Russia repositions border taking over more of Georgia overnight

[NutLoose]

Putin is getting power mad as the west stands by watching it happen.

Viewpoint: What's behind Russia's actions in Georgia? - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33675488)

[MPN11]

So where is the West's 'line in the sand'? Russia just keeps nibbling away at territories on their borders, and all we seem do is send a strong Note which they ignore.

To what extent can we/should we impose even stronger sanctions on Russia?

[rh200]

So where is the West's 'line in the sand'? Russia just keeps nibbling away at territories on their borders, and all we seem do is send a strong Note which they ignore.

There is no line, we are to spineless.
Its simple really, Russia is gone, there is no huggy fluffy ending for it, the sooner we accept that, and dig in for the long term the better.

Sign mutual defense pacts with both Georgia and Ukraine, and drop troops along the demarcation lines, and it will be all over. Fences go up, the people on our side go on and progress.

At the moment we are pouring aid money down the toilet in the Ukraine fiasco, the sooner we can lance that boil the sooner they can move on. The same goes with Georgia.

[Hempy]

Who really cares if Vlad wants the Ukraine, Crimea, etc? Let them fight their own battles and keep out of it. Do you really think Putin has eyes on 'world domination'?

There is no line, we are to spineless.
Its simple really, Russia is gone, there is no huggy fluffy ending for it, the sooner we accept that, and dig in for the long term the better.

Sign mutual defense pacts with both Georgia and Ukraine, and drop troops along the demarcation lines, and it will be all over. Fences go up, the people on our side go on and progress.

At the moment we are pouring aid money down the toilet in the Ukraine fiasco, the sooner we can lance that boil the sooner they can move on. The same goes with Georgia.

Yeah, lets just escalate it into a global conflict. Just what the world needs :rolleyes:

Some people just can't let go of the old Commie USSR Cold War, can they?

Then again, your words are easily said for someone who knows that they'll never be called upon to pick up a rifle to defend them... :yuk:

[highflyer40]

I would agree with hempy. They can take back the lot of their former States, they are mostly all corrupt failed states in their own rights, and why would we want anything to do with them? (Other than energy-but we should be looking to reduce our dependence on Russian has anyways)

[melmothtw]

I would agree with hempy. They can take back the lot of their former States, they are mostly all corrupt failed states in their own rights, and why would we want anything to do with them? (Other than energy-but we should be looking to reduce our dependence on Russian has anyways)


So, if I've understood you correctly, you're saying that the only reason that we 'need' the-former-Soviet-but-now-independent states is for their energy reserves? So if we let Russia 'take back the lot of former states', we'd be[I] more dependent on Russian energy, rather than less. Genius!

[Hempy]

I'm pretty sure the 'Wests' efforts in supplying energy resources over the last 20 years have satisfied the objective. Perhaps you are after 'world domination', no?

[melmothtw]

Surely that should be 'we' rather than 'you' Hempy, no?

[Lonewolf_50]

Who really cares if Vlad wants the Ukraine, Crimea, etc? Let them fight their own battles and keep out of it. Do you really think Putin has eyes on 'world domination'? More or less agree with this. Not sure how "the West" is invested in Georgia unless it is the state where Atlanta is the major city. ;)

[KenV]

Who really cares if Vlad wants the Ukraine, Crimea, etc? Let them fight their own battles and keep out of it. Do you really think Putin has eyes on 'world domination'?

Yeah, lets just escalate it into a global conflict. Just what the world needs :rolleyes:

This has a very familiar ring to it. Does no one see the similarity with Putin's actions today and Adolf's actions in the 1930s? Will Finland be next? The Baltics? I'm not saying military action is required, but certainly economic action against Russia needs to be stepped up. And military preparedness needs to be stepped up as well. A perception of military weakness appears to be all Putin needs to justify his actions.

[Hempy]

Surely that should be 'we' rather than 'you' Hempy, no?

Nah mate, as quoted, I'm pretty sure your comments belong to you and you alone..

[Lonewolf_50]

This has a very familiar ring to it. Does no one see the similarity with Putin's actions today and Adolf's actions in the 1930s? Will Finland be next? The Baltics? I'm not saying military action is required, but certainly economic action against Russia needs to be stepped up. And military preparedness needs to be stepped up as well. A perception of military weakness appears to be all Putin needs to justify his actions. I don't see Georgia being Poland, nor Czechoslovakia. Not even close, as an analogy, in terms of being important to the West.

[melmothtw]

Ah, my mistake. When you said Perhaps you are after 'world domination', no? I assumed you were talking figuratively about the West in general (though failing to include your own country of Australia - hence my retort of 'we').

I didn't realise your comment about world domination was aimed specifically at me :ooh:

[Chugalug2]

KenV:-
Does no one see the similarity with Putin's actions today and Adolf's actions in the 1930s?Indeed, KenV, it is almost as if he were following in his master's footsteps. Start with 'liberating' the Russian speaking populations and go on from there. I expect that the mandarins are even now redrafting the 'final note', to be delivered to the Kremlin rather than the Reich Chancellery, "that unless we hear from them by 11 o'clock that they were prepared at once to withdraw their troops from Poland a state of war will exist... I have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received and that consequently...", what?

[highflyer40]

No I don't think we should be buying Russian gas at all.

[melmothtw]

Agreed highflyer, but we will be buying Russian gas if all of these currently independent nations fall under her domination again.

[KenV]

I don't see Georgia being Poland, nor Czechoslovakia. Not even close, as an analogy, in terms of being important to the West.

Georgia and Ukraine certainly are NOT Poland nor Czechoslovokia. But Adolf didn't start with Poland nor Czechoslovokia either, did he? It was only after Adolf got away with his "lesser" expansionist crimes of militarizing the Rhineland and taking the Saar Basin, and then Austria and then Sudentenland that he was emboldened to take all of Czechoslovokia. And it was only after he took Czechoslovokia with no consequence that he set his sights on and took Poland.

And while Georgia and Ukraine are not "important to the West", I believe this is about a LOT more than just economic or political importance. It is about legal principle. If "the West" condones these violations of legal principle, they are inviting Putin to take further expansionist action, just as Europe invited Adolf to take further expansionist action after he "liberated" the German speaking peoples around Germany.

[Lonewolf_50]

And while Georgia and Ukraine are not "important to the West", I believe this is about a LOT more than just economic or political importance. It is about legal principle. His sales job on this is "restoring" rather than expansion, but I understand your point. We've had a few thread discussions on Ukraine, about which I have very mixed feelings. I won't pretend to have an answer, but I don't think the situation is that similar. (Did a small bit of work with some Ukraine Navy folks back when partnership for peace exercises were on my plate: mid 90's.)

[KenV]

His sales job on this is "restoring" rather than expansion...
That was exactly Adolf's sales job as well. Adolf "restored" the German speaking people in Austria and the Sudentanland (southern Czechoslovakia) to the "mother Germany". It didn't take long before he "restored" ALL of Czechoslovakia. And got away with it. Which led to invading Poland. And got away with it. Which led to WW2.

[Chugalug2]

Adolf's real job was to invade and plunder the treasuries and economies of other countries before his own economy imploded, whereas Putin's real...oh, wait...

[crackling jet]

Possibly if we had honoured our promise to the Ukraine along with the US after we persuaded them to give up their former soviet owned WMD's that we would back them up in the event of any aggression towards them then perhaps we would not be reading these stories of 'soviet border creep' here there and everywhere, that was dispicable, so much for the British 'my word is my bond'. (ex UK Forces and embarrased )

[Lonewolf_50]

@crackling jet: that's a sore point, no question. A whole bunch of Powers got around a table and agreed to something. It seemed politically expedient at the time, apparently, with the fears of the nukes based in the Ukraine needing to be accounted for ... and doubtless other reasons.

Politics is always about expedients, isn't it? The various historical quotes about scraps of paper don't look to have been wrong.

[Toadstool]

The problem is, how far do we go?

How far is Putting wishing to go?

Fighting Saddam's army in 2003, the insurgency afterwards and the Taliban in Afghanistan has in no way prepared us for fighting a well equipped and trained Force, all without having the luxury of air supremacy.

Oh, and they have nukes.

