Didn't Loki said that long ago in this thread?
Didn't Loki said that long ago in this thread?
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
He also suggested that Putin might see no limits to expanding "annexation" further into Ukraine, or other nations.
That would push the rest of the Ukraine even more to the west. And it was Hazir that suggested that Putin would not stop until he reaches the Dniester.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...x-account.html And now the real sanctions will kick in.
Hope is the denial of reality
If full banking/economic/trade sanctions were implemented...the EU might have to accept a degree of "hurt". Are they willing?
If Putin isn't interested in playing ball then what forms of sanctions are we exactly supposed to make. As this joke article said 6 years ago with a serious point about sanctions "we're a gigantic country filled with oil, gas and wheat Russia reminds EU". What lever do we have exactly?
Hell if Putin decides to turn Russia into a modern-day USSR what exactly do you want us to do Loki? Its no good just saying repeatedly that we're not doing enough to make him stop without saying your counter-proposal of precisely WHAT alternative you have. The idea post-Cold War has been that the USSR collapsed and Russia wants to become a modern nation. If Russia decides the collapse of the USSR was a mistake then short of another Cold War I fail to see what we can do - and we're not at that point yet.
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Ban investment in Russia's energy sector. Freeze the assets of any oligarch who's publicly supporting the annexation. Ban their businesses from doing business in Europe. Stop all transfers of weapons and any remotely sensitive technology to the Russian government or Russian firms. If that does nothing, ban Western banks from dealing with Russian banks. I fail to see why we should take weaker steps against Russia, which makes a mockery of all international norms and laws, including blatantly violating security guarantees to Ukraine that were offered in exchange for the latter giving up nukes, than we did against Iran, which was never threatening the international order to the same extent. Putin is the 1938 Hitler. Iran is some shitty dictatorship. We have to sort out our priorities.
Hope is the denial of reality
I've been thinking about what the proper analogy is for Putin/ Ukraine. Like you I considered the pre-WW2 annexations Hitler did, meaning Putin will be emboldened if he isn't challenged and end up causing a giant war in the medium term.
But I also thought about Noriega and Panama. When he was accused of drug trafficking he turned openly defiant against the US, so we occupied Panama, put him in jail and installed a satisfactory government. The thing is, we didn't occupy Panama because Noriega was a drug smuggling dictator, it was because of the canal, which is strategically and economically very important to us. That seems fairly analogous to Putin's activity in Ukraine. The government turned unfriendly to Russia, but because of the nation's size he couldn't just occupy the whole thing and put his government of choice in charge, he had to take the piece of it that is strategically and economically important to Russia.
Putin's actions are unjust, crappy and unfortunate for Ukraine, but are they harbingers of a 3rd world war? I really don't think so. As with the invasion of Georgia, Putin is policing his sphere of influence, making sure rivals like NATO and the EU do not create unfriendly powers on his doorstep and threaten Russia's key strategic interests. And its because this is Russia's doorstep that the West is not that interested in confronting Putin head on. Probably it isn't a great idea to recruit the former Soviet Republics that border Russia for organizations like NATO and the EU.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
Those are the kind of sanctions a Europe that can actually stand up to an aggressive Russia should impose. You know that Europe doesn't exist?
Congratulations America
Sorry, I must have missed the part where we annexed a chunk of Panama. Or where we threatened to annex half the country if Panama didn't change its ways. I also missed the part where we carried out the attack after promising not to do so if Panama gives up its nuclear weapons.
The last point is a non-sequitur. No one is calling for the use of force against Russia.
You don't need "Europe" to do anything; you need Germany, Britain, and France to do so. Everyone else would fall in line.
Hope is the denial of reality
Am I right in saying that we could basically cripple the Russian economy if we felt like taking a bit of pain ourselves, and maybe finding somewhere else to buy gas from?
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Oh, and I do think this is a bed we partially made ourselves; the idea that the west will use it's military power in arbitrary ways to enforce it's own interests with flimsy justifications and UN resolutions stretched to breaking point is a narrative that has a lot of currency in Russia, and apparently they really haven't gotten over Kosovo.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Pretty much. Unless Russia completely stops selling its gas to anyone (which it won't, because that would lead to instant bankruptcy), the cost Europe would pay is minimal. In the grand scheme of things, how much would it really matter if Russian oligarchs removed $100-200 billion from European banks? We're talking about peanuts.
This is not a question of using military force; plenty of countries still do so. This is a question of conquering another country's territory in an offensive war, which is not acceptable, and hasn't been done in a non-colonial situation since WWII (Iraq tried). The fact that Russia, the US, and UK have now violated security guarantees to Ukraine that were given in exchange for Ukraine getting rid of its nukes doesn't help either. Russia violated just about every international norm of importance here. If we let this stand on punished, we're opening a gigantic Pandora's box, not just for Russia, but also any other countries with delusions of grandeur.
Hope is the denial of reality
Oh really? You don't need them together to stand up to Russia? Isn't it blatantly clear that without an overriding 'European' dimension all they go by is their own short time national interests? You are living in lala-land if you expect any of the three countries you mention to get over their narrow national interests untill there is blood on the walls of the hall where ever the Council meets. And the same is true for all the other European countries with a capital west of Vienna. Inside the EU or outside.
Congratulations America
Yes, and suffer the consequences of a new Cold War (if we're lucky) with Russia.
