COUP IN KYIV?

I was wondering what was China's take on all of this.

, China’s Xinhua government news agency printed a March 7 editorial backing the Russian move.

“Russian military personnel [are] deployed in eastern Ukraine to protect Russia’s legitimate interests and pro-Russian regions [are] clamoring for a secession from Kiev,” said the editorial, which blamed the crisis on secret western plots that caused the collapse last month of the corrupt, pro-Russian president.

“The West’s strategy for installing a so-called democratic and pro-Western Ukrainian government did not get anywhere at all… [and] Russian leaders once again proved their credibility and shrewdness in planning and executing effective counter moves.” said the editorial.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/07/china-applauds-as-putin-rebuffs-obama-on-crimea/#ixzz2vKCZO3Tr

Which leads to President Obama, who has responded to the aggression by imposing sanctions—a cliché of foreign policy that usually has no effect, but in this case will almost certainly make things worse.

Sanctions only work (and, even then, rarely) when they are universal, when they truly hurt the regime being targeted, and when they coincide with—or prompt—political change. Russia fits none of these categories. Too many European nations are too dependent on Russian gas supplies or bank deposits to make sanctions bite or endure. None of the sanctions under discussion are knockout blows; no conceivable sanctions would compel Putin (or any Russian leader) to surrender Ukraine. And regime change in Moscow is hardly on the horizon

I don't know, hawk, if there is anything to do except grin and bear it.

I'm afraid Crimea as part of Ukraine has been lost at this point. It's now about preventing Ukraine from splitting into a pro-European West and pro-Russian East. The conflict in Crimea is going to remain unresolved for years. There are multiple conflicts in Europe that linger on in this way, such as Cyprus, Kosovo, Abkhazia and Ossetia. Circumstances are of course different, but diplomats managed somehow to contain these conflicts to make them manageable.
Giving in might be the way to go
The situation in Crimea would only change if Western states opted to send troops on a grand scale. But no one wants to risk a direct passage of arms with a nuclear power like Russia. That of course is not news to Putin - that's why he can relax, sit back and watch emergency summits and stern statements from afar.
I myself have experienced the Cold War - its bloc mentality which paralyzed everything and dictated the way how the world was perceived. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union, people in Europe had hoped the Cold War was over. It really got me thinking how quickly we are resorting back to those times.
It's not just about Crimea; we are in the middle of a European crisis - maybe one of the worst in decades. This new confrontation could have global implications, since Russia, the US and the EU should be working hand in hand to solve issues like Iran's nuclear program, the war in Syria and decide on how to contain North Korea.
Is it really possible that the hands of time were turned back 25 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall geopolitically speaking? No, the Europeans should bring themselves to massage Putin's ego by inviting him to a super summit to debate the conflict in Crimea as well as Ukraine's future. Giving in might be the only way to prevent worse consequences from happening.

Obama is quite the rube

"Trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching . The roots of the Russian Empire trace back to Kiev in the ninth century, so that was a monumental provocation. Were the Europeans, much less the Americans, willing to send their sons and daughters to defend Ukraine or Georgia? Hardly. So NATO expansion was a political act, not a carefully considered military commitment, thus undermining the purpose of the alliance and recklessly ignoring what the Russians considered their own vital national interests."

Russia's takeover of the Crimean peninsula has drawn condemnation from the west, but reaction has been more varied in the 14 former Soviet republics in Russia's "near abroad". Many have played a balancing act between Russia and the west, and almost all have significant Russian-speaking populations – like the one that served as a justification for Moscow's intervention in Crimea.

Is this the same woman? Some social media users in Ukraine seem to think so.

The woman has appeared in interviews in cities across Ukraine under different names, spreading an anti-protest and pro-Russian message. It's led to a deluge of videos and pictures being shared on social media platforms as people try to spot the woman.

But how justified is the confidence of the Crimean authorities that people here want to change country?

At demonstrations like the one outside the parliament, there is a clear nationalist fervour. "We want to go to Russia", says one student "not the European Union. Russians are our sisters and brothers - and this is a great idea."

It is a widely-held view among the ethnic Russian majority here, who have staged daily pro-Russia protests against what they call the "fascists and nationalists" who have taken power in Kiev. Many Ukrainian Russians feel threatened by the revolution, fearful that Ukraine's new westward trajectory threatens their language and identity.

But in over a week of reporting from Crimea, I've spoken to countless Russians who feel differently - favouring greater autonomy within Ukraine, rather than wanting to switch country.

Among them are Lena and her family - ethnic Russians who welcome me to their apartment in Simferopol, their one-year-old son plays at our feet. They are determined he should grow up a Ukrainian citizen.

"I feel sad and disappointed by this move", Lena says. "Crimea is my homeland. I would not be happy to live in Russia - it's a foreign country for me."

Her husband Dima would also vote no in the referendum. But, he tells me, the problem is that Crimea is still searching for its identity. "I'm Russian but not a citizen of the Russian federation. We are different people," he says. "I want to feel Crimean, but even when I type it on my computer, my spellchecker underlines it like it's not the right word."

Crimean Russians are split, perhaps by generation. Lena's mother, Irina, remembers 1954, when Crimea was given to Ukraine by the former Soviet leader Khruschev in a move that many here still resent. "I would vote yes in a referendum", she says. "Crimea has always been a Russian land and I don't have any emotional bonds with Ukraine."

Aside from the Russians, there is a sizeable community of ethnic Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars, who together make up around 40% of the population. They would both certainly reject changing nationality.

The Tatars were deported by Stalin to Central Asia in 1944, as punishment for alleged collaboration with the Nazis by some. Many died, and even after some eventually returned, they remained fiercely anti-Russian.

And that is the problem here. Within this small, rugged peninsula, the divisions are so deep that nothing can satisfy everyone.

MOSCOW — The day after he returned from the Winter Olympics, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia gathered the 12 members of his national security council for a crisis meeting to manage a political implosion in Ukraine that, by all accounts, had surprised Russia’s political and military elite and, above all, infuriated Mr. Putin himself.

One prominent member of the council, Valentina I. Matviyenko, chairwoman of the upper house of Parliament, emerged from the meeting declaring that it was impossible that Russia would invade Crimea, yet a couple of days later Russian troops were streaming into the peninsula.
[...]
An examination of the seismic events that set off the most threatening East-West confrontation since the Cold War era, based on Mr. Putin’s public remarks and interviews with officials, diplomats and analysts here, suggests that the Kremlin’s strategy emerged haphazardly, even misleadingly, over a tense and momentous week, as an emotional Mr. Putin acted out of what the officials described as a deep sense of betrayal and grievance, especially toward the United States and Europe.

... ... ...

Dymytro Yarosh, the leader of the Ukrainian nationalist Right Sector party has declared his intention of running for president. Yarosh and his party are described by opponents as neo-Nazis and their activities have been used as part of the justification for Russia’s intervention in Crimea.

At a press conference he apologised for the tight security but said he had information that Moscow has sent an assassination squad to kill him.

He said that his group was not xenophobic or anti-semitic and included members from all minorities. He said that the Ukrainian should be the language of the state but that should not effect what language people speak privately.