Russia is at it again!

[Ronnie]

Breaking a pledge to Mikhail Gorbachev, we moved our military alliance into Eastern Europe, then onto Russia’s doorstep. Six Warsaw Pact nations and three former republics of the Soviet Union are now NATO members.

Utter nonsense.  How can "we" (whoever that is) pledge that independent countries will do or not do something that is entirely within their right to do.  We did not move our military alliance into the former republics.  They sought, (and the recent events demonstrate why), shelter in NATO.  These countries have had Russian tanks in their streets!

Buchanan has written too many books expousing his upside down foreign policy views.  He's fully invested.  He can't now see the world in any other way than though his own broken looking glass.

[Ronnie]

Ronnie

It seems like you decided to discredit the messenger rather than the message.  Did he mistate facts?

In a word.  Yes.  Repeatedly.

Here's one blatant example..
That Putin took the occasion of Saakashvili’s provocative and stupid stunt to administer an extra dose of punishment is undeniable. But is not Russian anger understandable? For years the West has rubbed Russia’s nose in her Cold War defeat and treated her like Weimar Germany
Weimar Germany was treated dispicably but understandably after all the destruction it brought on Europe.  Russia, after the end of the cold war has been treated incredibly well.  Invited to join the G7 ahead of Spain, Brazil and China, all of who have larger economies. President Bush appointed as his Secretary of State a person with no political experience but who speaks Russian and is an expert on Russia.  Bush himself and invited Putin to visit him and tried to establish a special relationship.  Believing perhaps the old advice that if want someone to act a certain way, treat them as thought they already do, Bush said he looked in the Putin's soul and believes him to be trustworthy. 
The truth was Bush knew very well who Putin was..if he could see into Putin's soul at all he would have seen a dark void or as someone said recently, "death."  The west has tolerated the murderous Putin and been quiet about his crimes because he is popular in Russia and in order to improve relations with Russia, they have to improve relations with Putin.   

There are many more...It's unclear by he implies that Russia has sovereignty over Crimea and Sevastopol.  Maybe he doesn't know it is actually in Ukraine and Russia is required by agreement to leave Sevastopol in 2017.

[OlgaH]

There are many more...It's unclear by he implies that Russia has sovereignty over Crimea and Sevastopol.  Maybe he doesn't know it is actually in Ukraine and Russia is required by agreement to leave Sevastopol in 2017.

May be you don't know but Russia rents Sevastopol  and every year pays $98 million for rent  The contract was signed in May 28 of 1997 for 20 years.

[oldernotwiser]

Ronnie

It's unclear by he implies that Russia has sovereignty over Crimea and Sevastopol.

It's unclear what you mean by this sentence.

[OlgaH]

PS

The debt of Ukraine to Russia for gas right now is $2 billion.

[steviej]

Utter nonsense.  How can "we" (whoever that is) pledge that independent countries will do or not do something that is entirely with their right to do.  We did not move our military alliance into the former republics.  They sought (and the recent events demonstrate why), shelter in NATO.  These countries have had Russian tanks in their streets!

Buchanan has written too many books expousing his upside down foreign policy views.  He's fully invested.  He can't now see the world in any other way than though his own broken looking glass.

You know Ronnie, based on other previous threads on this forum, I have seen you to be an experienced man of the world with good knowledge and an independent, albeit strong, view on things, often enlightening. But the sum of your views in this thread simply astonishes me. You sound like a combo neo-con boyscout robot. Your view is so narrow, simplistic, belligerant, naive, and totally lacking in any introspection as to be almost unbelievable. It's like getting a broadside from a coin-operated propaganda machine. And your response to Pat Buchanan's excellent assessment is simply, "I think he's stupid."

Further, your response to BC's valid comments by accusing him as "having problems" is offensive and unwarranted. Maybe you have some problems? I never thought anyone could look at "America", American foreign policy and American global antics with such myopia as you've demonstrated.

---------------------------------------------------------
And regarding your views on the "Post American World:"

Years ago, America under Richard Nixon made the decision to "engage" the Communist regime in China rather than allow a second cold war front.  To a large extent it has worked.  I feel it's now time to protect American jobs as I've never felt it was a good plan to redistribute our wealth to other countries, expecially when redistribution does not promote world prosperity or peace.

