Ukraine War Thread

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Things have gone further downhill already, a Ukranian military chopper was downed on takeoff by someone with an RPG- though the pilot survived in one piece. Also:

Ukraine crisis: Pentagon says Russian jets violated airspace

[mr friendly guy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN_Qow4FTzw
Both sides are no doubt engaging in propaganda war, but its hell funny nevertheless.

[Irbis]

But don't worry, EU has enough stupid Russophobes of it's own. Plus this wonderful US pressure that only coincidentally and by accident (honest!) calls for sanctions calculated to weaken economies of 2 biggest US rivals.

Just for interest, which 2 countries are you referring to and what sanctions are being proposed?

I meant EU and Russia. I read about sanction proposals every few days, both from local rabid anti-Russian politicians and US sources, and they all can be summed up as "let's fight for Ukraine's freedom to the last Euro". I personally have nothing against the sanctions, and ones that would both weaken the Putin and strengthen Russian democracy would be good, but so far, I didn't saw a single serious proposal for doing that. Almost all of them would just damage only European economies, strengthen Putin, and damage democracy in Eastern Europe even more.

That's why Germany, UK and France so far have been calling for restraint - unlike Obama, who can call for anything as it costs him little to nothing, these countries are responsible before their voters and can't justify pointless 'feelgood' Jingoist measures. EU actually has to think before doing anything, which is the hard part.

To give some example, there's Georgia's relation to Abkhazia. Had they didn't reneged on ex-Soviet autonomy deals in 1993, it's very possible Abkhazia would be still part of it. But they did, and the resulting conflict made Abkhazians hate Georgians. Now Georgia imposed punitive sanctions on Abkhazia, intercepting any shipping to Abkhazian ports and harassing every company trying to invest there. The result? It doesn't serve any useful purpose, doesn't bring peace, it's just petty, spiteful revenge that just made Georgia even more hated in Abkhazia, and ties to Russia at any cost seen as the only option. And for what? Because somehow lines hand-scribbled by Stalin himself to reward some nations while punishing others are now holy?

To me, all the proposed sanctions would just be repeat of the above: people hurting, Putin laughing all the way to bank, more hatred, more idiots wondering "why they don't love us after we kicked them below the belt? why, they must be evil, MORE SANCTIONS!". It had already been tried dozen times, expecting it to work after so many failures is just stupid. But then again, USA blockaded Cuba for 60 years and despite all the harm and Castro strengthening it did, they still do it, learning nothing, as if expecting it would finally work one day.

[Kane Starkiller]

I would be interested to hear what kind of sanctions can cause Russia to reconsider its current policy of territorial expansion, weaken Putin and at the same time strengthen Russian democracy.
I would also like to hear what kind of sanctions could hurt Russia enough to reconsider its actions yet, at the same time, not significantly hurt the countries imposing those sanctions.

Although your attempt to portray the current situation as Russia and EU on one side being economically targeted by US on the other makes me think you are just an apologist for Russian expansionism. I mean it's not as if Russia's aggressive moves in Eastern Europe threaten EU more directly than US or anything.

[mr friendly guy]

Presumably (and this is just broad principles) you sanction thing which are needed to power their military (eg uranium / centrifruges) and leave out things which will just harm the regular people such as "dual use" stuff and accept it might theoretically be used to strengthen the military.

[Broomstick]

The problem with that concept is that Russia controls such a vast territory, not just within its own borders but also via satellite nations, that they can access the raw materials they want and they also have the high end technology to build what they want. That makes sanctions sort of useless.

[mr friendly guy]

Sanctions can hurt Russia. Its just a matter of whether it hurts them enough. I would argue that its unlikely to hurt Putin too much, and more likely hurt the average Russian. This in turns strengthens Putin's hand. Especially if Putin a) can blame the West and b) find an alternative source to compensate to a large degree (eg Chinese buying Russian gas instead of Europe, China supplying machine tools etc).

[Kane Starkiller]

Does this really sound like it could work to anyone? Yes you have annexed 25,000 km2 of territory which is also a strategic location on the Black Sea but watch out now we'll make it more difficult to get centrifuge components or something.

