Russia & Crimea

[Patrick Bateman]

So, I often read the debates on this forum without really getting involved now and form my own opinion based on the views from all sides - and some of you do like a rant!

 

So a simple question; should Britain "intervene" in the Russia & Crimea situation?

 

The reason for asking is that a good friend of mine who descends from that part of the world feels Britain should "do something", I disagree personally as I honestly don't know enough about it and also, I don't think we're "powerful" enough to do anything.

[hypochondriac]

Why should we do something over anyone else? There is nothing to do, Russia is making Crimea part of their country and we should just accept it and come to some sort of agreement to stop the nonsense.

[Minty]

Presumably the kind of intervention implied is military?

 

If we were to 'do something' I think it should only be as a near last resort, and only as part of a wider agreed NATO programme. We certainly shouldn't be doing anything yet and certainly not on our own, and I don't think we ever would anyway. All diplomatic channels should be exhausted before any military action is sanctioned IMO.

[Minty]

Why should we do something over anyone else? There is nothing to do, Russia is making Crimea part of their country and we should just accept it and come to some sort of agreement to stop the nonsense.

 

Do you not think that international law should be upheld? Russia is acting illegally and we should just 'accept it'?

[buctootim]

So, I often read the debates on this forum without really getting involved now and form my own opinion based on the views from all sides - and some of you do like a rant!

 

So a simple question; should Britain "intervene" in the Russia & Crimea situation?

 

The reason for asking is that a good friend of mine who descends from that part of the world feels Britain should "do something", I disagree personally as I honestly don't know enough about it and also, I don't think we're "powerful" enough to do anything.

 

 

There are two competing issues imo. First the majority of people in Crimea probably do want to secede to Russia and they should be given a chance to vote on it in fair elections after a proper campaign. Second Putin wants to build a 'Greater Russia', extending the countries borders to anywhere significant numbers of ethnic Russians live - Georgia, Chechnya, Baltic states - and has been fomenting unrest in Ukraine with a view to taking control not just of Crimea but the whole east of the country. If they aren't stopped in Ukraine it really might become like Hitler and the Sudetenland - a much bigger problem later.

 

What we do about it is not so easy to agree. Russia will probably try to blackmail Germany over gas supplies and exports to prevent meaningful sanctions. Some kind of rapid membership of NATO for Ukraine, and all the mutual defence that implies might be the way forward.

Edited 18 March, 2014 by buctootim

[Patrick Bateman]

Presumably the kind of intervention implied is military?

 

If we were to 'do something' I think it should only be as a near last resort, and only as part of a wider agreed NATO programme. We certainly shouldn't be doing anything yet and certainly not on our own, and I don't think we ever would anyway. All diplomatic channels should be exhausted before any military action is sanctioned IMO.

 

I think she was implying there would be an inevitable persecution and/or cleansing of patriots and various smaller ethnic minorities that remain.

 

Military is out of the question, but sanctions is what she implied?

[Minty]

I think she was implying there would be an inevitable persecution and/or cleansing of patriots and various smaller ethnic minorities that remain.

I've read about that, certainly the fears seem to be that the Tatars could well be 'cleansed', so I understand the fears, but as buctootim says, I think the first issue still remains dealing with the illegal process that has taken place thus far... the whole thing is moving so fast though. I'm not honestly sure what other sanctions are available, but I am all for the EU and US taking things as far as they feel they can, because Russia can't be allowed to flout international law in this way.

 

I agree that the majority of people in Crimea do clearly want to be part of Russia, but that has to be done via a fair and legal referendum, with Kiev's authority.

[View From The Top]

We can't, nor will we, do anything. Too much Russian money swilling around The City.

[buctootim]

Why should we do something over anyone else? There is nothing to do, Russia is making Crimea part of their country and we should just accept it and come to some sort of agreement to stop the nonsense.

 

Do you not think that international law should be upheld? Russia is acting illegally and we should just 'accept it'?

 

The other aspect is that Britain and the US guaranteed to Ukraine only 20 years ago we would protect their territorial integrity in exchange for them agreeing to give up their nuclear weapons. If we walked away from that commitment it would not only destroy our credibility but would make further disarmanent almost impossible.

[pap]

None of this has happened in a vacuum.

