• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kremlin: Crimea and Sevastopol are now part of Russia, not Ukraine

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,862
Reaction score
10,300
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From CNN:

...the Kremlin says Ukraine's Crimea region is now part of Russia.

A signing ceremony Tuesday between Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Prime Minister of Crimea and the mayor of the city of Sevastopol made it official, the Kremlin said in a statement.

Crimea and Sevastopol, where the Russian Black Sea fleet is based, are now part of the Russian Federation, it said.

Kremlin: Crimea and Sevastopol are now part of Russia, not Ukraine - CNN.com

This development is not surprising for a number of reasons:

1. Russia has long viewed Crimea as constituting a crital national interest (naval base, majority ethnic Russian population, history).
2. The balance of power favored Russia in moving to regain control of Crimea. Ukraine lacked the military power to impose high costs.
3. Neither the U.S. nor Europe have sufficient interests at stake to consider military options.
4. A military approach would be impractical under any reasonable circumstances.
5. The costs of non-military measures are not likely to be so high relative to the gains Russia perceives it will make so as to reverse Russian policy. Russia also has capabilities of retaliating ranging from restricting access to its resources to withdrawing cooperation on major geopolitical matters e.g., Iran's nuclear program. It expects that its ability to complicate U.S. geopolitical goals will constrain the degree of U.S. economic and other non-military sanctions.
6. Past precedent concerning Kosovo's being separated from Serbia with NATO military force playing a role during what amounted to a civil war.

In his national address, Russian President Putin has cited a number of those factors. He did disavow intentions to become more broadly involved in Ukraine, but he has shown a willingness to act decisively where he perceives major Russian interests are at stake.

This development also speaks anew of the need for the U.S. to develop a clear and coherent foreign policy doctrine and relearn how to engage in contingency planning (military and broader foreign policy). It needs to tighten its integration with existing NATO members so as to make clear that NATO members will be safeguarded under any circumstances, even if the use of force is required. In Asia, the U.S. needs to strengthen ties with its leading allies. Japan and South Korea need to know that American commitments to their security are reliable.

Finally, to maintain military credibility in a world in which the balance of power is dynamic, the President and/or Congress need to abandon planned drastic cuts in military expenditures and manpower, even if that means reducing other expenditures, larger budget deficits than would otherwise be the case, or some combination of reallocated spending/larger budget deficits. Otherwise, the U.S. will be perceived as a great power, but one with declining capabilities. That outcome would rightly worry American allies. It could invite challenges to peripheral American interests by hostile actors.
 
Last edited:
We should no longer bother to try to prevent Iran or any other nation from developing nuclear weapons. It is vital to the interests of every country to develop a nuclear arsenal. Nor should any country believe a word any nuclear power says including the United States.

It's official. The United States and NATO are liars acting in conjunction with Russia to divide up the world between us.
 
Next stop on Putin's "liberation tour" Moldova.
 
From CNN:

Kremlin: Crimea and Sevastopol are now part of Russia, not Ukraine - CNN.com

This development is not surprising for a number of reasons:

1. Russia has long viewed Crimea as constituting a crital national interest (naval base, majority ethnic Russian population, history).
2. The balance of power favored Russia in moving to regain control of Crimea. Ukraine lacked the military power to impose high costs.
3. Neither the U.S. nor Europe have sufficient interests at stake to consider military options.
4. A military approach would be impractical under any reasonable circumstances.
5. The costs of non-military measures are not likely to be so high relative to the gains Russia perceives it will make so as to reverse Russian policy. Russia also has capabilities of retaliating ranging from restricting access to its resources to withdrawing cooperation on major geopolitical matters e.g., Iran's nuclear program. It expects that its ability to complicate U.S. geopolitical goals will constrain the degree of U.S. economic and other non-military sanctions.
6. Past precedent concerning Kosovo's being separated from Serbia with NATO military force playing a role during what amounted to a civil war.

In his national address, Russian President Putin has cited a number of those factors. He did disavow intentions to become more broadly involved in Ukraine, but he has shown a willingness to act decisively where he perceives major Russian interests are at stake.

