Matthew Kaminski wrote a very penetrating column that appeared in the Wall Street Journal a few days ago. Guess Ukraine has learned the hard way not to depend on the U.S. for help:
Two decades ago, when the Berlin Wall fell, the West embraced another generation of Eastern Europeans. Ukraine has gotten a different welcoming committee. An economically feeble European Union gorges on Russian energy and dirty money while lecturing Ukraine on Western values but refusing to defend it. Asking for Washington's help against Russian attack, Kiev finds a man "chosen" in the past two presidential elections to get America out of the world's trouble spots.
Vladimir Putin sees a West made soft by money, led by weak men and women, unwilling to make sacrifices to defend their so-called ideals. In the Ukrainian crisis, the image fits. Russia's president is many things, but most of all he is resolute. He took the EU and America's measure and annexed Crimea last month at minimal cost. Ignoring Western pleas for "de-escalation," Russia this weekend invaded eastern Ukraine. Just don't look for video of T-72 tanks rolling across the borders, not yet at least.
Russian intelligence and special forces on Saturday directed local crime bosses and thugs in coordinated attacks on police stations and other government buildings in towns across eastern Ukraine. These men were dressed and equipped like the elite Russian special forces ("little green men," as Ukrainians called them) who took Crimea. Ukrainian participants got the equivalent of $500 to storm and $40 to occupy buildings, according to journalists who spoke to them. Fighting broke out on Sunday in Slovyansk, a sleepy town in the working-class Donbas region that hadn't seen any "pro-Russia" protests. A Ukrainian security officer was killed.
Kiev is on a war footing. Radio commercials ask for donations to the defense budget by mobile-telephone texts. The government's decision to cede Crimea without firing a shot cost the defense minister his job and wasn't popular. Western praise for Ukrainians' "restraint" got them nothing. The fight for Ukraine's east will be different.
This invasion was stealthy enough to let Brussels and Washington not use the i-word in their toothless statements. The EU's high representative, Catherine Ashton, called herself "gravely concerned" and commended Ukraine's "measured response." There was no mention of sanctions or blame. The U.S. State Department on Saturday said that John Kerry warned his diplomatic counterpart, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, that "if Russia did not take steps to de-escalate in eastern Ukraine and move its troops back from Ukraine's border, there would be additional consequences."
By now, the Ukrainians ought to have seen enough to know that they're on their own. Moscow has reached the same conclusion. These perceptions of the West are shaping events.
A month ago, the EU sanctioned 21 marginal Russian officials and quickly tried to get back to business as usual. On Friday, the U.S. added to its sanctions list seven Russian citizens and one company, all in Crimea. What a relief for Moscow's elites, who were speculating in recent days about who might end up on the list. Slovyansk fell the next day
Any revolution brings a hangover. Ukrainians expected problems: an economic downturn, some of the old politics-as-usual in Kiev, including fisticuffs last week in parliament, and trouble from Russia. Abandonment by the West is the unexpected blow. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians fought, and 100 died, for their chance to join the world's democracies.
As an institution, the EU always found excuses to deny Ukraine the prospect of membership in the bloc one day. But Bill Clinton and George W. Bush never recognized Russian domination over Ukraine. Billions were spent—Kiev was the third-largest recipient of U.S. aid in the 1990s—and American promises were made to protect Ukraine's sovereignty. In return, Ukraine took active part in NATO discussions and missions, sending thousands of troops to the Balkans and Iraq.
When Russia invaded Crimea and massed 40,000 or more troops in the east, Ukraine turned to an old friend, the United States, and asked for light arms, antitank weapons, intelligence help and nonlethal aid. The Obama administration agreed to deliver 300,000 meals-ready-to-eat. As this newspaper reported Friday, military transport planes were deemed too provocative for Russia, so the food was shipped by commercial trucks. The administration refused Kiev's requests for intelligence-sharing and other supplies, lethal or not.
Boris Tarasiuk, Ukraine's former foreign minister, barely disguises his anger. He says: "We've not seen the same reaction from the U.S." as during Russia's 2008 attack on Georgia. U.S. Navy warships were deployed off the Georgian Black Sea coast. Large Air Force transport planes flew into Tbilisi with emergency humanitarian supplies. But who really knew for sure what was on board the planes? That was the point. Russian troops on the road to the Georgian capital saw them above and soon after turned back. The Bush administration dropped the ball on follow-up sanctions but may have saved Georgia.