IMHO, we are heading for a slightly warmer cold war hoping that we don't blink first.

[ericsson16]

MPN 11 "Russia just keeps nibbling away at territories on their borders"
Maybe Comrade Putin sees things differently,maybe the so called nibbling is a full blown feast from the west! Albania,Bulgaria,Czechoslovakia,East Germany,Hungary,Poland,Romania to mention but a few.

[Radix]

............

[MPN11]

ericsson16 ... good point.
"Russia just keeps nibbling away at territories on their borders"
Maybe Comrade Putin sees things differently, maybe the so called nibbling is a full blown feast from the west! Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania to mention but a few.
Yup, we do rather tend to look at things from our own perspectives, create the demonic image of Putin and ... rattle our pieces of paper.

From his POV there are undoubtedly different concerns, including the "Russia is surrounded by enemies" syndrome.

However, one had hoped that in the 21st C. we had all grown out of this sort of behaviour, and that's what worries me.


Good discussion, though ... some interesting points of view!

[Chugalug2]

Just because Putin feels justified in his actions doesn't make them right. The German nation (well the greater part of it) felt Hitler justified in his actions, the justification being the Versailles Treaty for the most part. That support only really faltered when his success did.

I think that much the same goes for Putin. He is a chancer like Hitler, and will only come a cropper when he takes one chance too many. We have a vested interest in seeing that happen sooner rather than later.

BTW, how many p's are there in appeasement again?

[air pig]

Chug:

Hitler's main problem was his strategic decision making in 1941, when he helped Mussolini and attacked Russia within months of each other.

In my view he should have finished the Greek and Balkan campaigns off first, sat tight in the desert and up armed for a move into Russia in 1942 or even 1943. The Whermacht was still to a very great extent a horse drawn army. Time would have allowed his divisions to be mechanically re-equipped. The other factor was that he went too late in the year and did not plan or even contemplate a Russian winter.

But today, we now have Putin as you say nibbling away at the western states and Turkey is slowly becoming embroiled with border incursions from Syria. Remembering Turkey has invoked Article 4 of the NATO Treaty. None of the NATO forces have the resources to fight one war let alone two. We lack resources such as material and manpower and outright will to get involved in Eastern Europe. We also do not have across Europe the political 'balls' either. The last 35 years of downsizing and so called peace dividends could be just about to bite us very severely in the backside and there is SFA we can do about it.

Putin as you put it maybe a 'chancer' but he's a very astute chancer.

[ericsson16]

сочувствие comrades сочувствие!

[air pig]

сочувствие comrades сочувствие!

E16, is that between the faecal matter and a social disease in the OED.

[rh200]

Yeah, lets just escalate it into a global conflict. Just what the world needs

There will be no global conflict, thats just socialist propaganda to create fear and reduce the chance of taking any meaningful action by the west.

Neither Putin or China is ready to engage the west militarily at this moment, if there is a chance it could escalate, there is to much to loose.

The chances are that won't always be the case. Plonking troops in a friendly country and having a defense pact is perfectly legal. The moment that happens, all those Russian volunteers will put on official insignia and will result in a stand of. The Russians will then be responsible for enforcing the peace in their areas.

At the moment we are pouring billions into those countries for nothing. Start playing Putin at his own game and using our brain.

Some people just can't let go of the old Commie USSR Cold War, can they?

Got nothing to do with that, but those who forget the past are bound to repeat it. Merkal did say she would prefer economic development etc to develop those places. Thats fine but you have to have stability to do it. Thats not going to happen with things as they are now.

Then again, your words are easily said for someone who knows that they'll never be called upon to pick up a rifle to defend them..

Are that old chestnut. There is a reason we have a principle on several fronts, including legal, political matters etc. where people who have personal gain or loss of issues should be excused from decision making. That can be both positive and negative.

[Chugalug2]

air pig:-
The last 35 years of downsizing and so called peace dividends could be just about to bite us very severely in the backside and there is SFA we can do about it.Well, we could start by stopping that downsizing and start rearming instead. As you say, Eastern Europe is a far off place of which we know little, but better to draw the line in the sand there now, before Putin is compelled to react to an unprovoked Polish attack upon one of his radio stations.

Putin can't afford to rearm either, but he is doing so anyway. The party is over I'm afraid. If you want peace prepare for war! You heard it here first. No? Well, it's as well to repeat it anyway...

[pax britanica]

Vlad is powerful but he isn't Stalin, too many people in Russia with too many millions/billions in or invested in the west for one single madman to put all that at risk.

A few steps to 'restore some pride to mother Russia yes I can see the meritocracy /corruptocracy ' behind Putin tolerating but anything bigger and -Dammit Dmitri I wont be able to go to St Tropez on holiday attitudes ' will see his days numbered'

[air pig]

Chugs:

As you say, Eastern Europe is a far off place of which we know little, but better to draw the line in the sand there now, before Putin is compelled to react to an unprovoked Polish attack upon one of his radio stations.

Eastern Europe is now far better known after hen and stag parties, just they can't remember being there. Unfortunately the politicians since the fall of the Wall have forgotten that adage and I suspect have no idea or even read the works of Sun Tzu, but I bet Putin has. As for spending more money, that ain't going to happen, unless you slash the aid budget to zero and as you are aware weapons manufacture is these day a long term thing, not easy as building Spitfires and Mosquito's was in the past.

Putin had cleverly covered his rear door by coming to accords with the Chinese, who own a very large slice of the deficit in the USA and a fair percentage of Africa. Russia still believes in the Mother Russia as the embodiment of the state.

Pax britanica:

A few steps to 'restore some pride to mother Russia yes I can see the meritocracy /corruptocracy ' behind Putin tolerating but anything bigger and -Dammit Dmitri I wont be able to go to St Tropez on holiday attitudes ' will see his days numbered'

Putin is an old Chekist and not afraid to use old Chekist methods, as Mr Litvinenko found out. Having seen a video of the tax man calling, I suspect that such methods would not trouble Vlad if he had to use them again. Some pirates off the African east coast found out as did some gentlemen in Lebanon in the past, don't poke the bear and complain when he rips your arm off. If Vlad so wished he could start conscription again and call up his opponents into the army and sequester their assets, not a problem if you are an elected dictator and the older generation in Russia would support him.

[Chugalug2]

air pig:-
weapons manufacture is these day a long term thing, not easy as building Spitfires and Mosquito's was in the past.So all the more reason for getting started now. Waiting around for his next move, and the one after that, plays straight into Putin's hand.

The good Lord helps those who help themselves. It was a close enough thing last time we played the 10 year rule, this time we'll be lucky if we get 10 months warning of the coming war.

pb:-
Vlad is powerful but he isn't Stalin, too many people in Russia with too many millions/billions in or invested in the west for one single madman to put all that at risk.In much the same way as German industrialists and bankers were going to control the little Corporal? I shouldn't count on it if I were you.

[t43562]

weapons manufacture is these day a long term thing, not easy as building Spitfires and Mosquito's was in the past.

My impression from reading is that it was actually quite long term even then e.g. the merlin engine was developed in 1933 according to wikipedia and I remember reading that it had a lot of problems. But fortunately it was there and in good shape when it was needed.

So an engine might be a thing you want to keep developing as a continuous effort because it is an enabler for various different possible aircraft.

I suggest that the software might be similar - not easy to do in a hurry.

[air pig]

t43562: I did say manufacture and not development. Indeed the Merlin engine did have development difficulties.

[MPN11]

Hitler's main problem was his strategic decision making in 1941, when he helped Mussolini and attacked Russia within months of each other.
IRRC, in Speer's biography he said something like "Planning was based on the war getting going in 1942/43". Hitler got so carried away by his early successes that he decided to just 'keep on going' regardless of the original plans and production issues. So he invaded the wastes of Russia with a horse-drawn Wehrmacht, with the consequences we now know.

Similarly, war material production continued in parallel with extensive domestic production, so that Gerta would never have a problem getting a new sewing machine or kettle.