This development also speaks anew of the need for the U.S. to develop a clear and coherent foreign policy doctrine and relearn how to engage in contingency planning (military and broader foreign policy). It needs to tighten its integration with existing NATO members so as to make clear that NATO members will be safeguarded under any circumstances, even if the use of force is required. In Asia, the U.S. needs to strengthen ties with its leading allies. Japan and South Korea need to know that American commitments to their security are reliable.

Finally, to maintain military credibility in a world in which the balance of power is dynamic, the President and/or Congress need to abandon planned drastic cuts in military expenditures and manpower, even if that means reducing other expenditures, larger budget deficits than would otherwise be the case, or some combination of reallocated spending/larger budget deficits. Otherwise, the U.S. will be perceived as a great power, but one with declining capabilities. That outcome would rightly worry American allies. It could invite challenges to peripheral American interests by hostile actors.

I'm always grateful when you weigh in on these matters. Thank you for your perspective. Makes perfect sense.
 
I'm always grateful when you weigh in on these matters. Thank you for your perspective. Makes perfect sense.

I'm convinced sometimes Don works in the state department, he's brilliant.
 
Next stop on Putin's "liberation tour" Moldova.

Doubt that, there is nothing strategic in Moldova and he does not want to add more poor regions to Russia. Easier to just manipulate the politics of Moldova.. you know like the US/UK/France/Germany do all across Eastern Europe.

If there is any place he might go after, then that is southern parts of Lithuania.. so he can have direct access to the Kaliningrad area. Also here there is a large pro Russian contingent and since Belarus is pro Russian satellite state, then he would have land access to Kaliningrad area. But then we are talking about dealing with a NATO country, and I doubt he wants that. Crimea was a clear strategic move to maintain for good a naval base for the Black Sea Fleet.
 
I'm convinced sometimes Don works in the state department, he's brilliant.

I agree. I would love to know Don's back story. There is always a very diplomatic approach to his posts that's hard to miss. And an underlying understanding of the world stage and how the actors are playing the game.
 
Mornin' DS :2wave: .....and he cited for International Law, Kosovo's Independence Bid.....which the West stood for and Russia opposed and that the Crimea followed what the Ukraine did in 91 with Russia.

He also stated he wont be deterred by Sanctions and asked China and India to support him.

To top it off he even got support from Gorbachev. The West and the US have 4 days to do all they gonna do. Or its over!



Putin signs treaty for Crimea to join Russia
630c7749da42cb0a4e0f6a7067000bbd.jpg


The treaty will have to be endorsed by Russia's Constitutional Court and ratified by both houses of parliament, but Valentina Matviyenko, the speaker of upper house of Russian parliament, said the procedure could be completed by the end of the week.

Earlier in the day, France's Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said on Europe-1 radio leaders of the Group of Eight world powers "decided to suspend Russia's participation and it is envisaged that all the other countries, the seven leading countries, will unite without Russia."

The Russian State Duma, the lower chamber of parliament, on Tuesday unanimously passed a resolution condemning U.S. sanctions targeting Russian officials including members of the chamber. The chamber challenged Obama to extend the sanctions to all the 353 deputies who voted for Tuesday's resolution, suggesting that being targeted was a badge of honor. Eighty-eight deputies left the house before the vote.

But Putin on Tuesday vowed to protect the rights of Crimean Tatars and keep their language as one of Crimea's official tongues, along with Russian and Ukrainian.

Ukraine's political turmoil has become Europe's most severe security crisis in years. It began in November with a wave of protests after Yanukovych ditched a deal with the 28-nation European Union in favor of closer ties and a bailout loan from Russia. The protests went on for months, prompting Yanukovych to flee to Russia in late February and leading to the installation of a new government.....snip~

http://news.yahoo.com/putin-signs-treaty-crimea-join-russia-125545053.html
 
Next stop on Putin's "liberation tour" Moldova.

I do not think so.

The majority there is Romanian. Unless they are pro-Russian against their own interests?