Nixon, in a classic cold war maneuver, applied the divide and conquer approach. Not to avoid a second cold front, but to isolate Russia and apply pressure. But what is the result of that policy today? The result is an ever accummulating trade deficit with China of  approx. $400 Billion greenback dollars per year to China. Those are real dollars, which are redeemable by purchasing US assets. It is simply additional debt, on top of the huge federal deficit we have already [for example, they can buy US savings bonds, which our children have to slave away and pay their hard earned taxes to repay]. China outsmarted the US on that one big time. The orientals know much better the Western capitalist mind, and how to take advantage of it, than the reverse. And what happened? Exactly what they hoped would happen: the fastest and most rapid trasfer of wealth from one nation to another in history. People talk about the astonishing growth of the Chinese economy, but they were the recipients of a vast liquidation sale of American manufacturing and technology infrastructure - the largest such firesale in history. The American economy did not grow because of European companies closing their factories and moving them here to use cheap labor. The US economy grew, much more slowly, by developing our own industries primarily with the capital created in our own country. We have turned our children into tax paying indentured servants to the communist Chinese on a vast scale.

Economically, who can suppose that America does not know how to measure her own ecomonic temperature and understand how to make changes to restore her to economic health?  To paraphrase Al Gore, if America has a fever, she will take steps to restore her health and I believe we are just now starting to feel a bit of an ache and understand something needs tending to.  The folly of the article BC posted is that it supposes nothing will change and current trends will continue unabated.  

The article is not in any way a folly. I agree with his assessment that unless extraordinary policy changes are made within a short timeframe - 4/5 years - it will be almost too late. And why is that? It is because the movement of Global capital at this point is pretty much beyond the control of any one nation anymore. In a "free trade" world, the American worker, eduacated or not, will have (as we have had for the past 10 years) a continually falling standard of living. We have bequeathed a lower standard of living to our children for the first time in US in more than 80 years. What happened? Did our farm land fail? Were we devastated by war and invastion? Did plague wipe out 30% of our population? No. We engaged in a reckless policy of "free trade" with the presumption that 95% of the world's consumers were outside our borders. But what really happened is that 95% of the workers are outside our borders. They did not, and do not, want our products, they and their investors want our jobs. Do the math. There are 20 workers willing to work for much less for every middle class American worker now.

You made a comment earlier about the strength of America's exports ?? ?? Astonishing. You can only measure the strength of exports by measuring the balance of trade. Our accumulated trade DEFICIT for the past 10 years is trillions of dollars. A catastrophe and failure of trade policy on a massive scale.

And while all this is going on, our President, Vice President, Republican candidate for President, and others such as yourself are flexing your ever-weakening muscle about Georgia's "struggling" democracy. Unbelievable.

[Ronnie]

May be you don't know but Russia rents Sevastopol  and every year pays $98 million for rent  The contract was signed in May 28 of 1997 for 20 years.

That's right Olga, 1997 plus 20 years is 2017, is it not?

[OlgaH]

That's right Olga, 1997 plus 20 years is 2017, is it not?

Ronnie

It's unclear what you mean by this sentence.

It's unclear by he implies that Russia has sovereignty over Crimea and Sevastopol.

[Ronnie]

You know Ronnie, based on other previous threads on this forum, I have seen you to be an experienced man of the world with good knowledge and an independent, albeit strong, view on things, often enlightening. But the sum of your views in this thread simply astonishes me. You sound like a combo neo-con boyscout robot. Your view is so narrow, simplistic, belligerant, naive, and totally lacking in any introspection as to be almost unbelievable. It's like getting a broadside from a coin-operated propaganda machine. And your response to Pat Buchanan's excellent assessment is simply, "I think he's stupid."

Stevie, you believe and accept every jot and tittle of the writings of Patrick Buchanan.  I don't know if Buchanan has every lived overseas, don't know if you have either.  I don't know if Buchanan shaped your views through reading his books or he just happens to agree with you on everything.  You quote him way too much for it to have been happenstance.

I told you before I agree with his (Buchanan's views on many or most things.  I could say that about Ron Paul too, but the foreign policy views of both these men, (yours too) would be a disaster for the world if ever actually employed. 