[KenV]

[QUOTE]Vlad is powerful but he isn't Stalin, too many people in Russia with too many millions/billions in or invested in the west for one single madman to put all that at risk.[/QUOTE

I hafta wonder about that. The industrialists in 1930s Germany had too much invested in their industries to allow "one single madman to put all that at risk," and yet "a single madman" was essentially responsible for the near complete destruction of Germany. The same can be said of Italy. And Japan. History seems to show that a highly ambitious political leader with near unlimited power can roll over even the high and mighty in the corporate realms of his nation.

And it seems that it is that highly concentrated power that is corrupting of the nation and the individual. Ensuring governmental power is spread out, although very inefficient, seems to be the only way to prevent a single madman from (ultimately) embroiling nations in war.

[Royalistflyer]

There is no parallel between Putin's Russia and Hitler's Nazi party. Putin wants to rebuild Russia as it was, no more than that. If he wants the Ukraine - let him have it, if he wants a route to the south Baltic, let him have it. I see no reason for us to get our petticoats in a bunch about any of this. His overflights of our area of self interest are in my view, nothing but warning not to interfere. And in my view, neither we should. I certainly would not station any troops or aircraft in any of those places. Anyone who has studied Putin could pretty well draw a line where he will stop and not go further. The Ukraine held much of the old USSR's heavy industry and he wants that back. It is historically Russian anyway. Certainly not worth our fighting for.

[KenV]

There is no parallel between Putin's Russia and Hitler's Nazi party. Putin wants to rebuild Russia as it was, no more than that. If he wants the Ukraine - let him have it. if he wants a route to the south Baltic, let him have it. Yeah, and all the Nazis wanted was "liebensraum", and "no more than that."

Well, OK, they also wanted to humiliate the French after the humiliating Versailles Treaty. But "no more than that."

Anyone who has studied Putin could pretty well draw a line where he will stop and not go further.Interestingly, Neville Chamberlain thought the exact same thing of Adolf. Indeed he was was so sure he knew where Adolf "will stop and not go further," he declared "Peace in our time" after agreeing to give Austria and Czechoslovakia to Adolf. But that was not enough liebensraum. Then Stalin gave him 60% of Poland. But that was still not enough liebensraum. Egomaniacs are VERY hard to satisfy. The more they get, the more they need.

(Ukraine) is historically Russian anyway. Certainly not worth our fighting for.Maybe. Maybe not. But the Ukrainians seem to think it's worth fighting for. And maybe it's worth it to us to help the Ukrainians fight for it and make it very costly for Putin to "restore" Ukraine to "Mother Russia". And maybe its worth it to arm ourselves so in the event Putin wants more, the price will be too high.

Here's a scary footnote: Barrack Obama also used the phrase "peace in our time" in his 2013 inaugural address. Deja vu????

[air pig]

I tend to favour Ken V's analysis rather than Royalistflyer's. Unfortunately treaties were signed in the mid 90s to defend the Ukraine in return for the Ukraine handing back the nuclear weapons it had acquired from the Russians. These treaties remain in force, so if they mean anything should we help the Ukraine?

I'm afraid Royalistflyer I cannot agree with your analysis that there are no parallels between Hitler and Putin, they are so obvious for the following reasons:-
1. Loss of prestige in the world albeit by the loss of a cold war rather than a hot war

2. Loss of territory.

3. A financial crisis and in this case mediated by the EUs sanctions and a fall in oil prices. his one stranglehold is gas supplies to the Ukraine and the west, for which he has demand payment in hard currency and that's not the euro.

4. An increase in armed forces spending.

5. He cannot afford to lose 'face'.

6. The older generation and armed forces/security services will be on his side.

Read Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising, well worth it. Time-scale maybe a bit out but very possible.

[NutLoose]

I do wonder how Putin will handle the future President Trump turning the Crimea into a golf course and hotel complex

[ORAC]

"........a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war."

Neville Chamberlain - 1938

[OFBSLF]

So where is the West's 'line in the sand'? Russia just keeps nibbling away at territories on their borders, and all we seem do is send a strong Note which they ignore.

I think it is similar to Obama's red lines about chemical weapons usage in Syria:

http://www.aim.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/obama-red-line-cartoon.jpg

[AreOut]

they just follow Turkey, Turkey enters Syria - they enter Georgia

[Lonewolf_50]

ORAC:
Regarding your quote and the Peace in Our Time sound byte ...

Neville Chamberlain said such things in public, but I wonder at what his private views were when he consulted with his cabinet.

I have seen posted on JB some points that he was aware of Hitler getting to be a problem and realized that he needed time to mobilize. So, he stalled for time. In some ways, I'd see these utterances so often quoted as a bit of a smoke screen, for both domestic and foreign consumption.

This plays into how that whole Phony War played out once Adolf and Joe Stalin had partitioned Poland. Neither the French nor the Brits were ready in 1939, so they obviously weren't ready in 1938.

[West Coast]

Aren't you the one admonishing posters to stay on topic?

Anyway, finish it out. Did Britain use the time after the Munich Agreement wisely? Was it a rather lackluster buildup of expeditionary and defensive forces? I'd say it was. A one trick pony, relying on the RN mostly.

[KenV]

I have seen posted on JB some points that he was aware of Hitler getting to be a problem and realized that he needed time to mobilize.Not to put too fine a point on it, but Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement on Sept 30, 1938. Britain declared war on Germany on Sept 03, 1939, so just under one year later. So he did not buy much time, and during that year seems to have accomplished precious little in the way of "mobilizing" Britain.

And if it was his intention to mobilize for war, might I add that the following Chamberlain statements would seem to make rallying a nation to mobilize for war exceedingly difficult: The settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace. This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you: ' ... We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.
My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Go home and get a nice quiet sleep.

[Royalistflyer]

I must say that I have a very low tolerance for Americans – especially the variety which “knows everything” much better than we do about our own patch of the world or our own history.
I do have a good deal of experience at fairly senior level, advising Prime Ministers, running advisory groups for government etc.
My knowledge of Russia in its present incarnation is gained from my ongoing involvement with the whole process and the assessing of Russia's intentions.
I realise there are Americans in the defence industries particularly who like/need to beat up the Russian bogey man in order that business with their government remains at a high level. They would like to get Europeans/UK worried about Russia too for the same business reasons. There are other Americans who just pine for the good old days of the cold War.
Unfortunately we at present have ministers in the UK government who for several questionable reasons are only too ready to trot along Blair-like after the Americans.
I repeat, the realistic assessment of Putin is that he will stop at the Dnieper and that will be the ultimate boundary. It is the natural boundary for the Russians, beyond that there is nothing that they want.
The question of a Byelorus-Kaliningrad corridor is somewhat more open, whether the Russians consider it vital is a much more open question. Opinion seems to be that their sable rattling at the Baltic states is mainly intended to keep them quiet.
Russia certainly doesn't want a war with the west or with the nations of Europe. It is not in accordance with her intentions.
As far as Georgia is concerned, the thinking is that Russia wants to do nothing more than scare Georgia into not throwing her lot in with America. Russia wants Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan as a buffer zone.
Turkey is a very interesting question. Opinion is that Russia would like to woo Turkey away from NATO. Turkey and particularly its present government feel profoundly rebuffed by Europe and have turned somewhat back to their religious roots. Russia for her own historical reasons and at the behest of internal pressure would like to do a deal with Turkey. However this has nothing to do with defence or threat.
Russia has to satisfy itself that there is no threat from the west – and we need to understand that Russia's feelings of threat are not necessarily to us rational – in order for her to turn her attention to the east. Russia knows very well that her future lies in the east.
I am sure all-knowing American experts will insist that I and those I represent are wrong, but I'm afraid their opinions aren't the ones that count.
We in the UK need to stop running after the Americans and start looking to our own defences – our own interests. We stupidly allowed ourselves to be massively duped over the whole carrier debacle, we need to wake up and start acting like responsible adults. We need an RAF that is capable of asserting our interests (not those of anyone else). We need a strong RAF and a strong RN - as an island nation that is basic.

[ORAC]

Russia knows very well that her future lies in the east.