Moldovan/Romanian 78.2%, Ukrainian 8.4%, Russian 5.8%, Gagauz 4.4%, Bulgarian 1.9%, other 1.3% (2004 census)

Do you mean the Transnistrain region of Moldavia though?

note: internal disputes with ethnic Slavs in the Transnistrian region

If so if Transnistrain joins Russia while Moldavia joins Romania I do not see what a problem there may be about this?

References:

CIA (2014). World factbook. Retrieved from:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/md.html
 
I don't know the answer to this question, but perhaps some others do.

Where from and how does Crimea get its electrical power, oil and natural gas supplies, fresh water and sewage systems, food supplies, vehicle and other transportation routes, etc?

I ask this because if the only current direct land connections between Crimea and the world at large are through mainland Ukraine, wouldn't the first level of sanction that should be put up, with Ukrainian support from outside powers, be a "Berlin Wall" type structure closing off the two main transportation arteries between Crimea and Ukraine and shutting down/off the flow of "utilities" to Crimea? Wouldn't it make some sense to squeeze out the people of Crimea by making them completely beholden to Russia and Russian supplies/support in a full cold war/iron curtain type way?
 
Next stop on Putin's "liberation tour" Moldova.

Russian state television has made an error and by mistake, it displayed the signing of the annexation treaty by Russia of Moldavia, all of Ukraine, the baltic states and Finland... the director apologized for the mistake and then put on the correct annexation of Crimea tape.

/sarcasm

I do not think so.

The majority there is Romanian. Unless they are pro-Russian against their own interests?

Do you mean the Transnistrain region of Moldavia though?

If so if Transnistrain joins Russia while Moldavia joins Romania I do not see what a problem there may be about this?

References:

CIA (2014). World factbook. Retrieved from:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/md.html

Where are you getting these scenarios? Russia annexes a region, Romania annexes another country... what's the angle. How are you getting these thoughts? What ... I don't even know.
 
I don't know the answer to this question, but perhaps some others do.

Where from and how does Crimea get its electrical power, oil and natural gas supplies, fresh water and sewage systems, food supplies, vehicle and other transportation routes, etc?

I ask this because if the only current direct land connections between Crimea and the world at large are through mainland Ukraine, wouldn't the first level of sanction that should be put up, with Ukrainian support from outside powers, be a "Berlin Wall" type structure closing off the two main transportation arteries between Crimea and Ukraine and shutting down/off the flow of "utilities" to Crimea? Wouldn't it make some sense to squeeze out the people of Crimea by making them completely beholden to Russia and Russian supplies/support in a full cold war/iron curtain type way?



Mornin' CJ. :2wave: This should give you an idea. But Putin has counted for it.....so it appears.


Vote to join Russia could leave Crimea without water, electricity.....

crimeamap.jpg


As Russia’s stranglehold on Crimea tightens, the Ukrainian province to the north is warning it could make life on the peninsula miserable if the coveted region chooses sides with Moscow in Sunday's referendum.

Pro-Moscow officials in Crimea, who favor secession from Ukraine, have said they will seize all utilities and assets owned by the Kiev-based Ukrainian government if the referendum goes as expected. But Crimea's electricity, freshwater and natural gas all flows in from the province of Kherson, where leaders warn they will shut everything off if the referendum they say is illegitimate, goes forward.

Crimea's freshwater flows in from the Kakhov Reservoir in Kherson via the 250-mile North Crimean Aqueduct. The peninsula’s vast orchards and vineyards rely on mainland water supply for their livelihood, as do the people in Crimea’s cities of Simferopol, Sevastopol, Kerch, Sudak and Feodosia.

Just as important to Crimea is the power it gets from the Kakhov and Zaporizhiya hydroelectric power stations in Kherson, which provide the peninsula with 75-80 percent of its electricity needs. Finally, Crimea gets 35 percent of its natural gas delivered through pipelines that extend from the mainland via the Mykolayiv and Kherson regions.

Crimea’s chief gas supplier, Ukraine-owned Chornomornaftogaz, has already been targeted by the Kremlin-backed government that took power following the revolution in Kiev that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych last month. But even if they seize Ukrainian state-owned assets, including gas company Chronornaftogaz, it may prove moot if the raw resources are cut off in Kherson.