 

The EU has been on a slow crawl across Eastern Europe for the last 20 years, to the point where if Ukraine had have been easily subsumed into the European Union, the map of Russia's Western frontiers would roughly resemble those laid down after the 1917 treaty of Brest-Litovsk. The Bolsheviks ceded huge amounts of territory to "end the war quickly". Most of that same territory has now been conquered via diplomacy, without a shot fired.

 

The Ukrainian vote to oust Yanukovych was unconstitutional; a 75% majority was needed to remove him from office. They got just over 73%. Yet, despite an MP vote and a public vote in the Crimea, William Hague has the gall to pretend that the Ukrainian vote is somehow more legitimate.

 

As to the question, I think we'd be insane to go toe-to-toe with Russia. However, the insanity of any particular plan no longer seems to be an obstacle to its implementation.

Edited 18 March, 2014 by pap

[badgerx16]

 

I agree that the majority of people in Crimea do clearly want to be part of Russia, but that has to be done via a fair and legal referendum, with Kiev's authority.

How 'fair and legal' is any vote in that part of the world ? It's not as if the current regime in Kiev were put in place by such means.

[pap]

The other aspect is that Britain and the US guaranteed to Ukraine only 20 years ago we would protect their territorial integrity in exchange for them agreeing to give up their nuclear weapons. If we walked away from that commitment it would not only destroy our credibility but would make further disarmanent almost impossible.

 

We did the same with Poland, except we didn't have the US on-board as part of some tri-partite arrangement.

 

It cost us first power status, plunged us into decades of debt, cost France her freedom and the world tens of millions of lives. Poland was destroyed anyway, Warsaw systematically.

 

If we cannot protect the Ukraine (and we can't), what is the point of pretending we can?

[alpine_saint]

None of this has happened in a vacuum.

 

The EU has been on a slow crawl across Eastern Europe for the last 20 years, to the point where if Ukraine had have been easily subsumed into the European Union, the map of Russia's Western frontiers would roughly resemble those laid down after the 1917 treaty of Brest-Litovsk. The Bolsheviks ceded huge amounts of territory to "end the war quickly" scheme. Most of that same territory has now been conquered via diplomacy, without a shot fired.

 

The Ukrainian vote to oust Yanukovych was unconstitutional; a 75% majority was needed to remove him from office. They got just over 73%. Yet, despite an MP vote and a public vote in the Crimea, William Hague has the gall to pretend that the Ukrainian vote is somehow more legitimate.

 

 

Christ, you Seumas Milne-wannabees crack me up.

 

You seek to justfiy anything to spite the West.

 

"The EU has been on a slow crawl across Easten Europe " - WTF ? Those countries begged to join the EU (and in some cases NATO) to try to make sure they never again lived in the shadow of that nation that you claim is so law-abiding and justifiably paranoid....

[pap]

Christ, you Seumas Milne-wannabees crack me up.

 

You seek to justfiy anything to spite the West.

 

"The EU has been on a slow crawl across Easten Europe " - WTF ? Those countries begged to join the EU (and in some cases NATO) to try to make sure they never again lived in the shadow of that nation that you claim is so law-abiding and justifiably paranoid....

 

My point is backed up the moment someone looks up two, perhaps three maps of Eastern Europe ( 1917, 1948 and 2014 will do ).

 

What is yours backed with, sir?

[Minty]

Fair points, I'm not sure how we can 'compare' any one situation with another over there particularly, but the issue here is how Russia steamed in and influenced the process... if there was to be any intervention in the area it should be done through the UN and in an agreed manner... but we know why Russia is doing this, hence why, now, intervention is being supported by 13 of the 15 members of the UN Security Council, whilst China, although abstaining, still made a clear statement about support for Ukraine and further diplomatic discussion.

[View From The Top]

We can do nothing. Russia doesn't give a f**k about anyone but Russia and if Europe gets uppity they'll switch the gas off.

 

The UN is doing nothing but loud tutting, the US will do nowt and we can't. Putin knows this.

[buctootim]

There is a very good 2008 BBC interview with Russian foreign minister Lavrov about the Georgia crisis (Russia is still occupying two Georgian provinces) where he says they only sent troops in to protect ethnic Russians (even no-one was threatening them). He was then asked about Crimea and he categorically stated there was no way Russia was interested in Crimea and would have no involvement. I had thought Russia had changed and was now a western partner - but under Putin it has moved backwards.

[Minty]

We can do nothing. Russia doesn't give a f**k about anyone but Russia and if Europe gets uppity they'll switch the gas off.

