A minor squib about Ukraine
Hmmm...
A few weeks ago: Europe and Russia were politicking over whether Ukraine should be considered to be Finlandized to the EU sphere of influence or to the Russian sphere of influence.
Now: Basically the same diplomatic and grand political struggle, over Eastern Ukraine.
Remind me again who looks weak and silly and has been humiliated? It looks to me as if, in sheer territory-lost-versus-gained metrics, there's a clear winner and a clear loser among the two imperial powers on the European continent, to the tune of half of Ukraine.
Not an expert on this feud, but from a simple negotiating perspective you could argue that Putin acted like he wanted everything, then it seemed like a concession when he only went for East Ukraine. But that's still more than he had before.
ReplyDelete"that's still more than he had before" - well, define "before". This time last year Yanukovich was in charge, and Yanukovich was definitely more pro-Russian than not. The only reason he fell is that Putin overreached with regard to the EU deal. Going from a situation where he definitely has a lot of influence over the guy who runs Ukraine, to the situation where he owns Crimea and a bit of the Donbass, is probably a step back.
ReplyDeleteajay: "The only reason he [Yanukovich] fell is that Putin overreached with regard to the EU deal."
ReplyDeleteYanukovich was duly elected. The reason he "fell" had little to do with your above assertion but rather was a result of the deeply corrupt political culture in Ukraine. It was an overthrow incidentally that was aided and abetted by the Americans, notably the late war monger, John McCain. McCain had no problem consorting with Ukrainian fascists as he urged on Euromaiden activists. He wanted some type of "freedom" and "change"... whatever that means in that god awful context. Yanukovich was replace by equally corrupt candy millionaire Petro Poroshenko and life went on. A phony "revolution" if ever there was one.