter into Eastern Ukraine, I wasn't impressed by their desire to pick up guns to change the situation. If America has a Pearl Harbor or World Trade Center bombed, we'd have all out war with the offenders. Many Americans have a point when they say "Why should we shed blood and help Ukrainians and Syrians when the majority of those people aren't helping themselves?" The only answer I can give them is because the bad guys will win and eventually we will eventually have to answer to a stronger foe. 

Hello? Anybody home?


US troops are in Ukraine. Poroshenko invited US troops into Ukraine. Obama didn't send those troops there uninvited. Those troops mission is to train Ukrainian troops simply because that's all Obama will allow them to do. Poroshenko would like more of course. During Poroshenko's visit to D.C., you don't think behind closed doors he asked Obama for American troops to help him regain his country? You're dreaming. You better believe he reminded Obama about the Budapest Memorandum and our responsibilities to protecting Ukraine's borders. Any leader of a country facing getting wiped off the map will ask for all possible help. It's common sense that you don't seem to get. Just because Poroshenko's not getting front line American troops doesn't mean he didn't ask. What are you going to tell us next? Assad didn't ask for Russian troops to fight in Syria when he went to Moscow?

You really are a dunce,

You write "Many Americans have a point when they say "Why should we shed blood-- if that is not  you saying  Americans saying it is unacceptable to US--I replied

Like I said BB-- start reading and get with program.You seem to have missed the part where US is not being asked to send frontline fighting  troops. have a nice argument with yourself about it !

Now ........... connect......... the US is not being asked to send frontline troops  NOTE  that is in the here and now-- not 18 months ago.  You and your ideas are stuck in another point in time.
i NOTE-- AGAIN- you attempt to attribute something not being said by me-- and then proceed to have an argument with the erroneous proposition you raised--not me !
Really BB-- you of all people need to read some of the links posted-instead of whining about them.It is your sort of ignorance that the links are there for.!!

In case you missed it-- FRONTLINE FIGHTING TROOPS  is actually different to the advisors and training troops in Ukraine!

[BillyB]

the US is not being asked to send frontline troops  NOTE  that is in the here and now-- not 18 months ago.

Hello? Anybody home? If Ukraine made a request 18 months ago, and it wasn't retracted, the request is still good even today. It's silly for Poroshenko to repeat himself everyday for something he knows he's not going to get but he still wants it. If Obama has a change of heart or the next Prez honors the request made over a year ago, you really think Poroshenko is going to turn them down? You're living in fantasy land. Poreshenko will accept our frontline troops or any lethal aid we will give. All he's getting now is training and defensive weapons and he's not happy about it. Whoever is our next Prez, you better believe Poroshenko is going to make another request in hopes of getting more action than Obama was willing to give.

[Belvis]

The cooperation Kerry talks about is pertaining to the Minsk II agreement which doesn't ask Russia to return Crimea. If Russia abides by the Minsk II agreement, all sanctions will be lifted, included the sanctions that were applied during Russia's takeover of Crimea.

Not all sanctions will be lifted. The sanctions  that were applied during Russia's takeover of Crimea will be left. Crimean sanctions are purely cosmetic, only a bunch of officials and bankers are feeling the effect. I would prefer if the pressure on russian officials and bankers will  remain  so that they're forced to keep their personal assets at home.
    In Russia the topic of sanctions is not causing much interest, situation with commodities is drawing all the attention.
    As for Crimea Putin has voiced the russian stand in his interview in the movie about Crimean reconquista. Compelled return of Crimea to Ukraine is impossible without defeat of Russia in the nuclear war, at least in foreseeable future.

[BillyB]

Not all sanctions will be lifted. The sanctions  that were applied during Russia's takeover of Crimea will be left. Crimean sanctions are purely cosmetic, only a bunch of officials and bankers are feeling the effect. I would prefer if the pressure on russian officials and bankers will  remain  so that they're forced to keep their personal assets at home.
   

Where did Kerry say "some" of the sanctions will be removed after Minsk 2 agreement is met? The sanctions end when the Minsk 2 agreement is met. The return of Crimea is not included to lift the sanctions. If the sanctions applied during the takeover are Crimea are cosmetic as you say, America and Europe will easily remove those too. They aren't going to risk making it harder for Putin to comply and losing business with Russia over a few cosmetic sanctions getting in the way. If Putin will comply with Minsk 2, all sanctions will be lifted and Crimea is his with no debate. Putin is going to get all he can get from the West. If Iran can do it, so can Russia.

[Gator]

If sanctions were simply lifted, Russia gets off too easy.