 

The UN is doing nothing but loud tutting, the US will do nowt and we can't. Putin knows this.

 

You may well be right, but what next? What does a future look like where Russia does almost whatever it wants and the rest of the world does nothing?

 

I realise that's a pretty big question, but its also the basis for what the EU and US are doing now... they can't be seen to do nothing, so what do they do?

[Barry Sanchez]

None of this has happened in a vacuum.

 

The EU has been on a slow crawl across Eastern Europe for the last 20 years, to the point where if Ukraine had have been easily subsumed into the European Union, the map of Russia's Western frontiers would roughly resemble those laid down after the 1917 treaty of Brest-Litovsk. The Bolsheviks ceded huge amounts of territory to "end the war quickly". Most of that same territory has now been conquered via diplomacy, without a shot fired.

 

The Ukrainian vote to oust Yanukovych was unconstitutional; a 75% majority was needed to remove him from office. They got just over 73%. Yet, despite an MP vote and a public vote in the Crimea, William Hague has the gall to pretend that the Ukrainian vote is somehow more legitimate.

 

As to the question, I think we'd be insane to go toe-to-toe with Russia. However, the insanity of any particular plan no longer seems to be an obstacle to its implementation.

 

 

By that you accept what Russia has done as right and proper?

[Barry Sanchez]

There is a very good 2008 BBC interview with Russian foreign minister Lavrov about the Georgia crisis (Russia is still occupying two Georgian provinces) where he says they only sent troops in to protect ethnic Russians (even no-one was threatening them). He was then asked about Crimea and he categorically stated there was no way Russia was interested in Crimea and would have no involvement. I had thought Russia had changed and was now a western partner - but under Putin it has moved backwards.

 

The bear has always been the same, they only know brute force, its as simple as that. China could still play a role in all this, they could be playing now, the great game continues.

[hypochondriac]

Do you not think that international law should be upheld? Russia is acting illegally and we should just 'accept it'?

 

If the majority of people who live in crimea want to join Russia then what is the issue?

[Barry Sanchez]

We did the same with Poland, except we didn't have the US on-board as part of some tri-partite arrangement.

 

It cost us first power status, plunged us into decades of debt, cost France her freedom and the world tens of millions of lives. Poland was destroyed anyway, Warsaw systematically.

 

If we cannot protect the Ukraine (and we can't), what is the point of pretending we can?

 

Why doesn't America and China simply divide the World up as they could both do it?

[Minty]

If the majority of people who live in crimea want to join Russia then what is the issue?

 

Two separate issues. I agree that if that is what a clear majority of people want then there should be a discussion and subsequent legal process to determine that and possibly make it happen. But ultimately that area is part of Ukraine, and therefore comes under the Ukrainian governments rule and they are the ones who must allow it to happen.

 

What's the point of having international law otherwise?

[Johnny Bognor]

Do you not think that international law should be upheld? Russia is acting illegally and we should just 'accept it'?

 

International Law should be upheld, but we lost our right to lecture on it when our Labour government broke international law to invade Iraq.

 

I was definitely pro-Ukraine a few weeks ago, but the more I read, I think the Russians may have a point. The legitimate pro-russian governent were removed illegitimately in what was essentially a revolution. How legitimate are the current Ukrainian government?

 

Crimea was part of Russia at one point and the majority of people living there are Russian and clearly want to be part of Russia. So is this any different to Britain invading the Falklands?

 

I don't profess to have the answers, but the situation is complex and therefore not easy to resolve. Military action, even if it was feasible, wouldn't solve these issues.

[hypochondriac]

You may well be right, but what next? What does a future look like where Russia does almost whatever it wants and the rest of the world does nothing?

 

I realise that's a pretty big question, but its also the basis for what the EU and US are doing now... they can't be seen to do nothing, so what do they do?

 

Well better that than pushing for world war 3.

[Halo Stickman]

A military response is almost certainly out of the question, and sanctions are likely to end up hurting the West more than Russia, so, IMO, how this plays out is down to one man: Vladimir Putin, a man, handpicked to replace Boris Yeltsin in 1999, who has ever since – including during the presidency of Dimitry Medevdev – been the de facto ruler of a country where large swathes of the populace regard him as part Tsar, part General Secretary, part CEO and part patrimonial lord. In short, this is a man used to getting his way. Interesting days ahead, I think.