In the short term, Crimea cannot survive on its own without money from Kiev, according to observers. The peninsula gets $700 million from the national government each year, and Ukrainian economists have estimated that Crimea would need billions of dollars in new investments to integrate its economy and infrastructure with Russia.....snip~

Vote to join Russia could leave Crimea without water, electricity | Fox News
 
I don't know the answer to this question, but perhaps some others do.

Where from and how does Crimea get its electrical power, oil and natural gas supplies, fresh water and sewage systems, food supplies, vehicle and other transportation routes, etc?

I ask this because if the only current direct land connections between Crimea and the world at large are through mainland Ukraine, wouldn't the first level of sanction that should be put up, with Ukrainian support from outside powers, be a "Berlin Wall" type structure closing off the two main transportation arteries between Crimea and Ukraine and shutting down/off the flow of "utilities" to Crimea? Wouldn't it make some sense to squeeze out the people of Crimea by making them completely beholden to Russia and Russian supplies/support in a full cold war/iron curtain type way?

It gets all those things from Ukraine. As in, the pipelines and all that come by land from the connection between the crimean peninsula to the territory of Ukraine.
But Ukraine gets most of it's gas from Russia. Not sure about petrol or electricity.

But it's not impossible to build new energy pipelines from the territory of Russia to the crimean peninsula. It's not that hard.

And I don't think Ukraine will cut off utilities to Crimea. It's not just against human rights but also because it'll hurt a lot of ukrainian supporters, around 250k crimean tartars and about 450k ukranian ethnics. So... that's not an option. It's the reason why Crimea was moved to Ukraine's administrative territory in the 1950s under the USSR. Economical and administrative reasons.
 
It gets all those things from Ukraine. As in, the pipelines and all that come by land from the connection between the crimean peninsula to the territory of Ukraine.
But Ukraine gets most of it's gas from Russia. Not sure about petrol or electricity.

But it's not impossible to build new energy pipelines from the territory of Russia to the crimean peninsula. It's not that hard.

And I don't think Ukraine will cut off utilities to Crimea. It's not just against human rights but also because it'll hurt a lot of ukrainian supporters, around 250k crimean tartars and about 450k ukranian ethnics. So... that's not an option. It's the reason why Crimea was moved to Ukraine's administrative territory in the 1950s under the USSR. Economical and administrative reasons.



Mornin RM. :2wave: That's Right.....as then it gives Putin a means to create jobs inside Russia if he needs to. Moreover he already announced they were going ahead with the plans for the Southern Pipeline. Which the EU said they were suspending. Failing to mention they already had the agreement. Which you know what Countries that line feeds. They already had the agreement and are finishing out the finer details before they sign by the end of the month.

As far as our Sanctions.....Look how their Lower parliament acted and then told Obama to put all of them on his Sanctions list. No wonder some Deputy Minister was laughing.

Moreover while France made this move. They also came out and told all that are standing with the Election that goes back to May. Which means they Validate Yanokovich as the Official Elected Government of the Ukraine.


Obama Has 4 Days to Stop Putin.....

Now that Crimea has “voted,” the Obama administration has unveiled sanctions against Russian and Crimean leaders who are linked to what the West is calling Russia’s invasion and subversion in Crimea. But with a fragile ceasefire set to expire by Friday, the sanctions are unlikely to work in time to head off a conflict.

According to one independent analysis being studied by the Kremlin and reviewed by The Daily Beast, such measures could be a drag on the Russian economy over time and an embarrassment for the Russian government, but would only be an “inconvenience” for the Russian economy in the near term. More drastic measures would include going after Russia’s ability to interact in global financial markets, which the analysis calls “disruptive,” and restrictions on Russian energy exports or trade sanctions, which the analysis says would be “catastrophic.”

The analysis by Macro-Advisory, an investment firm operating in Russia, predicts that the West, especially European countries, will not move to impose “disruptive” or “catastrophic” sanctions on Russia until Putin crosses another red line, such as the outright invasion of Ukraine.