Russia and China fuel Asia’s other ‘Great Game’ (http://www.thecommentator.com/article/6022/russia_and_china_fuel_asia_s_other_great_game)

Russia and China fuel Asia's other 'Great Game' (http://asia.nikkei.com/Viewpoints/Geopolitico/Russia-and-China-fuel-Asia-s-other-Great-Game)

[Chugalug2]

RF:_
I am sure all-knowing American experts will insist that I and those I represent are wrong, but I'm afraid their opinions aren't the ones that count.Nor, I sincerely hope, are yours. The UK USA alliance has waxed and waned over the years, possibly waning rather more in recent years, but at least it is one with a global view rather than the parochial one that you espouse. That is more typical of our Continental cousins, "If they are not invading us from the East then they are invading us from the West", as a Belgian colleague once observed.

We are more than an island, we are one with global responsibilities still and an historic ability to look to who threatens those arrangements. Putin is one such threat. Above all we trade with the World, and the Pax may no longer be Britannica but is essential nonetheless.

Please tell me that the list of Prime Ministers that you have advised doesn't include the present one...

[Royalistflyer]

Advising a Prime Minister is one thing. Getting heard through the cacaphony of those in the party with vested financial interests, and those outside with similar interests is quite another thing. Both this Prime Minister and his predecessors have been given excellent advice by several advice organisations, but corruption trumps all.

I am by no means advocating a parochial little Britain approach. On the contrary I advocate a world role - but one that we and our Old Commonwealth partners want. Not the juvenile "world policeman" role that Americans seem to want. Their middle east "approach" (one cannot dignify it with the term "policy") is the most disastrous and we have trotted along with them.

[Chugalug2]

Have we asked what
"our Old Commonwealth partners want"? I rather suspect that they would laugh in our face if we were to suggest it was to cut off their own association with the "juvenile world policeman" in favour of a return to the bosom of the mother country. "Time has passed by", as Peter Sellars famously observed, "and so shall we".

I am not suggesting that the USA is above criticism, far from it. At times their State Department makes "Feet of Clay" look like an aspiration. They certainly saw their chance and took it to force us out of our colonial domination to being a compliant partner to their own Pax Americana. All that granted, but they believe in Capitalism and Trade. So do we if we know what's good for us. Those may share with Democracy the contempt of some, but I know of no other systems that work better, certainly for this little speck in an ocean of fear.

As to the 11 months in 38/39 , we survived what came after. That was all that we could hope for, that was all that was wanted of us then. Of course we made mistakes, democracies launched against their will into World War always will, on land, on sea, and in the air. So did the USA. But we survived, and made possible thus the liberation of Europe and American post-war domination.

You see, you owe it all to us! ;-)

[Royalistflyer]

I am sure you are privy to the conversations of Stephen Harper, John Key, Tony Abbot - all Conservatives by the way. You might just find that their non-public view of the USA and its "leadership" isn't quite what you think. I am talking about a 2015 approach - as equals with common interests and common needs.

[Chugalug2]

So, the Premiers of Canada, New Zealand, and Australia have strong reservations about USA "leadership" ? So join the club! It would be strange if it were otherwise.

USA leadership was strongest when its various Alliances were faced with a common external threat, ie the Soviet Union and the Cold War. I shouldn't worry too much; if Al-Qaeda and ISIS doesn't do it sufficiently for them, Vlad will obligingly make up the short-fall.

I repeat, with all its shortcomings, USA leadership of its various alliances kept the Cold War from going Hot. As others have said, they will have to ensure the same result if we are now to have Cold War II.

Unless of course you were alluding to other Commonwealth pre-occupations, like Republicanism?

[Heathrow Harry]

The only place anyone ever mentions the Commonwealth is in the UK - our old colonies really aren't that interested in an Empire that disapeared by the end of the 1960's...............

[Royalistflyer]

Do please stop being silly. No one today is talking about "empire" or "mother country" What we are talking about at various levels is trade and defence - our common areas of interest as equals on the world stage. Try to understand the world has indeed moved on - to a point where the trade and defence issues are of common interest to Canada, Australia and UK.

There will be no Cold War II unless it is with China. And in that possibility it will in all probability at least initially be a Pacific/Asian problem and we have no idea how that will align.

It may be China against USA/India/Australia/Japan ...... in which case my betting is that Russia will quietly embark upon a major far eastern infrastructure/industry build up.

[Chugalug2]

Silliness is in the eye of the beholder. Your stance looks pretty silly from where I am, RF. What trade and defence issues do we hold in common with Canada, Australia and New Zealand that we don't have in common with the USA? The main dynamic of your stance seems to be :-
that I have a very low tolerance for Americans well OK, but don't expect a great thronging to your idiosyncratic version of realpolitik based on such bias.

[Royalistflyer]

Funny how you chop and change what you're talking about isn't it?
I was talking about your references to "empire" "mother country" as silly, so you change to something else entirely.
But if you like playing junior assistant sheriff to the USA that's fine - but there are those now coming up who don't want to do that Blair-slobber thing any more.

[Chugalug2]

..and you claim not be be parochial? Whatever the "Special Relationship" might or might not stand for, it's certainly something greater than that pathetic self justifying person. There at least we hold something in common contempt, RF!

[Snafu351]

Knowing Ukrainians who are rather less than keen to be welcomed back to the bosom of mother russia the idea expressed by certain folk that putain should be allowed to take what he wants because he won't take any more is rather stupid, not to say callous. I do wonder exactly how those who express such views would feel if it was their country that was being given away by persons in a far distant land?
Knowing Poles who are rather less keen than certain folk to see putains expansion I also wonder if perhaps certain folk should try seeing events from the perspective of the countries actually being impacted by putains actions rather than bleat that the west must understand things from putains perspective.
Frankly **** putain, bullies only ever understand one thing, a good hard punch on the nose. Then you can start giving them all the love they so clearly need. Although in putains case that probably involves little children so perhaps not.

[Chugalug2]

Snafu, while I empathise with the Ukrainians (and indeed with your viewpoint) one should only go to war (which you seem to suggest that "we" should be prepared to do) either for one's own security or for those that we are obliged to by treaty. AFAIK no such treaty exists in Ukraine's case, though evidently a "promise" was made. That would equate to the worthless bit of paper that Chamberlain famously read from, I'm afraid.

I agree that we should stand firm against Russian expansion, but where and when should be defined by my first paragraph rather than by a sense that we should do something, anything. If that coincides with Ukraine then we need to make such a Treaty with it now, so that there is no doubt about our intentions, for doubts and misunderstandings start wars more surely than legal obligations do. If Putin wants war he will get his way I'm afraid, just as was the case with Hitler.

BTW, I see far more in common between Putin and Hitler than Putin and Stalin . The former two both bent on pursuing aggressive expansion, the latter only after beating back the aggressors to their own territory.

[West Coast]

Royalistflyer

Is your point that you think Putin's over reach regarding Ukraine and Georgia is acceptable or that you dislike the US having an active role in opposing it?

Which do you dislike more?

[Royalistflyer]

I think that Russia's actions in the Ukraine are understandable and insofar as all they want is east Ukraine up to the Dneiper, yes its acceptable. East Ukraine is largely populated with Russian speaking ethnic Russians, and historically it was Russian territory.
As far as Georgia is concerned, I have doubts about the tactics, but I believe that Russia is not keen to take over Georgia. I think it is trying to warn Georgia off aligning with the west. I think that it is somewhat heavy-handed and anyway - I very much doubt that any western country could do anything if Russia did move into Georgia.
I think I've said before - if we leave Russia alone and stop imagining that it is somehow the USSR revisited, we will have no trouble. What I fear most is being dragged into a macho American confrontation - which America does not have the capacity to win.

[West Coast]

You're operating theory is based on a lot of uncertain opinion of what Putin's ultimate goal is yet somehow you are certain enough to condemn the US despite it being but one voice in the opposition.

I do believe you're right about the West's actions if Georgia was taken over by Putin. Europe has a long history of appeasement. The question is, where does the level of apathy end, with a NATO country under his dominion?

[Lonewolf_50]

Not the juvenile "world policeman" role that Americans seem to want. Even though most Americans don't want that role, you were happy to trot that out in your next round of Yank bashing.

Thanks for sharing.

Back to Russia: I'd like to believe that the Dniepr is the limit of Putin's security concern. Won't pretend to know. Regarding the Georgia buffer concept, IIRC that goes back to old imperial Russian policy.

Turkey and Russia cutting some new deals ... I'd be surprised if they don't.