Secondly if the Russian population widely supports these moves and ultimately it is the population of the country that maintains and supports the military machine why should it be exempt from the effects of sanctions? I mean if the conclusion of the EU countries is that Crimea or even Eastern Ukraine isn't important enough to enact sanctions which will hurt EU economies as well that's one thing but suggesting these toothles sanctions which are completely disproportionate to Russian actions and which are designed not to offend the Russian population or something doesn't make any sense to me. Basically suggesting to do nothing without actually coming out and saying "we should do nothing".

[Esquire]

The problem is that punishing Russian citizens generally sabotages the Western idea that Russia could be a proper Western democracy if it weren't for that dastardly Putin and company. We lose the high ground, at least with respect to methods.

Not that there's really another way, but by responding to Russian actions as... Well, Russian, rather than those of an oligarchic cabal, we tacitly agree that populations can voluntarily do things that we, the West I mean, don't like, and from there its only a short step to asking why Eastern Ukraine should stay part of Ukraine at all. Collective punishment means collective agency.

[Esquire]

Russian citizens in general, I mean. The country as a whole.

[Kane Starkiller]

I don't see why genuine separatist sentiments amongst a part of the population would serve to justify separation under these conditions. Armed men storming buildings and Russians massing their military near the borders. If there is a orderly peaceful discussion followed by a referendum like the future Scottish referendum that is a different matter entirely.

[mr friendly guy]

Does this really sound like it could work to anyone? Yes you have annexed 25,000 km2 of territory which is also a strategic location on the Black Sea but watch out now we'll make it more difficult to get centrifuge components or something.

I was thinking more in terms of Iran and North Korea when I said centrifuges that which is why I put in the proviso that its just a general description. Obviously Russia's military requirements would be different. And harder to sanction since Russia is a bigger and stronger country.

Secondly if the Russian population widely supports these moves and ultimately it is the population of the country that maintains and supports the military machine why should it be exempt from the effects of sanctions?

If we take this to its logical conclusion, if for example most of the US population supports a policy which is unpopular in another country, can that other country target US civilians for retaliation? If so, how far? Sanctions? What about direct attacks like bombing television stations? Its a tough call and I am not going to pretend I currently know the answer to that one. I suppose on what your goal is. If say country A hates country B and isn't interested in spreading some type of ideology, then sanctions to weaken the rival country for geopolitical goals would be productive for its goals. If country A however is interested in promoting some ideology, eg democracy in country B, then sanctions might not be so useful for reasons I stated previously.

I mean if the conclusion of the EU countries is that Crimea or even Eastern Ukraine isn't important enough to enact sanctions which will hurt EU economies as well that's one thing but suggesting these toothles sanctions which are completely disproportionate to Russian actions and which are designed not to offend the Russian population or something doesn't make any sense to me. Basically suggesting to do nothing without actually coming out and saying "we should do nothing".

Presumably they believe they can get the Russian population on side eventually. Who knows. Eventually even the Serb population had enough of Milosevic, although conversely Saddam still managed good support and required foreign intervention to oust. So there isn't a magic rule or formula which will tell us when sanctions will work and when it won't. What we can say though is that sanctions as they are currently done to small countries likely puts great strain and cost on the civilian population. Russia being a comparatively bigger country may whether the storm much better than Serbia or Iraq.

[Esquire]

I don't see why genuine separatist sentiments amongst a part of the population would serve to justify separation under these conditions. Armed men storming buildings and Russians massing their military near the borders. If there is a orderly peaceful discussion followed by a referendum like the future Scottish referendum that is a different matter entirely.

Surely the same legitimacy questions apply to the Kiev protesters? Why is 'stay part of Ukraine' the privileged position during/after a violent revolution?

As far as I can tell, the answer is something like "because obviously the large and omnipresent bands of rebels in lots of Eastern Ukrainian towns are only a small subset of the population and/or Russian infiltrators," but I'm not sure why we keep assuming that. If there's data I don't have, fine, but I suspect it's more to do with what the West would prefer to be the answer.