BC has issues with the U.S.  That's clear and I understand how it can happen.  My own father served two tours in the Pacific then got a general discharge (as opposed to honorable) because of his deteriorated attitude to the military.  He was angry because he felt he was tricked into signing up for a second tour.  He re-upped in July of 1945, was given the promised 30-day leave to go home but then had to return for his second tour while those who didn't re-up were discharged.  Bad luck, bad timing, but no deception..few could have known the war with Japan would end so abruptly.

Timothy McVey was obviously upset with the USA despite being a veteran.  Who knows what sets people off.  BC's story doesn't interest me but when one has a vendetta against something or somebody, it usually poisons them.  These are the things you learn over a lifetime of interacting with people.

[Ronnie]

Ronnie

It's unclear what you mean by this sentence.

Yes, I had a typo...sorry,  "By" should have read "but."

To restate it, Buchanan seems to imply that he thinks Crimea is or Sevastopol at least is sovereign Russian soil.  Olga correctly pointed out that Russia pays an annual lease fee of $98 million until 2017.  We don't know the rest of the terms of that lease other than it was part of a larger agreement wherein Russian agreed to current Ukrainian borders and with the inclusion of Crimea into the Ukrainian Republic.  Russia has lately been suggesting that if Ukraine violates the terms of the lease, they will no longer recognize the borders of Ukraine.  I don't know what Buchanan meant to say but it sounds like he doesn't understand the question of sovereignty in Crimea.

[Ronnie]

Thank you. Here is also video http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/29104/video

I have been searching in vain for an RT video where an opposing view has been allowed to be presented.  Maybe you can help me find one.
And, let's be clear about one thing.  This little girl and her aunt are not eyewitnesses.  All they know is that the city was fired upon.  They know nothing about who started it.  They know nothing about causualties.  She is repeating what she and everyone else in Russia has been told, making her testimony no less/more valid than anyone else's. 

And we will soon, if we haven't already, learn from actual people on the ground who are in position to know (doctors, etc) that the second part of that story concerning civilian deaths was so much an an exaggeration as to be a pure lie.  We're all thankful for that.  So as how the shooting started and by who and what lead up to it, we'll know the truth about that in time.

We know Russia has said they would teach Georgia a lesson for snubbing it's influence seeking NATO protection. And, we know that Russia wanted a regime change in Tbilisi ("Saakashvili must go" -Sergei Lavrov).  Few observers think the conflict has anything at all to do with the two provinces.  Those appear to have been convenient open doors that Russia walked right through.

[OlgaH]

I see Patrick Buchanan writes with humor   

Mikheil Saakashvili’s decision to use the opening of the Olympic Games to cover Georgia’s invasion of its breakaway province of South Ossetia must rank in stupidity with Gamal Abdel-Nasser’s decision to close the Straits of Tiran to Israeli ships.

Nasser’s blunder cost him the Sinai in the Six-Day War. Saakashvili’s blunder probably means permanent loss of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

After shelling and attacking what he claims is his own country, killing scores of his own Ossetian citizens and sending tens of thousands fleeing into Russia, Saakashvili’s army was whipped back into Georgia in 48 hours.

Vladimir Putin took the opportunity to kick the Georgian army out of Abkhazia, as well, to bomb Tbilisi and to seize Gori, birthplace of Stalin.

Reveling in his status as an intimate of George Bush, Dick Cheney and John McCain, and America’s lone democratic ally in the Caucasus, Saakashvili thought he could get away with a lightning coup and present the world with a fait accompli.

Mikheil did not reckon on the rage or resolve of the Bear.

American charges of Russian aggression ring hollow. Georgia started this fight — Russia finished it. People who start wars don’t get to decide how and when they end.

Russia’s response was “disproportionate” and “brutal,” wailed Bush.

True. But did we not authorize Israel to bomb Lebanon for 35 days in response to a border skirmish where several Israel soldiers were killed and two captured? Was that not many times more “disproportionate”?

Russia has invaded a sovereign country, railed Bush. But did not the United States bomb Serbia for 78 days and invade to force it to surrender a province, Kosovo, to which Serbia had a far greater historic claim than Georgia had to Abkhazia or South Ossetia, both of which prefer Moscow to Tbilisi?

Is not Western hypocrisy astonishing?

When the Soviet Union broke into 15 nations, we celebrated. When Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, Bosnia, Montenegro and Kosovo broke from Serbia, we rejoiced. Why, then, the indignation when two provinces, whose peoples are ethnically separate from Georgians and who fought for their independence, should succeed in breaking away?