Wooing Turkey away from NATO: how is that in Turkey's interest?

@West Coast: The question is, where does the level of apathy end, with a NATO country under his dominion? Georgia isn't a NATO member (http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/nato_countries.htm).

(I may have misunderstood what you were saying there ... )

[air pig]

Here is a copy of the Budapest Memorandum, it fairly ties the UK/USA into the situation.

http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2014/eirv41n08-20140221/34-35_4108.pdf

[West Coast]

Yes LW, you misunderstood, Georgia isn't but there are plenty others nearby that are and are understandably nervous. Funny enough, they seem to welcome the US involvement, those with a geographic comfort zone see it otherwise.

[Royalistflyer]

I seriously doubt that Putin would be silly enough to take on a NATO member - that would be stupid.

I think he wants his western borders secured so that he can turn east - that is far more concerning for him.

He has real worries about moslem extremists in the south and about Chinese intentions in Siberia. Siberia is where much of Russia's future wealth lies.

What seems to be unrecognised by many people is that the last thing that Russia wants is a big scale shooting war - it has far too much work to do in the east exploiting its resources there. If it does that right, Russia's people will become very prosperous.

Russia has more than enough territory for its people right now. It is at the point that America was in the 1850s - it needs to send its young men to the wild east to make their fortunes there.

Of course Putin portrays himself in a certain macho way - he knows his own people and he plays to that - just as American politicians do. But it is a mistake to follow the media portrayal. Any intelligence operation will tell you that his private life is very different and that it belies the appearance of aggressive behaviour. Yes Putin attends church officially and one can dismiss that. But he also attends privately his own local church without an entourage or press. The man is not what so many people think he is.

(If I could put a picture in I would - but I can't for the life of me see how to get a picture from my desktop into a post here - if anyone can tell me how I would be grateful.)

[Chugalug2]

RF, you have to open an account with the likes of photobucket.com etc, there your pic acquires a URL which you can then download onto your post, by using the icon that looks like an envelope (but is supposed to represent a photograph). Persist and your patience will be rewarded!

[Royalistflyer]

Many thanks

[Lonewolf_50]

He has real worries about moslem extremists in the south and about Chinese intentions in Siberia. Siberia is where much of Russia's future wealth lies. The US and Russia seemed to have a common cause on that score, for a brief while after 9-11. The opportunity to use that as a "something we have in common" and build bridges has been either let go, or wasn't strong enough to overcome whatever else it is that we grate on each other about.

[West Coast]

I don't know if Putin is that stupid or not. I assume till proven otherwise that you plan for a worst case scenario. Bluster or not, he has made it known he could take on Poland, Romania and the Baltic states in short order. You cannot discount his words, especially given his road trips into other former Soviet satellites. He has threatened the Swedes. The Finns are nervous. About the only ones with the time and safety in terms of distance to spin this into a US slagging are in old Europe, living under the nuclear umbrella. If you can simply write it off as Vlad banging the drums for effect, well you better be right.

I'd rather be prepared and happy to admit I was wrong, than not to be and say I got it wrong.

Do you not find it curious that those in places such as Poland and others looking across the border at Putin's army are quite happy that the US and others are doing at least something and yet you have the luxury of reletive safety to complain about the guy who didn't invade the Ukraine or Georgia? Who has it right, you or them?

[Chugalug2]

West Coast, I agree in the main with your riposte to Royalflyer. Given his background and his arbitrary way of disposing of those who seek to oppose him or merely stand in his way, I wouldn't trust Putin to see me across the road.

The mystery of the "real" leader is as old as the world. Hitler was supposedly above all the horrors perpetrated by his regime. "If only The Fuhrer knew!", was heard often in Germany. He knew all right, and directed most of it. So it is with Putin. Certainly church attendance can be of no reassurance. It was in his own Catholic church as a choirboy that Hitler discovered the swastika motif that was to be daubed by his brutish regime from the Atlantic Coast to (nearly!) Moscow.

Putin has an agenda, and only he really knows what it includes, but it will be bad news for us all unless we head it off at the pass.

What I do cavil at though is your swipe at "Old Europe", by which I guess you mean Western Europe. You rightly complain of RF's sweeping condemnation of "Americans" and respond in similar vein against "Old Europeans". If you include the UK in that condemnation I am doubly offended, because I for one do not consider myself European, let alone an old one! Famously approximately 3.9M voters (13% of the votes) seemed to share my Eurosceptic views, by voting UKIP in the UK General Election (not that it got us anywhere). Europe is not a country but a con-trick in its guise as the EU. Rail against that and you will have my blessing. Depend upon it (as your government appears to) and you will end up wishing that you had not.

[NutLoose]

I always thought Georgia was his toe dipping time, and we failed miserably in our response, Perhaps if the response had been more robust, putting NATO troops on the ground at the same time as returning their peace keeping troops and confronting Putin, things might well have been different now, I do feel sorry for them and feel the west who encouraged them let them down big time.
It would have shown Putin that invading his neighbours was a no no and would have hopefully have put paid to his future plans, having allowed him to get away with Georgia he was confident that even though accords had been signed to protect the Ukraine, the west would do squat, there was a lot of rhetoric and talk of ramping up sanctions, but what it needed in those early days was Nato troops on the ground in the Ukraine...

Just my view...

[Just This Once...]

I seriously doubt that Putin would be silly enough to take on a NATO member - that would be stupid.

I hope you are right. Last time I looked NATO was a treaty that assured military assistance if a signatory's sovereignty was threatened.

Not that dissimilar to the treaty we had with Ukraine, but Russia went in anyway and the other signatories did not intervene militarily.

So do we have an agreed list of treaties that we really mean and those that are just optional? If so, is this list shared with Russia so there is no chance of a misunderstanding?

:(

[Toadstool]

Perhaps the idea would be to station peacekeeping troops under the guise of NATO in eastern Ukraine.

This would be in the hope that it would not be in Russia's best interest to aggregate the situation and kill western peacekeepers.

I would't like to be those guinea pigs though!!

If something were to happen, what would be the next step? We are war weary after Iraq, Afghanistan and now ISIL.

[Chugalug2]

Well nor I, Toadstool! Thanks to Air Pig we can see the "solemn and binding" undertaking that Russia, USA, and UK made with the Ukraine. We (ie the signatories) will not invade, blockade, or lay sanctions on Ukraine providing it keeps to the terms laid down. If there is any infringement of this agreement it is to be referred by the signatories to the UN Security Council. Can anyone spot the slight flaw (from Ukraine's p.o.v.) with this arrangement?

They were sold a pup, I'm afraid, and unless we (NATO, "the West", the USA, the EU?) enter into a real treaty with them, they are on their own and probably know that already.

Certain other Eastern European countries are more fortunate, sheltering under the protection of NATO membership. That is where push will come to shove. That is when the British ambassador will no doubt deliver that final note, with war following with the mid-day pips, if indeed Putin turns out to be "that stupid".

[Royalistflyer]

I think that Putin will let the eastern Ukrainians (with lots of relatively indirect help) do the heavy lifting to get away from the Ukraine. Certainly he will put lots of special forces in and anti-aircraft systems. 90% of Ukraine's heavy industry, metal production is east of the Dnieper - that's what he wants back because it was largely Russian-developed. It was a fair percentage of Russia's industrial base. THat's why I say that once he gets to the natural border of the Dnieper, he will stop because there's no point in going further.

If Georgia tones down its squeals to the west, I suspect that he will stop where he is there.

Wooing Turkey away from NATO may be considered as a good idea by some of the elements coming to the fore in Turkey. Turkey is facing the likelihood of much domestic turmoil unless the government changes its ways. Anti-western elements, quiet for so long are now coming out and indeed inside the government. NATO needs Turkey more than Turkey needs NATO - it took us an effort to get a base there and Turkey has never been entirely in favour.

History definitely counts. ALL of this area has long history and long memories. I think that American planners simply ignore/don't understand that. Turkey and Russia actually have more in common than you might think, and Russia understands the Turks better that the US does. I said that their efforts in Turkey may have nothing to do with defence, and I think I am right. There are lots of things about Russia (and Turkey for that matter) that westerners simply do not understand and discount.