[Barry Sanchez]

I said this right a the start and yet again got whalloped for it, it only seems now reason is taking hold, if we allow this what else will we? Eastern Ukraine,Belarus,? Desperate acts from a desperate man.

[Barry Sanchez]

A military response is almost certainly out of the question, and sanctions are likely to end up hurting the West more than Russia, so, IMO, how this plays out is down to one man: Vladimir Putin, a man, handpicked to replace Boris Yeltsin in 1999, who has ever since – including during the presidency of Dimitry Medevdev – been the de facto ruler of a country where large swathes of the populace regard him as part Tsar, part General Secretary, part CEO and part patrimonial lord. In short, this is a man used to getting his way. Interesting days ahead, I think.

 

 

We could get gas from elsewhere, now is the time to do it.

[Minty]

International Law should be upheld, but we lost our right to lecture on it when our Labour government broke international law to invade Iraq.

 

I was definitely pro-Ukraine a few weeks ago, but the more I read, I think the Russians may have a point. The legitimate pro-russian governent were removed illegitimately in what was essentially a revolution. How legitimate are the current Ukrainian government?

 

Crimea was part of Russia at one point and the majority of people living there are Russian and clearly want to be part of Russia. So is this any different to Britain invading the Falklands?

 

I don't profess to have the answers, but the situation is complex and therefore not easy to resolve. Military action, even if it was feasible, wouldn't solve these issues.

I agree entirely, and it is very complicated and I'm not professing that Russia are the only 'bad guys'... clearly what happened in Ukraine was not entirely legitimate, but in terms of INTERNATIONAL relations, Russia were the first to 'act' in Ukraine so I would be more concerned if that were allowed to pass unchallenged.

 

I also fully recognise that our role in Iraq etc was probably illegal too and I'm not going to defend that. But that doesn't stop me feeling that ANY nation who breaks the law shouldn't be held to account in some way.

 

Hypo - I think you're being a bit simplistic about it... it's not a case of leave them to it or else it's World War 3. As JB says, it is complex, but 'do nothing' is not an option IMO.

[melmacian_saint]

We could get gas from elsewhere, now is the time to do it.

 

We can. However, that half of the EU can't, and nor can Germany. If Germany can't, then the EU won't.

 

Same goes for all issues China, and their ever increasing partnership with Germany, which of course reflects our trade/diplomatic agreements with the Chinese. Of course, they mostly benefit one nation around this continent...yeup, you guessed it!

[Barry Sanchez]

We can. However, that half of the EU can't, and nor can Germany. If Germany can't, then the EU won't.

 

Why cant Germany? It could go back to coal and get US gas after a while. It could be done but it would be expensive, if it kept them in check a price worth paying.

[buctootim]

Why cant Germany? It could go back to coal and get US gas after a while. It could be done but it would be expensive, if it kept them in check a price worth paying.

 

Because their gas is piped in direct from Russia. You cant just decide to burn coal in domestic gas boilers, or to import LNG from the US by ship without infrastructure.

[melmacian_saint]

 

So is this any different to Britain invading the Falklands?

 

I'm not even British but this sounds like a very ignorant thing to say! The Falklands WERE British, and were effectively part of the UK when Argentinas basket case military dictatorship decided to invade. And of course, the majority of the population is/was British and so wanted to be!

 

Crimea might have been Russian, but it is a state of the Ukraine and has been for a while, regardless of the majority of the population being ethnically from somewhere else. I am also pretty sure that a Crimean independence movement have had plenty of time to ask for and successfully obtain a referendum on either independence and then on alliance with Russia. It's very different when you do things yourself, or you are dragged along by a bigger power essentially as part of a global game. One is effectively legitimate, the other really isn't.

[pap]

By that you accept what Russia has done as right and proper?

 

I'm capable of putting the shoe on the other foot and seeing it from their point of view.

 

Russia was given assurances at the end of the Cold War that there would be no eastward expansion.

 

Since then, the West's approach to Russia has been akin to an abusive dog owner poking a dormant, yet dangerous dog with a stick. Now that the dog has finally woken up and has bit their hand, they're calling for it to be destroyed.

 

Complete hypocrisy; people need to get these Red Dawn good guy/bad guy ideas out of their heads.

[Minty]

I don't think anyone has mentioned anything about Red Dawn good guy/bad guys until you... at a very basic level this is about a country having internal issues, in which the International community should not have needed to intervene. But one country did intervene, aligned with their own self-interest, so now others are responding.

