Toy_Soldier wrote:
@Jacoby, I do agree that the EU and USA are guilty of their own actions and self interest. I mentioned earlier my greatest disappointment in Europe was the missed or bungled opportunity for east and west Europe along with the USA to establish a log term and friendly connection that would deepen in time.
And I blame the USA most for this failure, for failing to help more when Russia was financially struggling (along with the EU), and then later for the USA's unilateral aggressions/nation building projects in Afghanistan and Iraq. The only two limited operations I thought justified was the initial attempt to take Bin Laden at Tora Bora and the later successful Bin Laden Raid in Pakistan. The USA also weakened the UN severely by not working thru that organization. A weakening that I am not sure it will recover from, as the USA was the most important and financially supporting member.
So basically I am not comparing Russias actions against ours. But I still can judge them on their own actions and call it good or bad depending on what they do.
The only real way for eastern Ukraine to have fairly determined its real allegiance would have been by referendum, and not the hasty and highly suspect type the Russian backed seperatists have conducted at gunpoint. There have been peaceful decisions made in the past as in Alsace voting to join with France after the end of WWII and the Saar voting to join Germany.
But the powers that be will not let the Ukrainians truly decide, first by Yanokovych nixing the EU referendum and now Russia forcing the issue in eastern Ukraine. Russia has bankrolled and trained and equipped the separatist movement and what the eastern Ukrainians want was never going to be considered. The continued farce of Russian soldiers and equipment removing insignia and being formally detached from the Russian army and granted leave to voluntarily fight for the separatists only makes it more deceptive. The Chinese used that deception in the Korean War, and the USA also in small numbers in Vietnam via the CIA.
Coming back under Russian domination was about much more then the better financial deal. It was about the loss of freedom. Ukraine was playing it by riding the fence. Perhaps there was no other way in the short term, but if they wanted to keep their independence they would have had to chose and between east and west there is no contest in that respect, again.
I think you are wrong to believe that eastern Ukraine ever had a choice or that the other half of the country would ever be willing to free them from their bond. The dilemma for nationalist anti-Russian western Ukraine is that it isn't a viable country on its own as they need the ports, industry, natural resources of eastern and southern Ukraine which are decidedly pro-Russian. The US and EU aren't interested in wheat fields and even those aren't as good as they are in the east, I assure they've spent a lot of money fostering this nationalist ant-Russian sentiment in the west of the country too just as they have all over the former sphere of influence of the Soviet Union.
It didn't start as insurrection in the east, it has slowly built itself up and at the beginning there were demands of federalization which Russia supported as well. I don't think Russia has any real interest in absorbing Donbass or any other parts of Ukraine, Russia's interest in more keeping NATO off its doorstep. They'd much rather have an independent non-aligned Ukraine than one dependent on them for survival. I'm not sure a federal solution is still viable considering the scope of this war now, it's a bad situation.
29 Aug 2014, 2:33 pm