Are secessions and the dissolution of nations laudable only when they advance the agenda of the neocons, many of who viscerally detest Russia?

That Putin took the occasion of Saakashvili’s provocative and stupid stunt to administer an extra dose of punishment is undeniable. But is not Russian anger understandable? For years the West has rubbed Russia’s nose in her Cold War defeat and treated her like Weimar Germany.

When Moscow pulled the Red Army out of Europe, closed its bases in Cuba, dissolved the evil empire, let the Soviet Union break up into 15 states, and sought friendship and alliance with the United States, what did we do?

American carpetbaggers colluded with Muscovite Scalawags to loot the Russian nation. Breaking a pledge to Mikhail Gorbachev, we moved our military alliance into Eastern Europe, then onto Russia’s doorstep. Six Warsaw Pact nations and three former republics of the Soviet Union are now NATO members.

Bush, Cheney and McCain have pushed to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. This would require the United States to go to war with Russia over Stalin’s birthplace and who has sovereignty over the Crimean Peninsula and Sebastopol, traditional home of Russia’s Black Sea fleet.

When did these become U.S. vital interests, justifying war with Russia?

The United States unilaterally abrogated the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty because our technology was superior, then planned to site anti-missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic to defend against Iranian missiles, though Iran has no ICBMs and no atomic bombs. A Russian counter-offer to have us together put an anti-missile system in Azerbaijan was rejected out of hand.

We built a Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline from Azerbaijan through Georgia to Turkey to cut Russia out. Then we helped dump over regimes friendly to Moscow with democratic “revolutions” in Ukraine and Georgia, and tried to repeat it in Belarus.

Americans have many fine qualities. A capacity to see ourselves as others see us is not high among them.

Imagine a world that never knew Ronald Reagan, where Europe had opted out of the Cold War after Moscow installed those SS-20 missiles east of the Elbe. And Europe had abandoned NATO, told us to go home and become subservient to Moscow.

How would we have reacted if Moscow had brought Western Europe into the Warsaw Pact, established bases in Mexico and Panama, put missile defense radars and rockets in Cuba, and joined with China to build pipelines to transfer Mexican and Venezuelan oil to Pacific ports for shipment to Asia? And cut us out? If there were Russian and Chinese advisers training Latin American armies, the way we are in the former Soviet republics, how would we react? Would we look with bemusement on such Russian behavior?

For a decade, some of us have warned about the folly of getting into Russia’s space and getting into Russia’s face. The chickens of democratic imperialism have now come home to roost — in Tbilisi.
http://buchanan.org/blog/2008/08/pjb-blowback-from-bear-baiting/

[OlgaH]

  Russia has lately been suggesting that if Ukraine violates the terms of the lease, they will no longer recognize the borders of Ukraine. 

when, where and who said it? Putin?  Gen. Nagovitsin? Medvedev?

[msmoby_ru]

As I hadn't seen my wife for 3 months, I haven't contributed, recently, so I'm joining in a little "late".

For me, it was very sad that that Saakashvili chose to attempt to "put the manner to bed " ( bringing the "breakaway" areas under govt control ) as the world was distracted by the Olympic Games.

It "seemed" to have united Georgians behind him, even  when the Russians pushed the Georgians back out of the breakaway republics - but I just can't see what a supposed Diplomat hoped to achieve .

He came to power promising to bring the breakaway regions back under control and this now seems further away than ever !  

Russia has shown that it can't be allowed to be a "peace-keeper" in this sphere.... I have been warning for a LONG time that they would use the pretext of "Russian Citizens" being attacked as an "excuse" .... The response was swift disproportionate - backed up by a huge  troop build-up BEFORE  the huge Georgian escalation. Since when do "peace-keepers hand out their countries passports to citizens of another nation?!

There have been many warning signs of Russia "stirring" things up - shooting down drones arming the breakaway "republics" and "attempting" to compare Kosovo with Georgia ( whilst conveniently ignoring Chechnya)

NATO didn't move into Serbia from Kosovo to destroy the Serbian army on the ground. This is exactly what Russia has done....  

Russia's actions has managed to "persuade " Germany - who had been cool on NATO membership for Georgia, in the near future - to do an about turn, and actively promote it.