Anyways, my point is simply that if we're going to hold the Russian people responsible for the annexation of Crimea, we also have to at least entertain the possibility that Eastern Ukraine wants to join the Russian Federation. But a proper plebiscite holds a significant chance of going the 'wrong' way, so the West refuses to allow the possibility that separatist sentiment has a genuine majority of support. If I were a Russia-inclined Ukrainian, why would I care what the international community has to say about my political allegiances? I'm used to corrupt elections and would rather not trust my future to another one, overseen by a Western community that a), has no real business interfering, and b), has made its bias incredibly obvious.

[Edi]

There were pretty large counterprotests against the pro-Russians in eastern Ukraine a couple of days ago. Peaceful ones, though it didn't stay peaceful for very long when the pro-Russian separatists attacked the pro-Ukraine side.

I'm really tired of the rampant apologism for Russia in this thread. Doesn't seem to matter what the pro-Russian separatists do and how violent they get or how much restraint the Kiev government shows, there's no shortage of assholes here defending pan-Russian hegemony.

[fgalkin]

You mean, like, the same thing that was happening here during Maidan, when people were storming police headquarters and government buildings in Western Ukraine and no one here seemed to give a shit?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[bobalot]

You mean, like, the same thing that was happening here during Maidan, when people were storming police headquarters and government buildings in Western Ukraine and no one here seemed to give a shit?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

But they were pro-European, so that makes it okay.

[Kane Starkiller]

If we take this to its logical conclusion, if for example most of the US population supports a policy which is unpopular in another country, can that other country target US civilians for retaliation? If so, how far? Sanctions? What about direct attacks like bombing television stations? Its a tough call and I am not going to pretend I currently know the answer to that one. I suppose on what your goal is. If say country A hates country B and isn't interested in spreading some type of ideology, then sanctions to weaken the rival country for geopolitical goals would be productive for its goals. If country A however is interested in promoting some ideology, eg democracy in country B, then sanctions might not be so useful for reasons I stated previously.

There is a difference between going out of your way to target and harm civilians and refraining from any kind of sanctions that might also affect civilians. Furthermore the problem with annexing parts of other countries isn't just that it is unpopular in US. It actually hurts the targeted country and I would say it's not moral regardless of how popular it is.

Presumably they believe they can get the Russian population on side eventually. Who knows. Eventually even the Serb population had enough of Milosevic, although conversely Saddam still managed good support and required foreign intervention to oust. So there isn't a magic rule or formula which will tell us when sanctions will work and when it won't. What we can say though is that sanctions as they are currently done to small countries likely puts great strain and cost on the civilian population. Russia being a comparatively bigger country may whether the storm much better than Serbia or Iraq.

It may very well be that the only real thing NATO can do is bolster its presence in Eastern Europe it's just that people should be clear that freezing some assets of 20 people in Russia has little to no chance of changing the course of the country.

Surely the same legitimacy questions apply to the Kiev protesters? Why is 'stay part of Ukraine' the privileged position during/after a violent revolution?

So overthrow of a government nullifies a countries right to territorial integrity? We should certainly allow for the possibility that eastern parts of the country want to join Russia but not while there are armed rebels in the east, Russian Army massing near the border and Putin making not so veiled threats that Russia might intervene. That serves to intimidate the portion of the population in the east that wishes to remain in Ukraine and encourages the portion that wishes to leave.

You mean, like, the same thing that was happening here during Maidan, when people were storming police headquarters and government buildings in Western Ukraine and no one here seemed to give a shit?

Only it wasn't the same thing since overthrow of a government and dismemberment of a country are not one and the same. Also refusing to accept the view of Russian cheerleaders that turmoil in Ukraine means that Russia gets to pick off parts of Ukrainian territory is not exactly the same as not giving a shit that there is violence in Western Ukraine.

[Esquire]

Surely the same legitimacy questions apply to the Kiev protesters? Why is 'stay part of Ukraine' the privileged position during/after a violent revolution?

So overthrow of a government nullifies a countries right to territorial integrity? We should certainly allow for the possibility that eastern parts of the country want to join Russia but not while there are armed rebels in the east, Russian Army massing near the border and Putin making not so veiled threats that Russia might intervene. That serves to intimidate the portion of the population in the east that wishes to remain in Ukraine and encourages the portion that wishes to leave. .