Western secularists may laugh at my next statements as much as they like. They may counter with their secularist views, but they would be wrong to do so:

The Orthodox Church in Russia was for centuries the deeply ingrained core of Russia - more than anything else. That Church survived 80 years of communist rule - and bounced back incredibly from 3,000 parishes in 1989 to 30,675 parishes today.

You doubt that Putin could be KGB and a Christian? But he is, we even know who his private confessor is, we know his local parish and we know his private attendance there and his part in mending ecclesiastical disputes. Consider Dmitry Medvedev, he converted to Orthodox Christianity while a student in communist Russia - hardly a good career move, but it does indicate genuineness.

Do not underestimate the ingrainedness of Orthodoxy in Russians - its there and the west would be stupid indeed to discount it. It would also be stupid to try to liken Putin and Medvedev to Hitler or anyone else. Unless you understand his real motivation, you will miscalculate. He is definitely not a "USSR Expansionist" there will be no new "Cold War" what Putin is - is a deeply religious, passionate nationalist who wants his country behind secure borders in the west and in the east. His methods may not suit western secularists or effete politicians, but you would do well to understand that his passion is Russian-ness in Russia. It is most definitely not world or European domination.

[ORAC]

I think that Russia's actions in the Ukraine are understandable and insofar as all they want is east Ukraine up to the Dneiper So why is it that when discussing the region, the term used by Putin and his cohorts is "Novorossiya (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/04/18/understanding-novorossiya-the-latest-historical-concept-to-get-worried-about-in-ukraine/)", and the Russian support for Transnistria? (http://www.sott.net/article/296916-Transnistria-asks-Putin-for-protection-from-external-threats)

If the pressure on Mariupol (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11795563/Michael-Fallon-warns-Ukraine-war-remains-red-hot-as-he-pledges-more-British-military-help.html) continues and Putin finally pushes on to Odessa and a land corridor to Crimea and Transnistria, would you still consider him justified for 'historical" and security reasons? :hmm::hmm:

[Lonewolf_50]

From ORAC's Mariupol link ...
'We are standing shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine while its borders are still threatened, for as long as its borders are threatened...'
- Michael Fallon, Defence Secretary He was referring to the training mission to the Ukraine.

Interesting little tidbit ... in 1961, on today's date, 13 August, the Berlin Wall went up.

[KenV]

I think I've said before - if we leave Russia alone and stop imagining that it is somehow the USSR revisited, we will have no trouble

Almost exactly what Chamberlain said about Adolf: "If we leave Her Hitler alone and stop imagining he has large expansionist ambitions, we will have no trouble." As for Russia being "the USSR revisited," no it's not. But Putin clearly wants to recapture the glory of the old Soviet days. The question is how much of the old soviet glory is he seeking. You claim "all they want is east Ukraine up to the Dneiper", but have nothing to support your claim. Everyone assumed all Adolf wanted was the German speaking portions of Europe. Everyone was proved wrong when Adolf took all of Czechoslovakia, and not just the German speaking portion. And in this case Adolph had signed an accord explicitly stating that's "all he wanted". The accord turned out to be worthless, but we don't even have that from Putin.



I think that Russia's actions in the Ukraine are understandable... Yeah, Adolf's actions in Rhineland, then the Saar Basin, then Austria, and then Sudetenland were also "understandable". And led to WW2.

And no, as an American I'm NOT demanding the UK or anyone else to declare war. I am suggesting that the signs are very ominous and call for at least two actions:
1. tough economic sanctions against Russia
2. increased military preparedness

I don't see either happening.

[t43562]

Turkey and Russia actually have more in common than you might think, and Russia understands the Turks better that the US does. I said that their efforts in Turkey may have nothing to do with defence, and I think I am right. There are lots of things about Russia (and Turkey for that matter) that westerners simply do not understand and discount.I'm in Turkey now and I'm not seeing it. This is a country where hordes of newly-educated but still close-minded people in the East are voting for religious conservatives. They are also pouring into the big cities. This is making things difficult for the far more open-minded, less religious types in the other side of the country to maintain the Ataturk-inspired western-modelled democracy.

Neither side, however, appears to have any interest in the Russians at all apart from their gas. Even though Ukraine is not far away, it is still a matter of 0 interest to anyone here.

European issues in general are of little concern and people don't know about them. There are quite enough things to be worried about to the South and East.

The former communists, such as my in-laws, are all busy making money and buying second flats. Some proclaim themselves atheists to be shocking. The situation now is one where people have to work very hard but they are "making it". So it's not a great time for Russians to come along and exploit some ideological issue.

The Turks I speak to say "we favour the Americans then the Russians then back again - we are on our own side and our job is to play the great powers off against each other."

Plus the Russians support Assad, enemy #2, and that doesn't help them.

[Royalistflyer]

Mr KenV's response pretty well typifies the American thinking - a total lack of understanding of Russia. I tried to point out in my previous post where and how we should be looking, but I doubt it would have any effect on Americans and others intent of the "evil Putin" stance.

Sanctions? Seriously? Do you even understand what the sanctions have done? Very little. Without the simultaneous oil price drop they would have achieved virtually nothing. Now oil has picked up a little.

More to the point the sanctions have somewhat played into Putin's hands. He had previously been trying to rebuild Russian local production and guide away from excessive imports, without much success. Now he has been able to ban much imported food and other items, so economic sanctions have less bite - and more to the point, they have encouraged local entrepreneurs to start producing local import substitution goods - exactly what Putin had been trying to do.

So good thinking America - that did lots to help.

I'm sorry, but so long as America - and to a lesser extent Britain misunderstand Russia's true motivation, then they will fail to have any effect on Putin's plans in Ukraine.

Have you not noticed that France and Germany are very unenthusiastic about these American-led sanctions. “What he wants is to remain influential. What Mr. Putin wants is that Ukraine not become a member of NATO. The idea of Mr. Putin is to not have an army at Russia’s borders.” That was President Hollande's statement.

You might want to try understanding that America's black and white take on the world is not shared elsewhere.

[ORAC]

Sanctions? Seriously? Do you even understand what the sanctions have done? Very little. Without the simultaneous oil price drop they would have achieved virtually nothing. Now oil has picked up a little.


There are those who are financial experts who would disagree with you...

The Streetwise Economist: Hey, It’s August: The Russian Economy Imitates the Kursk (http://streetwiseprofessor.com/?p=9509)

FT: Russia is in trouble as energy prices fall (http://blogs.ft.com/nick-butler/2015/08/09/russia-in-trouble-as-energy-prices-fall/)

[Royalistflyer]

Read the last two sentences of what you quoted

[t43562]

A Putin-like person will always turn whatever you do into "an attack" and blast the propaganda at his people. It's pathetic to think that there is any way to appease people like that or neutralise their version of the truth within their borders.

They understand weakness though, because they got into their positions by exploiting it a lot.

[air pig]

RF, it's when Putin turns the gas off to Western Europe and the Ukraine is when life become difficult.

[ORAC]

Actually Air Pig, the last few years have been spent getting around that problem. Ukraine is now getting gas reverse fed from its neighbours. One of the reasons Gazprom is in trouble is their sales to the West are plummeting and they don't have the funds or expertise for lines to new markets in the East.

How Russian energy giant Gazprom lost $300bn | World news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/07/gazprom-oil-company-share-price-collapse)

Which is why things are getting nasty in Georgia.....


The Heavy-Handed Russian Move Nobody?s Talking About | The Diplomat (http://thediplomat.com/2015/08/the-heavy-handed-russian-move-nobodys-talking-about/)

[KenV]

90% of Ukraine's heavy industry, metal production is east of the Dnieper - that's what he wants back because it was largely Russian-developed. It was a fair percentage of Russia's industrial base. THat's why I say that once he gets to the natural border of the Dnieper, he will stop because there's no point in going further.Good point! That makes perfect sense.

On the other hand.......

90% of Germany's heavy industry in the 1930s was in the Rhineland. Surely Adolf would stop there once he had militarized the Rhineland. Surely. And Sudetenland had a "natural" border. After taking that, surely there would be "no point in going further." Surely.