Russia has been VERY bellicose - warning Ukraine and Georgia's west leaning leaders of the "dangers" - regarding NATO membership, yet EXACTLY demonstrated  the "benefits" of membership... not smart..

Russia has been deliberately targetting Georgia for "treatment" for some years now - be it laws to exclude imports of Water or Wine, or encouraging the breakaway republics..

Those who think Georgia's military action broke a "peaceful" situation should know that there has been fighting in pockets for some time.

The whole thing is a mess - that can affect the world.  

IMHO Georgia and Russia should accept that the two regions seeking independence should have it ( they are part of Georgia, now, but the folk seeking independence don't WANT to be Georgian and aren't ethically Georgian ) and Georgia should vote on NATO membership and if accepted - they should be admitted... may be THAT is Saakashvili's "end game"?

I also don't believe that the US didn't know of Saakashvili's intentions...which is VERY worrying..

Even MORE worrying, is Ukraine....   Russia has flexed it's muscles, but this could backfire and result in the loss of the Winter Olympics in Sochi and exclusion from trade organisations.

Twenty years ago, I had hoped Russia could be a member of the EU and NATO would be disbanded - it seems that polarisation is back on the agenda.

Russia can be strong without bullying it's neighbours and current US admin has merely encouraged Russian paranoia.

In Cyprus , we have Russian, Ukrainian and Georgian acquaintances and it is impossible to invite them around at the same time - as they only wish to argue about what's happening in Georgia and how Russia is reacting   They all make valid points and wish to point out the wrongs of t'other side, without seeing THEIR side isn't as pure as a the driven snow ...

I'm sorry, Olga, but "Russia Today" has become a propaganda channel - and it seems to be representative of what I see on Russian TV... it conveniently ignores the facts that Russia has bean HOPING Saakashvili would respond to increasing military action against Georgia and that Russia was involved in provocation leading up to the latest flare-up.  "Peace-keepers"  simply don't behave in the way Russians did.


Ronnie - I strongly believe the current US administration is ( as usual) managing to provoke local tensions - rather than calm things down.

I wish the Olympic Games  had been making the headlines ... it is a tragedy that anyone has had to suffer in this region, when common sense and compromise could have prevailed.

[OlgaH]

  We don't know the rest of the terms of that lease other than it was part of a larger agreement wherein

Why we don't know 

The agreement between Russian Federation and Ukraine on the stationing of Russia's Black Sea Fleet in the Crimea dated May 28 1997
http://infopravo.by.ru/fed1997/ch05/akt18856.shtm

part of a larger agreement? Do you mean "The Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation dated May 31, 1997" 
http://lawrussia.ru/texts/legal_836/doc836a409x894.htm

[steviej]

Twenty years ago, I had hoped Russia could be a member of the EU and NATO would be disbanded - it seems that polarisation is back on the agenda.

Russia can be strong without bullying it's neighbours and current US admin has merely encouraged Russian paranoia.

Welcome back Mark - I wondered where you'd been hiding! So finally you got out of jail and can see your wife, that's great !

If Georgia and Ukraine join NATO, please tell me what is the purpose of NATO? To have all of Europe except Russia in a military alliance against Russia? And Russia should not oppose this, by force, if necessary?

Although you said about 20 years ago, I would like to see NATO either disbanded now, or the only sane purpose I can think of for it would be to have Russia join NATO and have a strategic military alliance to oppose China. That might make sense. Even with that, China still outnumbers all of Europe something like 1.6B to approx. 700M ??

In either case, the US should leave NATO. NATO does nothing for us. It simply pulls us into everyone else's wars. Its one-way. Its unilateral. Serioiusly, what does the precarious obligations of NATO do for US citizens? Is NATO going to rescue us if Mexico attacks us? Or maybe Canada? Europe is smart and US is dumb. Europeans are happy to have American taxpayers sweat, work hard and pay for all of Europe's defense needs.