[Halo Stickman]

We could get gas from elsewhere, now is the time to do it.

 

Barry, if this were possible, then I agree with you that now might be a good time to do it, because, whilst I doubt we’re on the verge of WWIII, I wouldn’t be too surprised if all this ends up in Cold War II.

[pap]

I don't think anyone has mentioned anything about Red Dawn good guy/bad guys until you... at a very basic level this is about a country having internal issues, in which the International community should not have needed to intervene. But one country did intervene, aligned with their own self-interest, so now others are responding.

 

Yeah, that works if you discount Victoria Nuland and co discussing who would be in charge of Ukraine, or the EU trying to get the country into the fold. If you admit those as evidence, then it's fairly clear that more than one country has been wrestling over the soul of Ukraine.

 

Respectfully, Minty - you've got things the wrong way round. The country reacting here is Russia.

[View From The Top]

Putin wants to be the big dog and Russia to be the world power they've dreamed about since the 18th century. He knows that the UN is toothless, US will spout off but do nothing and the EU he has bent over and he isn't going to use lube!

 

International law means f**k all unless it suits our energy needs. I give you the case of Palestine & The West Bank as evidence enough of that.

[Minsk]

As I posted in the other thread...... I have spent at least 3 weeks in the Crimea every summer for the past 6 years. It really is one of my favourite places to visit. From first hand experience I can say absolutely that the majority of the locals there consider themselves to be more Russian than Ukranian or, at least, as much Russian as Ukranian.

 

Up until only 60 years ago Crimea was part of Russia. It was given to Ukraine 'as a gift' in 1954. There was no referendum then to ask those living there what they wanted.

 

Yes, I do have misgivings about how Sunday's referendum occurred and the official results of it. For me, it was all pushed through too fast and has a seemingly too big of a majority win. However, I do also feel that even if the referendum has waited until the original date in May the outcome would have been the same.

 

Do I agree with how Russia have gone about things? NO.

 

Do I think we (Britain) should get involved in the situation, especially militarily? NO

 

As others have said above, at present there is no legal government in Ukraine. Russia used the situation to their advantage. Crimea is a strategic base. It is also one inhabited by a large Russian population. The majority of them do want to be part of Russia. Their primary source of income is tourism from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Maybe that is why I like going there, no ****ed up Brits or sun-bed hogging Germans.

 

The whole thing has upset greatly, as I have now had to change my holiday plans for this year. But hope everything will be more settled by next summer - even if I will then need a visa to go there (I need one for Russia but not for Ukraine).

 

To all those beating the 'let's get in there and sort out the Russians' drum: what experience do you have of life in Crimea? have you ever served in the military? Would YOU be prepared to put your own life on the line for a piece of land in the Black Sea?

 

P.S. For those who haven't seen it yet, there is very little that can really be argued with from Putin's speech on the Crimea this afternoon.

[pap]

Putin wants to be the big dog and Russia to be the world power they've dreamed about since the 18th century. He knows that the UN is toothless, US will spout off but do nothing and the EU he has bent over and he isn't going to use lube!

 

International law means f**k all unless it suits our energy needs. I give you the case of Palestine & The West Bank as evidence enough of that.

 

I wonder then, what all the provocation is about. I tend to agree with your view that Russia is in a strong position, so I wonder what practical measures the West is actually going to take to bring about their changes. Any UN Security Council resolution can be vetoed by Russia.

 

The West is already involved by proxy in events in Ukraine. When it comes down to it, I don't think it dares go any more direct, so I'm at a loss as to what the propaganda campaign is all about.

 

(yes, yes - I watch RT too, and to my mind, it's all propaganda).

[aintforever]

Ukraine just need to forget about Crimea, move their forces to the border, hold elections and join the EU. A pro west government will be more likely now they have go shot of the Russians in that region.

 

The UK should not get involved but the west should concentrate on helping what is left of Ukraine plus offer financial assistance.

[Minty]

Respectfully, Minty - you've got things the wrong way round. The country reacting here is Russia.

 

I'll happily admit that my knowledge on the area and the wider issues is not great, so I'm in no position to challenge what you say. And VFTT has a point about Palestine/West Bank etc.

 

It's all pretty depressing really.

[bridge too far]

 

 

P.S. For those who haven't seen it yet, there is very little that can really be argued with from Putin's speech on the Crimea this afternoon.

 

Absolutely agree and very powerfully delivered.