[Chugalug2]

RF:-
Read the last two sentences of what you quoted Words to the effect that the writer doesn't see Putin being ousted from power as there is no-one else who is capable of taking his place? Hardly a wringing endorsement for your man. I find another statement in the main article:-

http://streetwiseprofessor.com/?p=9509

far more compelling, that Russian workers have the lowest productivity in Europe, being only 50% of the average, and 30% below Greece! That is an economy going to hell in a hand-basket, and the kind of thing that sends autocrats to war.

Why you keep harping on about his faith, the Orthodox Church, and how it is important that we understand that, I just don't understand. Plenty of tyrants have boasted exemplary church (or whatever other religious buildings) attendance, especially in Latin America. I wouldn't suggest that their torture chambers, execution blocks, or labour camps were any more salubrious than those of their agnostic co-tyrants.

This man has form and soon has to pull myriad rabbits out of many hats. We need to be ready for that.

[ORAC]

I note RF has decided not to reply to my question at post #81.......

[NutLoose]

Hmmm, that's not good

Russia and Nato 'actively preparing for war' - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11797351/Russia-and-Nato-actively-preparing-for-war.html)

[ORAC]

Further to my question to RF about Mariupol.... Funny old thing....

The Times today: Ukraine rebels are preparing for war

Russian-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine have cancelled all military leave and are mobilising for “full combat readiness”, a Kremlin-run television station reported. The announcement came hours after President Putin summoned his prime minister, defence minister and security chiefs for an emergency meeting as fighting flared in the region.

Ukraine has blamed the upsurge in violence on pro-Russian forces, claiming that Ukrainian troops were under increasingly intense fire from heavy weapons, banned under a treaty signed in Minsk last February. “The shelling is carried out around the clock using large-calibre artillery and multiple launch rocket systems, prohibited by the Minsk agreements,” Oleksander Turchynov, the head of Ukraine’s national security and defence council, said yesterday. “During the day, the enemy carried out 153 artillery attacks.”.......

Zvezda, a television network run by the Russian ministry of defence, reported claims that the self-proclaimed separatist “Donetsk People’s Republic” was preparing for combat readiness. It quoted the republic’s envoy to the peace talks, Denis Pushilin, who said war could flare up at any moment. All leave has been cancelled for the rebel-backed soldiers throughout August so they can be deployed at short notice.

In a report issued on Wednesday night, the OSCE said it had discovered several empty storage facilities, where rebels must keep their heavy weapons in accordance with the peace treaty.........Observers said they had watched a column of rebel selfpropelled howitzers moving towards the front line until insurgents opened fire on them. Ukraine said five regular army soldiers had been killed and another 42 wounded since militia troops launched a tank assault last Monday on Ukrainian fortifications outside the village of Starohnativka, between the rebel capital Donetsk and the government port of Mariupol..........

[BossEyed]

Hmmm...

Russian warplanes used practice bombs with “To Berlin!” and “For Stalin” slogans during Baltic drills (http://theaviationist.com/2015/08/14/inscriptions-on-russian-navy-bombs/)

http://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/P-50SH-bomb-706x470.jpg

http://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/AN-26-bomb.jpg

[ORAC]

Kremlin Elite Engaged In Search For Putin’s Replacement, Piontkovsky Says (http://www.eurasiareview.com/13082015-kremlin-elite-engaged-in-search-for-putins-replacement-piontkovsky-says-oped/)

Both Vladimir Putin’s plans for Ukraine – his initial one of absorbing much of Ukraine and his “Plan B” of having the West force Ukraine into agreeing to make concessions– have failed, Andrey Piontkovsky says; and “the interests of Putin and his closest entourage” now “seriously diverge", with the latter searching for his replacement.

In a comment for Apostrophe.com.ua (http://apostrophe.com.ua/article/world/ex-ussr/2015-08-13/v-rossii-nashli-zamenu-putinu-vse-re****sya-v-blijayshie-nedeli/2095), the Russian analyst says that the only things Putin can try is to step up his aggression or stage a provocation to prompt the West to desert Ukraine. If he does the former and tries to seize Mariupol or a land corridor to Crimea, the West has said it will increase sanctions and sell lethal arms to Ukraine. “But this is not all the West’s response could be,” Piontkovsky continues. Other options include: “the seizure of the accounts of Russian officials and oligarchs in Western banks, stepping up the pressure against Moscow regarding the shooting down of the Malaysian airliner, the Litvinenko murder and a mass of other things.”

But not increasing his acts of aggression also constitutes a threat to Putin “as a man responsible for a serious foreign policy defeat.” He thus doesn’t want to back down, but for his entourage, “military escalation is absolutely unacceptable for Putin’s entourage and for the majority of the Russian political establishment.” Those people “understand perfectly well that this will lead to their loss of billions of dollars and to the rapid overthrow of the regime,” Piontkovsky says. But if Putin were to suddenly change course, he would in the eyes of those around him be “guilty of a defeat,” and they would desert him.

It is worth remembering what happened to Nikita Khrushchev after the Cuban missile crisis, the analyst continues. “He was forced to pull back after which his days in power were numbered … for the establishment, the lesser evil is to withdraw, part ways with Putin, and establish some kind of peaceful coexistence with the West.”

Members of the Russian elite have been sending signals to the West in this regard for several months, Piontkovsky says. Now, the situation has become more serious; and he suggested that “everything will be resolved already in the coming weeks.” If Putin is going to expand his aggressive actions in Ukraine, he will have to do so in August or September. “October is not the season for a military advance.” But what may be even more likely, the Kremlin leader may try to stage “an enormous provocation” designed to shift the blame on Kyiv and thus cost Ukraine the support it has in the West.

Ukrainian leaders have to be very aware of this danger and act with restraint and care on the battlefield lest they fall into a trap, he says. But at the same time, they need to launch “an aggressive diplomatic offensive.” They must tell the UN Security Council that Moscow is escalating its aggression. What Moscow will do next is “difficult to predict now because the Kremlin ‘top’ is in a panic,” Piontkovsky argues, as shown by Naryshkin’s article (http://www.ibtimes.com/us-plotting-against-russia-russian-state-duma-speaker-says-obama-administration-turns-2046074) on the burning of foodstuffs at the border and Lavrov’s behavior (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2015/08/13/Russian-FM-Lavrov-mutters-salty-language-during-press-conference-with-Saudi-counterpart/1251439476808/) at a press conference after meeting with Saudi officials.

The Russian analyst suggests that “Moscow understands” that it has no really good options in Ukraine and consequently many there are considering what to do in the Russian capital. If his entourage can force Putin out, Piontkovsky says, “the most probable figure” to replace him is Sergey Ivanov. “Formally, [Ivanov] occupies a non-political post as head of the Presidential Administration. Nevertheless, he unceasingly gives interviews to foreign media” in which he portrays himself as someone who could be “a constructive partner for the West.”

“Will Putin’s departure change Moscow’s policy?” Piontkovsky asks rhetorically, answering that “undoubtedly” it will even though those who will replace him will come out of the same part of the elite he did. And in support of that argument he cites what happened after Stalin died. Stalin’s successors “essentially changed the foreign policy of the USSR,” he writes. “The same thing will happen in our case. A 20th congress of the United Russia Party will take place at which the serious errors of Comrade Putin in the Ukrainian question will be condemned.”

Panic in the Kremlin (http://www.rferl.org/content/panic-in-the-kremlin/27187665.html)

What the West Gets Wrong About Russia (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/13/opinion/what-the-west-gets-wrong-about-russia.html?_r=0)

RUSSIA ECONOMY HITS PERFECT STORM (http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/08/12/stratfor-russia-economy-hits-perfect-storm/)

[rh200]

Its a difficult case, but there could be another angle.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/world/a/29265299/ukraine-creditors-plan-phone-talks-as-debt-deal-eludes-them/

Theres a couple of reasons I believe western troops on the ground both in Georgia and Ukraine. The first is, a I don't believe Russia with take them on, its not politically expedient and their not ready for that.

But at the end of the day, he wants both of them back in his sphere of influence, the best way to do that is to have the people demand it.

As the crisis drags on, the country's can't progress, sooner or later financially they become basket cases, and become ungovernable.

Essentially people want to be left alone to live how they see fit. If feeding their family's and getting the basics means leaning to Russia, they will do that.