[Oh don't forget, for all that money and military commitment, Europeans will say to us that we are a "Superpower" and a necessary "Global Leader" and we are the "Leader of the Free World!" and they are laughing all the way to the bank every time they say it. And for every Billion we suck from our tax payers to spend on them, they will say it 10 times and we get to feel like we are real important and have very large organs, or something like that ....  ]

[OlgaH]

 
IMHO Georgia and Russia should accept that the two regions seeking independence should have it ... 

msmoby_ru,

I already have written that in 2004 South Ossetia officially has wanted to enter into Russian Federation. The president of South Ossetia has insisted to keep the Russian Army on the territory of South Ossetia. In 2006 Russia  recognized South Ossetia as independent state economically  and Russia is ready to recognize it as absolutely an independent Republic there for the Russian Army protects South Ossetia from Georgian invasion. 

"Peace-keepers"  simply don't behave in the way Russians did.

Georgia officially declared war against South Ossetia and started to fire on the capital of South Ossetia. As I also have written the war is not an armed conflict. 

[Lit_1nce]

and we get to feel like we are real important and have very large organs, or something like that ....  ]

Well ....

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Where_is_the_world%27s_largest_pipe_organ_located

[Ronnie]

Ronnie - I strongly believe the current US administration is ( as usual) managing to provoke local tensions - rather than calm things down.

I understand your comments and agree that the strong statements against Russia appear to be inflaming the situation.  But guess what?  The opposite may actually be true.  Here's why.

This invasion took place because Putin and his advisors believed they could overthrow Saakashvili.  When he won last time with only 52% of the vote, Putin thought that was his opening.  While Saakashvili is very young and inexperienced, he has proven himself to be incredibly brave.  I can't imagine he gets much sleep and one of the propaganda videos making Russian circles shows him chewing on the short end of his tie.  Obviously, he's distressed and the Russians are delighting in it.

But back to your point.  Just as Russians see the ruthlessness of a man like Putin as being a source of strength, Putin sees the molly coddling of him by the west as a sign of weaknesses.  I think the American administration, the French, Brits and Germans have decided it's time to change their approach to Putin.  Time for some 'tough love" if you will. 

Some may say, "What do we care about a little country like Georgia."
Well, apart from the pipeline issues, there are much bigger issues.  The other nations who have been in Putin's crosshairs are watching with great interest to see how the west backs a new ally. 

These former victims of Russian dominance know all to well that the Putin regime is bent on reassembling the old Soviet Union.  Putin has stated that the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century was the dissolution of the USSR.  He likely wants to go down in history as the man who brought it back. 

Left to his own devices, and with continued kidglove treatment by the west, Putin could indeed decide to roll a thousand tanks simultaneously into each of Tbilisi, Kyiv, Chisinau, Prague, Bratislava, Vilnius, Riga, Budapest, Tallin Bucharest and Sofia.  Bear in mind that on Victory day this year, for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia paraded tanks in Red Square. 

Putin's got the bear on the move and as with any bear, you can only convince it back down by holding your ground, standing tall and yelling loudly at the damned thing.  Putin's animalistic instincts will determine his behavior.  The west's reaction to his behavior will determine the future of Europe, and beyond.

[msmoby_ru]

msmoby_ru,

I already have written that in 2004 South Ossetia officially has wanted to enter into Russian Federation. The president of South Ossetia has insisted to keep the Russian Army on the territory of South Ossetia. In 2006 Russia  recognized South Ossetia as independent state economically  and Russia is ready to recognize it as absolutely an independent Republic there for the Russian Army protects South Ossetia from Georgian invasion. 

Georgia officially declared war against South Ossetia and started to fire on the capital of South Ossetia. As I also have written the war is not an armed conflict. 

Olga, correct me if I'm wrong, but *WHO* currently recognises South Ossetia as a sovereign nation with a "President"...  ?

The Georgians didn't draw the lines on the map that made modern day Georgia - I think you'll Russians and Soviets did ..YES?

Georgia can't declare "war" on part of itself. or invade what is part of it's sovereign terretory.. The Russian "peace-keepers" were actively arming and supporting the S.Ossetians and Abkhazians ...

I'm sorry, Olga,m any armed conflict is a war for me.  "peace-kepers" do not take sides or give out citizenship.

[Ronnie]

Why we don't know 

The agreement between Russian Federation and Ukraine on the stationing of Russia's Black Sea Fleet in the Crimea dated May 28 1997
http://infopravo.by.ru/fed1997/ch05/akt18856.shtm

part of a larger agreement? Do you mean "The Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation dated May 31, 1997" 
http://lawrussia.ru/texts/legal_836/doc836a409x894.htm

Wow, Thanks Olga.  I kinda figured it must be posted somewhere on the internet.  Is it in English anywhere?  If not, I could have my wife read it out loud for me.  My Russian is conversational,  It hurts my widdle head to read more than a sentence or two. 