Of course it does. Or rather, the violent overthrow of an elected government does; the social contract has been torn up. I repeat, why is Eastern Ukraine remaining under the authority of a new government they had no part in choosing the default here? A country has no rights apart from the rights of its people, since it is created by and for those people.

I'm not arguing that the situation is ideal or that there shouldn't be a proper plebiscite*, I'm arguing that at the moment there is no particular reason to assume Eastern Ukraine will or should be part of Ukraine when this all settles down. Because, you know, the armed rebels had to come from somewhere, and that place appears to be the local population. Not all pro-Russian rebellions are dastardly Communislamofascist plots, just like not all pro-Western rebellions are spontaneous groundswells of popular feeling.

*By which I emphatically do not mean one organized/run by the US or EU; we've made our national biases too clear to be credibly neutral. The Swiss, maybe? I don't know, not my department.

[Kane Starkiller]

Really? So PRC currently has no right to territorial integrity seeing as the current government was installed in a violent revolution and there were no free elections since? USSR never had any right to territorial integrity during its entire existence since the October revolution overthrew elected parliament?

[K. A. Pital]

Really? So PRC currently has no right to territorial integrity seeing as the current government was installed in a violent revolution and there were no free elections since? USSR never had any right to territorial integrity during its entire existence since the October revolution overthrew elected parliament?

Just to make myself heard here, Kane, I'm on your side here. I mean, if you dislike someone that doesn't mean you can just take away his land. Pretty much the whole world hates the DPRK. It was also installed via a revolution. And yet, I don't see people saying that it has no borders.

[Esquire]

Of course they have borders. But if half of North Korea were to revolt against the Kims, we'd be on their side, not arguing that North Korea's territorial integrity had any objective value.

Obviously Ukraine's current government is vastly less awful than North Korea's; all I'm saying is that people deserve a say in their government.

[Vympel]

I'm really tired of the rampant apologism for Russia in this thread. Doesn't seem to matter what the pro-Russian separatists do and how violent they get or how much restraint the Kiev government shows, there's no shortage of assholes here defending pan-Russian hegemony.

The Kiev government are a bunch of useless fuckwits. They're not showing restraint out of some sort of magnamanity, they're showing it because the army and associated security forces will not abide going to war on their own civilians - the President just said the other day that they were literally "helpless" in the east, and that worse, security forces their are not cooperating with their demands and some are actually assisting the anti-Maidan / pro-Federalization / pro-Russia forces*.

If Yanukovych had unleased armored vehicles on the Maidan, the west would've cried bloody murder. Now the Kiev government attempts to unleash the army in what they have the unmitigated gall to call an "anti-terrorist" operation, and no one in the west gives a shit - what a surprise. We can only be thankful that the Ukrainian army is simply not going along with it so far.

*If anyone needs a more obvious indication that the unrest in the East is not simply a dastardly Putinist-plot, created by nefarious Russian mind control rays, I don't know what it is.

Ultimately, the people in the east's grievances are just as legitimate as those of the non-fascists / banderites amongst the Maidan movement. They were disenfranchised by the events in February and they want no part of the mmmmmm yummy austerity! that Kiev has planned for them.

[Kane Starkiller]

They are showing restraint because of the amassed Russian troops near the border and Russian threats to intervene.
I don't know who are these people who claim that unrest in the east is a complete fabrication of Putin. Clearly there is a portion of the population that wishes to join up with Russia but the question is what is their percentage. Russian actions encourage the pro Russian population while intimidating those that wish to stay within Ukraine.

BTW there are plenty of countries out there that have regions whose populations would like to secede but never have I seen people on this board justify secession with as flimsy of a justification as here in Ukraine.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Well the Ukranian riot police proved completely useless today; they failed to protect the last government building in the east (the prosecutor's office) and were forced to surrender, resulting in their gear being captured. Though I doubt it will actually make a difference- if it didn't do squat for the police it's hardly likely to be of any use to a bunch of untrained thugs

It's more a psychological blow than anything else. Nothing more humiliating than your own police force being frogmarched and having all their equipment stolen!

Source

They're also reinstating conscription- make of that what you will.

Source

[EnterpriseSovereign]

GHETTO EDIT: As the reporter on location said, "resistance proved futile".