 

Goodness knows what the solution / outcome will be though.

[Minty]

To all those beating the 'let's get in there and sort out the Russians' drum: what experience do you have of life in Crimea? have you ever served in the military? Would YOU be prepared to put your own life on the line for a piece of land in the Black Sea?

To be fair, I don't think anyone is proposing action at all. My position was always simply that laws should be abided by, whoever it is. As a result, I pretty much agree with your post on the whole subject (and from my far more limited knowledge).

 

P.S. For those who haven't seen it yet, there is very little that can really be argued with from Putin's speech on the Crimea this afternoon.

 

Can you summarise?

[alpine_saint]

We can do nothing. Russia doesn't give a f**k about anyone but Russia and if Europe gets uppity they'll switch the gas off.

 

The UN is doing nothing but loud tutting, the US will do nowt and we can't. Putin knows this.

 

Absolutely correct.

 

However, the worrying precedent is the Nazis in Sudetenland. If the West really cannot offer a robust coherent response, the message to Putin and his hawks is that they can think about recovering the likes of Poland or the Baltic states.

[Minsk]

To be fair, I don't think anyone is proposing action at all. My position was always simply that laws should be abided by, whoever it is. As a result, I pretty much agree with your post on the whole subject (and from my far more limited knowledge).

 

 

 

Can you summarise?

 

He had one great big swipe at the US saying that he is happy they have finally remembered about international law.

 

That the referendum in Crimea is no different to that heralded by the west for an independent Kosovo - except that with Kosovo there was a great loss of life and, thankfully, that was not the case with Crimea.

 

That the US like to go to the UN but when they don't get what they want just ignore them and do their own thing anyway.

 

That he is happy for NATO sailors to visit a Russian held Sevastopol, but would have considered himself a traitor to the history of Russia if he allowed Sevastopol to become a NATO base.

 

That Khrushchev will have to answer to his God as to why he gave away Russian territory to another country on a whim and without consultation to those who lived there first.

 

That he understands the Ukranian people's frustration with the heads of state they have had as, one after another, they promised to stop corruption but each simply continued to be as corrupt as their predessors.

 

Amongst other things.......

[alpine_saint]

Ukraine just need to forget about Crimea, move their forces to the border, hold elections and join the EU. A pro west government will be more likely now they have go shot of the Russians in that region.

 

The UK should not get involved but the west should concentrate on helping what is left of Ukraine plus offer financial assistance.

 

Yes, this is right too. The Ukraine should be fast-tracked for the EU. The vast majority in the Crimea are ethinic Russians; realpolitik says Ukraine need to let it go.

[alpine_saint]

He had one great big swipe at the US saying that he is happy they have finally remembered about international law.

 

That the referendum in Crimea is no different to that heralded by the west for an independent Kosovo - except that with Kosovo there was a great loss of life and, thankfully, that was not the case with Crimea.

 

That the US like to go to the UN but when they don't get what they want just ignore them and do their own thing anyway.

 

That he is happy for NATO sailors to visit a Russian held Sevastopol, but would have considered himself a traitor to the history of Russia if he allowed Sevastopol to become a NATO base.

 

That Khrushchev will have to answer to his God as to why he gave away Russian territory to another country on a whim and without consultation to those who lived there first.

 

That he understands the Ukranian people's frustration with the heads of state they have had as, one after another, they promised to stop corruption but each simply continued to be as corrupt as their predessors.

 

Amongst other things.......

 

Its hard to argue with much of that..

[Minsk]

Absolutely correct.

 

However, the worrying precedent is the Nazis in Sudetenland. If the West really cannot offer a robust coherent response, the message to Putin and his hawks is that they can think about recovering the likes of Poland or the Baltic states.

 

b o l l o c k s

 

Poland is a completely different entity to Crimea.

 

There may be some comparison with Baltic states, but they again are still far different to Crimea - as their incorporation into the EU and NATO proves.

[alpine_saint]

b o l l o c k s

 

Poland is a completely different entity to Crimea.

 

There may be some comparison with Baltic states, but they again are still far different to Crimea - as their incorporation into the EU and NATO proves.

 

I hope you are right. I really hope that Putin is satisfied with Crimea and the grip he has over Lukashenko and Nazarbayev. Looking at a map at the ex-USSR, Ukraine is one hell of a hole in their Western flank.

Edited 18 March, 2014 by alpine_saint