[steviej]

Left to his own devices, and with continued kidglove treatment by the west, Putin could indeed decide to roll a thousand tanks simultaneously into each of Tbilisi, Kyiv, Chisinau, Prague, Bratislava, Vilnius, Riga, Budapest, Tallin Bucharest and Sofia.  Bear in mind that on Victory day this year, for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia paraded tanks in Red Square. 

Putin's got the bear on the move and as with any bear, you can only convince it back down by holding your ground, standing tall and yelling loudly at the damned thing.  Putin's animalistic instincts will determine his behavior.  The west's reaction to his behavior will determine the future of Europe, and beyond.

Man, does history repeat itself or what? This is indeed a serious question. Let's imagine, just for fun, that Russia plans to attempt to reannex all the predominantly ethnic Russian territorities it lost at the dissolution of the Soviet Union, by force if necessary. Let's assume they use all the standard tricks: the ethnic Russians hold a plebicite, and declare at about the 90+ % level that they want to rejoin Russia (which they probably would), then Russia goes in to "rescue" them. Would you, as President of the US, Ronnie, start WWIII over this? Would you put the US in the center of a sure-fire global blood bath on a scale that might even make WWII seem tame? You know you would immediately have to reinstate the draft and send 10s and 100s of thousands of US young men and women to their deaths ?? Does the falacy of WWI and WWII reasoning and policy not ring any bells for you? The choice between letting Russia re-take some of their chosen territories or start WWIII is clear: Russia can take what she wants. Anyone caught in between Russia and the rest of Eastern Europe can make a choice: fight, join Russia, or join Germany, or something like that. At any rate, Europe is certainly capable of destroying themselves again without any help or the flesh and blood of America's young to do it.

[msmoby_ru]

I understand your comments and agree that the strong statements against Russia appear to be inflaming the situation.  But guess what?  The opposite may actually be true.  Here's why.

This invasion took place because Putin and his advisors believed they could overthrow Saakashvili.  When he won last time with only 52% of the vote, Putin thought that was his opening.  While Saakashvili is very young and inexperienced, he has proven himself to be incredibly brave.  I can't imagine he gets much sleep and one of the propaganda videos making Russian circles shows him chewing on the short end of his tie.  Obviously, he's distressed and the Russians are delighting in it.

But back to your point.  Just as Russians see the ruthlessness of a man like Putin as being a source of strength, Putin sees the molly coddling of him by the west as a sign of weaknesses.  I think the American administration, the French, Brits and Germans have decided it's time to change their approach to Putin.  Time for some 'tough love" if you will. 

Some may say, "What do we care about a little country like Georgia."
Well, apart from the pipeline issues, there are much bigger issues.  The other nations who have been in Putin's crosshairs are watching with great interest to see how the west backs a new ally. 

These former victims of Russian dominance know all to well that the Putin regime is bent on reassembling the old Soviet Union.  Putin has stated that the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century was the dissolution of the USSR.  He likely wants to go down in history as the man who brought it back. 

Left to his own devices, and with continued kidglove treatment by the west, Putin could indeed decide to roll a thousand tanks simultaneously into each of Tbilisi, Kyiv, Chisinau, Prague, Bratislava, Vilnius, Riga, Budapest, Tallin Bucharest and Sofia.  Bear in mind that on Victory day this year, for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia paraded tanks in Red Square. 

Putin's got the bear on the move and as with any bear, you can only convince it back down by holding your ground, standing tall and yelling loudly at the damned thing.  Putin's animalistic instincts will determine his behavior.  The west's reaction to his behavior will determine the future of Europe, and beyond.

Hi Ronnie, if Saakashvili's response to a recent upsurge in Russian inspired "games" in the disputed sovereign terruitory of Georgia came as a result of US "support" - then the US admin has blood on it's hands as much as the combatants.  

The SENSIBLE approach was a negotiated settlement - as the West didn't REALLY want to be embroiled in a Caucas territory dispute.
NOW we have a Ukrainian govt talking up a "hard line", too...

This will end in tears and moe innocent people will suffer or die.