“The key risk [for Russia] is Stage 3, i.e. a ban or restrictions on Russia’s interaction in global financial markets and/or any selected restrictions on trade or investment with Russia,” the report stated. “Investors assume that Stage 4 [catastrophic] sanctions are not yet on the agenda simply because these would also have a negative contagion to several EU countries, and many high-profile companies, as well as indirectly on the global economy.”

McFaul as US ambassador was demonized by Russian controlled media and harassed by the country's intelligence service. His private schedule as ambassador in the past would be shared with Russian media, who would ambush him at public events. In more ominous moves, anonymous videos appeared on the internet accusing McFaul of being a child molester. Because of his work on civil society, Russian hardliners have portrayed him as an agent of influence seeking regime change in Moscow.

Last year, in response to the U.S. creation of the Magnistky list, a list of Russian human rights violators subject to sanctions, Russia created its own list of Americans banned from traveling to Russia. The list included Bush administration officials including John Yoo, a former US Justice Department official, David Addington, the chief of staff for former vice-president Dick Cheney, and two former commanders of Guantanamo Bay.....snip~

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-5-days-stop-putin-094831705--politics.html
 
Last edited:
Kremlin: Crimea and Sevastopol are now part of Russia, not Ukraine

and no matter what we do -even nuclear war- this will still be the case. so, that leaves us a choice. we can run around beating our chests and drawing lines in the sand, or we can nation build here at home.

i vote for the latter. or at least i thought i did.
 
Last edited:
I don't know the answer to this question, but perhaps some others do.

Where from and how does Crimea get its electrical power, oil and natural gas supplies, fresh water and sewage systems, food supplies, vehicle and other transportation routes, etc?

I ask this because if the only current direct land connections between Crimea and the world at large are through mainland Ukraine, wouldn't the first level of sanction that should be put up, with Ukrainian support from outside powers, be a "Berlin Wall" type structure closing off the two main transportation arteries between Crimea and Ukraine and shutting down/off the flow of "utilities" to Crimea? Wouldn't it make some sense to squeeze out the people of Crimea by making them completely beholden to Russia and Russian supplies/support in a full cold war/iron curtain type way?

As far as I know, the vast majority of Crimea's power comes from Ukraine. However, Ukraine relies on Russia for a fairly large share of its energy resources.

Ukraine almost certainly won't respond by cutting off power or water for two reasons:

1. Such a move would impact civilians and violate humanitarian legal instruments. Ukraine would effectively reposition itself unfavorably globally and risk losing support that it would otherwise gain.
2. Russia has the military power to quickly reverse that situation, so such a move would be temporary and not enforceable.

Ukraine is in a very difficult and vulnerable position. Politically and diplomatically it can and will reject the annexation of Crimea. In terms of practical responses, it is in no position to try to wrest it away from Russia without inviting an existential threat, so it won't attempt to do so.

It also knows that the West is not very likely to intervene militarily in Crimea or even Ukraine. Hence, it will almost certainly try to minimize any rationale for Russia to launch even a limited invasion in the East. That means reassuring Russia that it wants a constructive relationship, avoiding policy measures that would inflame ethnic Russians living in its East who might already be tempted by Crimea's breaking away from Ukraine, and perhaps even limiting any integration with the West to economic integration. The prospect of future military integration with the West might change Russia's current calculus, so Ukraine has already announced that it will not seek NATO membership. Ukraine's hope is to preserve the rest of its territorial integrity, overcome its substantial financial problems, build prosperity within the territory it still possesses through deepened economic collaboration with the West, and limit its rejection of Russia's annexation of Crimea to political and diplomatic protests. Certainly, the transitional government has adopted that stance. Should the upcoming elections produce a more hard-core nationalist government, the risk of miscalculation could increase.
 