There should be war reparations for aiding the rebels in the destruction of eastern Ukraine and killing civilians including 298 aboard MH17. 

Meanwhile, Ukraine better advance its reforms.  If not,  let Putin annex it too in 5 years.  Otherwise it will be a huge sinkhole for Western aid.

Crimea.  This to me is a greater injustice than eastern Ukraine.  This issue should be tabled but not forgotten, to be reexamined by the world community if Ukraine can develop its democracy and economy. 

[BillyB]

If sanctions were simply lifted, Russia gets off too easy.

I agree but the West stopped twisting Russia's arm with sanctions long ago. Nothing was progressing with the current sanctions so the West seemed eager to end this. It wasn't Putin making a public announcement to the world he's ready to cooperate. It was Kerry, speaking for the West, that the sanctions could end quickly. The West wants this more than Putin. It would be wise for Putin to wait longer to see what more he can get out of this. If I were him, I'd ask for a few trillion dollars from the West to repair the damage the sanctions did to Russia's economy. If Iran can get some cash for cooperating, so can Russia. Putin can also use Syria for leverage when negotiating over Ukraine. Putin is in the driver's seat for controlling what happens in Syria and who gets to rule it. If America wants to have a say, America is going to have to pay.

[Belvis]

There should be war reparations for aiding the rebels in the destruction of eastern Ukraine

Needless to say, the war reparations are taken from war losers, so there should be the victory as the necessary condition. Russia had paid some reparations to Germany in 1918, to extract herself from WWI and  win the civil war. Russia had suffered defeats over her long violent history of many wars, but paid the reparations only once, to Germany in 1918. It means the victory over Russia must be very convincing to force her on reparations.
   Anyway, Russia is  spending monthly tens millions $  to support the people at Donbass and repair infrastructure. May be we can accept it as the reparations? 

Crimea.  This to me is a greater injustice than eastern Ukraine.  This issue should be tabled but not forgotten, to be reexamined by the world community if Ukraine can develop its democracy and economy.

    By other words, use Crimea  to dangle a carrot in front of Ukraine to push her for implementing reforms. Pragmatic approach for  world community  

[mendeleyev]

Nothing was progressing with the current sanctions so the West seemed eager to end this.

I'd have to disagree with this. The reason the Russians are so anxious, even desperate, to end sanctions is precisely because they are working. Putin is hoping that the West will be dumb enough (and Europe qualifies in the dumb category), to life sanctions without facing consequences for his past actions.

[BillyB]

Obama had said sanctions doesn't work when he lifted sanctions on Cuba. Obama freed up hundreds of billions of dollars and gave concessions just to get Iran too cooperate. Obama gives terrorists sweet deals by trading 5 terrorist generals for an anti American soldier who deserted. Obama has put out notice bad behavior and lack of cooperation pays. Putin would be stupid not to hold out longer for more benefits, especially since his popularity is high among his people and in no danger of losing his position.

[Anotherkiwi]

Anyway, Russia is  spending monthly tens millions $  to support the people at Donbass and repair infrastructure. May be we can accept it as the reparations? 

Are you sure about this, Belvis?  Do you have any information to back it up?

[JayH]

Needless to say, the war reparations are taken from war losers, so there should be the victory as the necessary condition. Russia had paid some reparations to Germany in 1918, to extract herself from WWI and  win the civil war. Russia had suffered defeats over her long violent history of many wars, but paid the reparations only once, to Germany in 1918. It means the victory over Russia must be very convincing to force her on reparations.
   Anyway, Russia is  spending monthly tens millions $  to support the people at Donbass and repair infrastructure. May be we can accept it as the reparations? 
    By other words, use Crimea  to dangle a carrot in front of Ukraine to push her for implementing reforms. Pragmatic approach for  world community

Are you sure about this, Belvis?  Do you have any information to back it up?

It is correct that Russia is spending  tens of millions of $ in the Donbass---  to flatten it and destroy it! The precedent-Chechnya.

[Belvis]

Are you sure about this, Belvis?  Do you have any information to back it up?

?? I thought it's trivial information.
Though I read first-hand info from locals at Donbass, I'll provide you info from western sources.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-15/the-central-bank-with-no-currency-no-interest-rates-but-atms
For Donetsk People's Republic alone:

Two people in the rebel administration said Russia transfers 2.5 billion rubles ($37 million) for pensions every month.

http://m.bild.de/politik/ausland/ukraine-konflikt/donbas-finanzierung-44031556.bildMobile.html
According to German's "Bild" Russia spends a milliard euros for rebel regions per year, 79 millions euros monthly on pensions and salaries for people on regional budget.