1/ Russia has to recognise that it agreed to national boundaries... yet it meddles and threatens former Soviet satellites

2/ Russia has to respect democratic votes of other nations - I will never forget Putins blatent meddling in Ukraine - when he stood alongside Yankovich and actively asked Ukrainians to vote for him :-o

3/ The USA doesn't ned to "interfere", either .. if nations wish to join the EU, or even NATO .. they have to prove stability first, and I was a little concerned by the "Soviet-style" clamp down on Media when there were anti-govt protests on the streets of Tblisi.


If you think "Russians" will understand your "tough love" concept, you must have ben walking around with your eyes closed when you were in the FSU.


The concept of Ukraine spliting in two appears to be a Russian agenda.

Russia can be "strong" without destablising other nations.. The USA keeps misreading Russia's sensitivities and instead of quelling them - inflames them..


Example - this missile shield - even if it is purely defensive - it is perceived as possible to re-point the missiles at Russia.

Russia offered their siting in Azeri territory.. was it SO difficult to consider this, before?  How did the USA fel when the soviets sited missiles in Cuba... ( which btw, many US folk forget, ended when the Soviets also got a US concession for the US to remove missiles from Turkey !)

Siting the infrastucture for these defense missiles in former Soviet satellites is BOUND to upset Russians .. it is time the USA "cared" a little as Poland was only too keen to cock a snoop at Russia - in return for some hard cash.

Previously, the UK might have allowed the siting of this infrastructure, but the US KNEW this would be political suicide for any govt.

If the US is so worried about missile from North Korea or Iran - it might have been better to work with a friendly Russia to ensure a united front ?!

The last eight years have sen the US and Russia move apart - and this is bad for us all

[Shadow]

You can think anyway you want BC.  The problem is you shoot from the hip, like a knee-jerk reaction set up by hostility not objectivity.  Look at your posts.  There is nothing objective in them..you are as one-sided as a person can get.  These posts of yours reek of antipathy for the U.S. 

I've lived in Europe 10% of my adult life.  I like it, especially Italy.  But when I was there last December and asked a Neapolitan news vendor in clear Italian, how to get to the museum (it was a half block away), she blew me off saying, "I'm too busy!"  I know Napoli is an embarassment to Italy, so I wan't surprised. But I know of no place in America (outside NYC) where this might happen.

I wrote peviously about a young immigrant family from Ukraine who arrived in Los Angeles and got stood up by their Russian contact.  They were taken in by a USCIS officer who make them her house guest for two weeks. 

Facts tend to infuriate the knee-jerk America haters like BC, Shadow and some others.   Like living in Italy or Holland better?  Great!  Got a beef with something about America that affects you?  Let's hear all about it, maybe it can be reconciled.  But if you only want to engage for the purpose of protecting your invested bias.  Stop wasting our time. 

Ronnie you are giving a typical American reply. If you are not with us, you are against us.
In my country it is very usual to look at the politics of our own country in a critical way and to accept criticism on its local and ofreign policy. This is something that I have not seen a lot in Americans.
Usually they follow the pattern that if you disagree with their version of democracy and freedom, you are hating their country.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I do not hate America. I might disagree with some actions the American government seems to make, and I do disagree with the notion that America is the best, most democratic and most free country in the world and there for has the right to push its ideas onto the rest of the world.

[Shadow]

Olga, correct me if I'm wrong, but *WHO* currently recognises South Ossetia as a sovereign nation with a "President"...  ?

The Georgians didn't draw the lines on the map that made modern day Georgia - I think you'll Russians and Soviets did ..YES?

Georgia can't declare "war" on part of itself. or invade what is part of it's sovereign terretory.. The Russian "peace-keepers" were actively arming and supporting the S.Ossetians and Abkhazians ...

I'm sorry, Olga,m any armed conflict is a war for me.  "peace-kepers" do not take sides or give out citizenship.

msmoby you might want to read back the topic, to avoid having to repeat all information.
Just to be brief, South Ossetia has been an autonomous region inside Georgia since the 1920's, and this continued after Georgia separated from the Soviet Union. Besides that why would Georgia bomb their own citizens ?

Something less discussed is that Georgia has until December 2008 to fix the problems with South Ossetia and Abkhazia in order to gain their membership of NATO. A quick flash action destroying the local autonomous governments would of course have played in to the hands of Georgia.