From CNN:



Kremlin: Crimea and Sevastopol are now part of Russia, not Ukraine - CNN.com

This development is not surprising for a number of reasons:

1. Russia has long viewed Crimea as constituting a crital national interest (naval base, majority ethnic Russian population, history).
2. The balance of power favored Russia in moving to regain control of Crimea. Ukraine lacked the military power to impose high costs.
3. Neither the U.S. nor Europe have sufficient interests at stake to consider military options.
4. A military approach would be impractical under any reasonable circumstances.
5. The costs of non-military measures are not likely to be so high relative to the gains Russia perceives it will make so as to reverse Russian policy. Russia also has capabilities of retaliating ranging from restricting access to its resources to withdrawing cooperation on major geopolitical matters e.g., Iran's nuclear program. It expects that its ability to complicate U.S. geopolitical goals will constrain the degree of U.S. economic and other non-military sanctions.
6. Past precedent concerning Kosovo's being separated from Serbia with NATO military force playing a role during what amounted to a civil war.

In his national address, Russian President Putin has cited a number of those factors. He did disavow intentions to become more broadly involved in Ukraine, but he has shown a willingness to act decisively where he perceives major Russian interests are at stake.

This development also speaks anew of the need for the U.S. to develop a clear and coherent foreign policy doctrine and relearn how to engage in contingency planning (military and broader foreign policy). It needs to tighten its integration with existing NATO members so as to make clear that NATO members will be safeguarded under any circumstances, even if the use of force is required. In Asia, the U.S. needs to strengthen ties with its leading allies. Japan and South Korea need to know that American commitments to their security are reliable.

Finally, to maintain military credibility in a world in which the balance of power is dynamic, the President and/or Congress need to abandon planned drastic cuts in military expenditures and manpower, even if that means reducing other expenditures, larger budget deficits than would otherwise be the case, or some combination of reallocated spending/larger budget deficits. Otherwise, the U.S. will be perceived as a great power, but one with declining capabilities. That outcome would rightly worry American allies. It could invite challenges to peripheral American interests by hostile actors.

Europe and Japan should be put on notice that America is reducing its capabilities to what it can afford, and that they need to start building their own capabilities so that we can shift our focus more to those other 'peripheral American interests'. I disagree that an Empire showing budgetary cracks should continue to strain itself to maintain its ability to project power. We can only be as strong as our domestic strength will allow us to be, and we do need to focus on fiscal responsibility and national economic competitiveness.
 
Where are you getting these scenarios? Russia annexes a region, Romania annexes another country... what's the angle. How are you getting these thoughts? What ... I don't even know.

Well, if you promise to keep it a secret then I will tell you. I have one of my people inside Putin's circle of people. He is reliable. Every now and then we meet at daylight and he tells me of Putin's next moves, clear and simple.

Seriously though. I think that is where this is going and I do not mind really for it means we join Albania too at last.

How about you though? Would you mind annexing Moldova back again?
 
Mornin' CJ. :2wave: This should give you an idea. But Putin has counted for it.....so it appears.


Vote to join Russia could leave Crimea without water, electricity.....

crimeamap.jpg


As Russia’s stranglehold on Crimea tightens, the Ukrainian province to the north is warning it could make life on the peninsula miserable if the coveted region chooses sides with Moscow in Sunday's referendum.

Pro-Moscow officials in Crimea, who favor secession from Ukraine, have said they will seize all utilities and assets owned by the Kiev-based Ukrainian government if the referendum goes as expected. But Crimea's electricity, freshwater and natural gas all flows in from the province of Kherson, where leaders warn they will shut everything off if the referendum they say is illegitimate, goes forward.

Crimea's freshwater flows in from the Kakhov Reservoir in Kherson via the 250-mile North Crimean Aqueduct. The peninsula’s vast orchards and vineyards rely on mainland water supply for their livelihood, as do the people in Crimea’s cities of Simferopol, Sevastopol, Kerch, Sudak and Feodosia.

Just as important to Crimea is the power it gets from the Kakhov and Zaporizhiya hydroelectric power stations in Kherson, which provide the peninsula with 75-80 percent of its electricity needs. Finally, Crimea gets 35 percent of its natural gas delivered through pipelines that extend from the mainland via the Mykolayiv and Kherson regions.