But, rest assured, we're not going to do anything of the sort. For the simple reason we can't really afford to piss off the Russians. Because we don't know how to calculate the risks that lie beyond our bank balances.
The way I see it, the Crimea is gone, and the only way the Ukranians are going to be allowed to keep their eastern half is by playing real nice to Uncle Vlad in Moscow.
People who try to approach this as a purely rational matter should consider reading newspapers with an Orthodox background. If they would they'd seen a worldview that's entirely different than the one that says that 'Putin will see reason'. For them Putin is protecting the lands of the true fate against the evil influences of the west.
Congratulations America
Given Germany's location, I would hope that it realized that having a revisionist Russia next door is not in its interest. It's also not in Britain's interest to make promises it has no intention of keeping. I've actually done research on the latter question. If you don't help those who help you, your ability to obtain anyone's assistance in the future becomes very limited.
The Cold War never ended...at least not according to the Russian leaders. Kind of odd that the assumptions in the West are different.
Hope is the denial of reality
Germany most of all realises how much of its goods it ships to Russia and how much natural gas they are getting back in return for that. I wouldn't put any money on Germans voting for nuclear energy to save the Ukraine or any other country the Russians claim for themselves. Especially not if those countries used to be part of the Soviet Union. The Brits aren't a hair better and neither are most others.
As for the Russians; I doubt they have any desires to occupy 'the West', they more than anything else want to keep out its influence.
Congratulations America
Russia is not even one of the top 10% German export partners.
Sure, they only want to control everything they had before 1989. Unfortunately for the EU, some of that territory is currently within EU borders. And if you think allowing this kind of behavior to go unpunished doesn't lead to copycats, then I don't know what to say.
Hope is the denial of reality
Not really impressive.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Germany is getting out of nuclear energy. The second part of my remark about the importance of Russia for Germany.
Congratulations America
That's the 11.3% (Erd)gas that might be a problem. They didn't had any problems so far to use coal as substitute. The 20% of coal currently coming from Russia can be easily replaced by other countries, coal is quite easy to ship around the oceans.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
I also don't understand the counterfactual here. Let's say Germany pisses off Russia. What's Russia going to do? Break its energy contracts and eliminate its main source of revenue?
Hope is the denial of reality
They are not even able to simply sell* the gas to someone else.
* For GGT, that means they are not able to deliver.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Exactly. They don't have the pipeline capacity to sell elsewhere. They'd just have to sit on the gas. And go bankrupt in the process.
Hope is the denial of reality
I'm still wondering how much pain Germany, or other Russian energy importers, are willing to inflict on their own people and economies? And when it comes to financial sanctions, I wonder if big global investors would actually suffer, since institutional money can be transferred at the first hint of bank sanctions. Doesn't that mean ordinary folks with bank accounts/credit cards would feel the most pain?
The US didn't need to annex Panama, we occupied the entire country in a day or so and installed a government that would suit our interests. I think Putin would have preferred that in Ukraine, but the country is too large. Russia was facing a Ukraine that was close to the EU and hostile to Russia - imagine how formidable a power Ukraine could be if the country got its corruption even somewhat under control say via EU influence. So Putin annexed the Black Sea port that he believes Russia needs economically and strategically. The two scenarios are far closer analogies than the pre-WW2 annexations Germany made.
By head on I don't mean force. I seriously doubt there will be meaningful sanctions.No one is calling for the use of force against Russia.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
Nonsense. Russia didn't need to annex the territory. They already had a de facto control of it due to an extensive military presence and political devolution that allowed the regional parliament to a toe a heavily pro-Russian line (it also had a lease that was never going to run out). And since when is need an excuse to conquer someone else's territory? Iraq was going bankrupt in 1990 and really needed Kuwait's oil. Does that somehow excuse Iraq's attempt to annex Kuwait? Do you think it would be a proper response by France in the 1960s (when the German economy was rapidly growing) to go in and conquer a chunk of Germany? Seriously, how does one even entertain that thought?
Should we just throw our hands in the air any time a country violates the most serious international norms just because they have a need to do so? Why even bother then? I hear Iran really needs nukes. And Sudan really needs to commit ethnic cleansing. And the old Rwandan government really needed to commit genocide. How is any of this stuff relevant? You know, I somehow don't see you supporting the same kind of an American foreign policy based on "need". I mean, we do kind of need Venezuelan oil and the Venezuelan leaders have been jerks to us for a while. Maybe we should conquer Venezuela's oil-producing regions? Or maybe Iran's?
Last edited by Loki; 03-23-2014 at 05:01 PM.
Hope is the denial of reality
Please, stay with what I've actually said. I have not and do not argue that what Russia has done should be excused out of need. My only argument is that Russia's action should not be seen as a harbinger of WW3 the way Germany's actions were a prelude to WW2. You said "Putin is the 1938 Hitler," and while I see why one might think that, I think it's an incorrect lens through which to view the situation.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
And my point is that Russia did not need to conquer anything. And if a country feels like it has to conquer its neighbors because the latter are getting a bit powerful (and clearly a Ukraine with a quarter of Russia's population, no energy resources to speak of, and a GDP per capita a quarter of Russia's is a "threat"), then I really don't see how this situation is any better than 1938 Europe.
I mean, China has more people than the US and its economy is actually increasing (unlike Ukraine's). It would be understandable if we tried to conquer it? Maybe just Manchuria?
Hope is the denial of reality
Dnjepr.
Congratulations America
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