At the moment, we have limited time to show dividends that leaning towards Europe is best, if it doesn't, they will go the other way. Ukraine is probably worse off than Georgia. Ukraine has its troops spread out and needs the help of undesirables.

Western troops on the ground effectively allows the country a chance to move on like west Germany after WW2.

[Lonewolf_50]

Western troops on the ground effectively allows the country a chance to move on like west Germany after WW2. OK, so we first conquer Ukraine, occupy it, and rebuild it over two generations while disagreeing with the Russians on how to reunify the place.

That's the analogy to Germany. I don't see a reunification of Ukraine if it formally splits. I think the analogy and model break down on a lot of levels.

Also, I honestly think that deploying troops, specifically American troops, into the Ukraine plays in to Putin's hands politically.

Edit To Add: this is all happening in Europe, so what do the European leading nations think? Are they willing to put their troops into Ukraine? If not, why should Americans do so? I see no reason.

[KenV]

Also, I honestly think that deploying troops, specifically American troops, into the Ukraine plays in to Putin's hands politically.Probably.

On the other hand, American troops are already on the ground in Ukraine. So far they are just providing training. So far.

[Lonewolf_50]

We have mil assistance missions all over the world. A decision to deploy combat formations is what I was referring to.

[Royalistflyer]

I hadn't noticed ORAC's question 81.

Remember the game that Putin is playing in the Ukraine: He is using local separatists to do a lot of the fighting, organise government etc. It's his hope that this will be seen as a local initiative. And there is plenty of local support for this region to become Russian.

While I think that Putin probably will happily stop at the Dnieper, there are a lot of ethnic Russians along the south coast to Odessa. Odessa itself was very Russian. He may not be in a position to stop them from going that far. And I doubt that he would bother stopping them. I do think that in the not too far distant future though, West Ukraine might be able to take back the south coast as far as the Dnieper.

[ORAC]

Not really an answer RF, in fact an apologist evasion by supporting the fiction that the majority of the fighters are separatists rather than Russian troops with all their equipment. The separatists can't advance an inch without Putins backing - and the recent artillery barrages are Russian army fired.

It would seem you suspect I am right about their intentions - and getting the excuses in early. Poor old Putin, he wanted them to stop but no one listens to him anymore.... :{

[rh200]

OK, so we first conquer Ukraine, occupy it, and rebuild it over two generations while disagreeing with the Russians on how to reunify the place.

Bit harsh the conquer bit?

Ukraine and Georgia are both sovereign countries with so called elected governments. They can have defense pacts and foreign troops on their soil if they like. We can supply weapons to them if we like.

At the moment we are doing squat except pouring aid money into a place with no end in site.

Also, I honestly think that deploying troops, specifically American troops, into the Ukraine plays in to Putin's hands politically.

Theres always that chance, but could be negated with the right strategies. Like everything, there has to be a multi-pronged approach. Just huffing and puffing and plonking troops down is not going to work.

his is all happening in Europe, so what do the European leading nations think? Are they willing to put their troops into Ukraine? If not, why should Americans do so? I see no reason.


True, but at the end of the day the Europeans have history of not doing anything until they have no choice, and then requiring outside help at great cost to put right. Now the yanks have history to a particular point as well, not sure if they can be blamed for letting things get out of control ending in world wars though.

If you decide that there is a chance you are going to have to act you have decide when.

1)When its small and you can head it off but little public support.

2) When its getting nasty and is going to be expensive but still with little public support.

3) When you have no choice in the matter and your very existence is at stake but with lots of public support.

I personal prefer number 1. Apparently Merkal has stated she would prefer a economic development solution along the lines of post Germany WW2 model, someone should enlighten her that requires the conditions for that to happen.

We keep moaning about so called superpowers and old ways etc. If you could get enough nations to throw troops in as a buffer then it can be seen as a non yank thing. Now we know that won't happen, but maybe they should stop winging about superpowers and world policeman if their not prepared to step up and help.

[West Coast]

True, but at the end of the day the Europeans have history of not doing anything until they have no choice, and then requiring outside help at great cost to put right.

At first blush most will think you're referring to WWII or earlier when the truth is you only need go back to the 90s to validate the statement.

[Chugalug2]

rh200:-
True, but at the end of the day the Europeans have history of not doing anything until they have no choice, and then requiring outside help at great cost to put right.West Coast:-
At first blush most will think you're referring to WWII or earlier when the truth is you only need go back to the 90s to validate the statement.You might just as well rail against "South Americans" who also inhabit a continent of disunited nations. That was so at the start of WWII, and is just as true of the 90s. The only institution that has ever managed to get the "Europeans" working together in any cohesive way for their combined security was NATO, when they were all faced with a common threat in the Cold War. If Putin ramps up the threat to anything approaching that level again, the only hope for Europe will be once again a revitalised NATO.

There is no such super-state as Europe, and to talk of Europeans just as we talk of Americans is to make a false analogy. The first inhabit nations of different cultures, languages, histories, and beliefs. The second inhabit one nation (the USA) from different cultures, languages, histories, and beliefs. The first will never become the second despite the agenda of a few, and the US in particular needs to take that on board if it is to have any realistic understanding of European realpolitik.

[West Coast]

Chug

I largely agree with your thoughts. One would think that if anything would quickly galvanize political will towards a common goal, it would be genocide in your own backyard. Situations such as Rwanda were tragic but inaction was predictable, that it happened again in Europe was appalling given the resources, proximity and past history. That it took outside influence to force Europe to act collectively is a powerful reminder that despite organizations such as the EU that Europe is far from a singular voice. This even when the stakes were at the highest.

[KenV]

We have mil assistance missions all over the world. A decision to deploy combat formations is what I was referring to.

Agreed. And I understood.

However, the "training forces" providing the "mil assistance mission" are paratroops. In a sense, a "combat formation" is already on the ground in Ukraine.

[KenV]

You might just as well rail against "South Americans" who also inhabit a continent of disunited nations. That was so at the start of WWII, and is just as true of the 90s. The only institution that has ever managed to get the "Europeans" working together in any cohesive way for their combined security was NATO, when they were all faced with a common threat in the Cold War. If Putin ramps up the threat to anything approaching that level again, the only hope for Europe will be once again a revitalised NATO.

The fall of the Soviet Union did not remove any perceived European security threat. Sweden, a long time "neutral" nation and not a member of NATO has leaned harder and harder toward America since AFTER the fall of the Soviet Union. And they are leaning ever harder in that direction, driven in large part by the recent belligerence of Russia.

Here's an interesting interview with the Swedish Defense Chief on that very subject.
The Russia Threat (http://www.defensenews.com/videos/defense-news/tv/2015/08/16/31816271/)

[KenV]

In this interview with the Swedish Defense Chief another interesting analogy surfaced between Herr Adolf of the past and Mr. Vlad of today.
The Russia Threat (http://www.defensenews.com/videos/defense-news/tv/2015/08/16/31816271/)

Both Adolf and Vlad are convinced that the populations of their nations are "morally superior" to the populations surrounding them, thus justifying belligerent or outright hostile actions against their neighbors.

[Chugalug2]

KenV:-
Both Adolf and Vlad are convinced that the populations of their nations are "morally superior" to the populations surrounding them They are not the only ones that feel/felt morally superior, so also those nations that, faced with a showdown between democratic nations and dictator led police states, professed themselves to be neutral. No doubt that neutrality would have rapidly swung in favour of the dictator led police states had they prevailed. The words cake and eat come to mind...

[rh200]

Both Adolf and Vlad are convinced that the populations of their nations are "morally superior" to the populations surrounding them, thus justifying belligerent or outright hostile actions against their neighbors.

Whilst that isn't just their trait, it is an issue that can be used to stoke nationalism.

The Huggly fluffies like to use it to justify all sorts of changes in our societys.

It has been a belief of mine that we in the west are changing to quickly, hence the change in culture across our societies is becoming to great, and causing undue negative social issues.

The problem is, that it makes it harder for outside moderates within our potential enemies to go down our path. The hardliners just have to show a multitude of western media clips to cause disgust amongst whatever it is they are raging against. This is true for the "Islamic" and "Russian" problem.