Crimea’s chief gas supplier, Ukraine-owned Chornomornaftogaz, has already been targeted by the Kremlin-backed government that took power following the revolution in Kiev that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych last month. But even if they seize Ukrainian state-owned assets, including gas company Chronornaftogaz, it may prove moot if the raw resources are cut off in Kherson.

In the short term, Crimea cannot survive on its own without money from Kiev, according to observers. The peninsula gets $700 million from the national government each year, and Ukrainian economists have estimated that Crimea would need billions of dollars in new investments to integrate its economy and infrastructure with Russia.....snip~

Vote to join Russia could leave Crimea without water, electricity | Fox News

Russia wants to make Crimea a tax free zone, free market economy. Tax free zone could be bring in lots of businesses and tourism.

ITAR-TASS: Accession of Crimea and Sevastopol to Russia - Crimea should keep revenues and taxes for five years - MP

Looks like it's going to be an economic war instead of a military one.
 
Russia wants to make Crimea a tax free zone, free market economy. Tax free zone could be bring in lots of businesses and tourism.

ITAR-TASS: Accession of Crimea and Sevastopol to Russia - Crimea should keep revenues and taxes for five years - MP

Looks like it's going to be an economic war instead of a military one.

Afternoon Moot.
hat.gif
Yep with Russia always holding the long term hole cards.

"Led by the powerhouse lobbying of the American Petroleum Institute, a coalition of Fortune 500 energy companies are using the Ukraine crisis to spur Congress to approve a key policy goal: Easing regulations on the export of U.S. natural gas.

Despite a decade-long boom in U.S. natural gas production, very little of America's vast gas reserves are exported.. That's because strict regulations on the transfer and storage of gas have made it impossible to profitably ship out of the U.S.

Oil and gas companies have paid Washington lobbyists millions in recent years to challenge the strict export rules.....snip~

U.S. Push For Natural Gas Exports To Help Ukraine Won't Actually Help Ukraine
 
Well, if you promise to keep it a secret then I will tell you. I have one of my people inside Putin's circle of people. He is reliable. Every now and then we meet at daylight and he tells me of Putin's next moves, clear and simple.

Seriously though. I think that is where this is going and I do not mind really for it means we join Albania too at last.

How about you though? Would you mind annexing Moldova back again?

No, because we're not a country that violated another country's sovereingty. Moldavia is an independent country. If Moldavia were to make a referendum to join Romania, ofc, we'll accept, but they must do it on their own. By their own volition, not Putin-style with foreign troops (or romanian troops in this case) on their territory. They may be our brothers accross the river but they have the same right to choose their own destiny and path in life as anyone of us. IF they'll ever want to part of Romania, which a lot do, they'll chose when and why, not us. It's their choice as a free and sovereign people with borders we respect.

You're making scenarios for annexation or trading international recognition... god dammit man. How cynical are you?
 
As far as I know, the vast majority of Crimea's power comes from Ukraine. However, Ukraine relies on Russia for a fairly large share of its energy resources.

Ukraine almost certainly won't respond by cutting off power or water for two reasons:

1. Such a move would impact civilians and violate humanitarian legal instruments. Ukraine would effectively reposition itself unfavorably globally and risk losing support that it would otherwise gain.
2. Russia has the military power to quickly reverse that situation, so such a move would be temporary and not enforceable.

Ukraine is in a very difficult and vulnerable position. Politically and diplomatically it can and will reject the annexation of Crimea. In terms of practical responses, it is in no position to try to wrest it away from Russia without inviting an existential threat, so it won't attempt to do so.

It also knows that the West is not very likely to intervene militarily in Crimea or even Ukraine. Hence, it will almost certainly try to minimize any rationale for Russia to launch even a limited invasion in the East. That means reassuring Russia that it wants a constructive relationship, avoiding policy measures that would inflame ethnic Russians living in its East who might already be tempted by Crimea's breaking away from Ukraine, and perhaps even limiting any integration with the West to economic integration. The prospect of future military integration with the West might change Russia's current calculus, so Ukraine has already announced that it will not seek NATO membership. Ukraine's hope is to preserve the rest of its territorial integrity, overcome its substantial financial problems, build prosperity within the territory it still possesses through deepened economic collaboration with the West, and limit its rejection of Russia's annexation of Crimea to political and diplomatic protests. Certainly, the transitional government has adopted that stance. Should the upcoming elections produce a more hard-core nationalist government, the risk of miscalculation could increase.


Everything is on hold until Ukraine's upcoming election in May. It should be interesting because Ukraines' past elections were filled voter fraud. One out of five Ukraines polled said they have or would sell their vote because they need the money. But thats just the tip of the voter fraud ice berg.

I wish I had as much hope in Ukraine over coming it's economic problems as you do. But the odds don't seem in Ukraines favor. 1. The government is too corrupt and infiltrated with oligarchs, cronyism and self interest. 2. There are too many political factions to get any meaningful reforms passed and implemented. 3. The people are poor and average income is $300 a month. The government subsidizes residential gas, so people aren't used to paying for the gas they use. They still want the government to support them but don't want to pay taxes. The people want to keep main industries nationalized. Loan rates are 13 to 14%. Add all that together and the results are plain to see in the streets of Ukraine....poverty and civil unrest. I don't see it changing anytime soon...especially now that far right parties hold seats in parliment and top position in government.
 
No, because we're not a country that violated another country's sovereingty. Moldavia is an independent country. If Moldavia were to make a referendum to join Romania, ofc, we'll accept, but they must do it on their own. By their own volition, not Putin-style with foreign troops (or romanian troops in this case) on their territory. They may be our brothers accross the river but they have the same right to choose their own destiny and path in life as anyone of us. IF they'll ever want to part of Romania, which a lot do, they'll chose when and why, not us. It's their choice as a free and sovereign people with borders we respect.

Who mentioned annexations by force in Putin style? I said "join" not "invade?"

You're making scenarios for annexation or trading international recognition... god dammit man. How cynical are you?

Huh?

What does this has to do with me? How am I cynical?
 
Afternoon Moot.
hat.gif
Yep with Russia always holding the long term hole cards.

"Led by the powerhouse lobbying of the American Petroleum Institute, a coalition of Fortune 500 energy companies are using the Ukraine crisis to spur Congress to approve a key policy goal: Easing regulations on the export of U.S. natural gas.

Despite a decade-long boom in U.S. natural gas production, very little of America's vast gas reserves are exported.. That's because strict regulations on the transfer and storage of gas have made it impossible to profitably ship out of the U.S.

Oil and gas companies have paid Washington lobbyists millions in recent years to challenge the strict export rules.....snip~

U.S. Push For Natural Gas Exports To Help Ukraine Won't Actually Help Ukraine

Howdy MMC ;)

How is the US going to export gas to EU cheaper than Russia? Ukraine can't even pay it's bills now so how do you think they will pay for US gas?

The oil industry never lets a good crisis go to waste.
 
Who mentioned annexations by force in Putin style? I said "join" not "invade?"

Huh?

What does this has to do with me? How am I cynical?

... You're applying a wrong set of standards all the way.
You don't trade countries or trade recognition or whatever.

The USA doesn't get to decide if Russia gets to keep Crimea. The EU doesn't get to decide if Russia gets to keep Crimea. It's Ukraines' decision whether they accept the reality that there is nothing that anyone can do and bite their tongues and suck it in. that's the of it. And then the EU and maybe the USA can work up a plan to prevent such a thing from happening ever again.

you saying that some entity gives Crimea to Russia in exchange for Moldavia to come to Romania and/or Russia + friends recogonize Kosovo. Who... what.. by what authority does someone or one country decide this?

Are you not getting this? Moldavia, Crimea, Ukraine, Kosovo are not pawns to be played by the greater powers of the world, trading favors or benefits. That's not how it should work IF we want a civilized world. You're cynical because you hint at that. You want some entity (EU or USA )to betray Ukraine's trust in regards to Crimea in order to make a deal with Russia for some other countries to get something out of the whole crisis. This is cynical to the bone.
 
Back
Top Bottom