By contrast, the Obama administration seems to think that pre-emptive concessions will pacify Mr. Putin. So the president in March ruled out U.S. military intervention in Ukraine. Maybe, but why say so? Late last month at a news conference in Brussels, Mr. Obama also openly discouraged the idea of Georgia or Ukraine joining NATO.
The next diplomatic "off ramp" touted by the Obama administration will be the negotiations involving Russia, Ukraine, the EU and the U.S. scheduled for later this week. Petro Poroshenko, the leading Ukrainian presidential candidate, tells me that these "talks for the sake of talks" send "a very wrong signal" about the West's commitment to sanctions. It's a case of the blind faith in "diplomacy" undermining diplomacy. See the Obama record on Syria for the past three years.
The West looks scared of Russia, which encourages Mr. Putin's bullying. Rest of column
To think that we supplied England before we entered WWII. Didn't let Hitler and his U-Boats intimidate us. Pitiful.
27 comments:
We got no dog in that hunt. Pushing for Ukraine to eventually join NATO is not dissimilar to putting nukes there. We would not stand for it & blaming Putin for reacting is odd at best. Is Putin an asshole? Yeah. But the West is not right here either.
It's 1939 all over again. Those who fail to learn from history are destined to repeat it. Jews are being forced to register by their Russian "liberators".
Putin better watch out! I heard Obama say "There will be consequences!"
Twenty years ago, Ukraine was the world's third largest nuclear weapons state, behind only Russia and the United States. Then it signed a treaty voluntarily handing over its arsenal to Russia, in exchange for guarantees that Russia would respect its borders.
As the annexation of Crimea has shown, that pledge was worth little. The message received over the past few months by countries bordering the Russian Federation is: If you have nuclear weapons, never given them up; if you don't, try to get the Americans to shield you with theirs.
The pledge was worth little to everyone is the problem. The West pushing for inclusion into the EU was -with respect to a balance of influence in East Europe- little different than Russia's annexation of Crimea.
Everyone needs to be prepared to accept a West Ukraine & East Ukraine (or whatever they call themselves). Or suffer the consequences of a bad, bad kettle of ignorant actions brewing.
Yes, there will be consequences for poking the Bear and the Dragon:a new Sino-Russian empire sitting atop most of world's petroleum energy reserves.
Why would this "construct" nation wish to join the EU with the "porous borders" requirement for admission? It's 1939 Czechoslovakia--that other 1919 Paris Peace Conference"construct" nation-- all over again.
Everyone needs to be prepared to accept ...
Yup, everyone was being told the same back in 1936 went ol' Adolf sent his troops into the Rhineland, and then Austria, then the Sudetenland, then ...
Yup, all those "invaded" ethnic German territories were ceded to the victors at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, then ethnically-cleansed of many of its German citizenry, resulting in the holocaust of millions of German civilians.
Hitler's plans to conduct plebsites in these ceded German territories were rejected.
It's deja vous all over again.
Yes, 9:52. Accept is right, but I do not believe the consequences of pragmatism here are the same as when dealing with Nazi Germany.
Integration of Ukraine into the EU is a disturbance of the balance of power on the continent and believing that Putin is "Hitler" for protecting Russia's interest in the status quo is suspect or a poor understanding of Realism.
No one is advocating sending troops to Ukraine. However, the Ukrainians voted for independence twenty years ago. Even in the majority Russian areas.
What is despicable is not sending them the help they are asking for. They ask for arms, we send food. If the Ukrainians want to fight for their freedom, then we have a moral obligation as a free people to give them the tools to defend themselves without endangering our national security.
April 20, 2014 at 8:04 AM = BINARY thinker
If you want to think of mistakes, think of ending the draft and being left with a volunteer military that leaves us without enough troops to flex our military muscle convincingly!
Both parties were on board with the idea that we can have our cake and eat it too and never thought about guerilla or civil warfare EVEN with the lessons of Vietnam and Russia's experience in Afghanistan.
To those of you who want to send our hi-tech weapons to Syria and the Ukraine, I have a question. What is going to happen if those weapons are captured and our hi-tech advantage begins to disappear a few years from now? Why will this time be different than arming jihadists with RPGs when it was Afghanistan and Russia?
If the EU won't act with us, what exactly are we to do other than flex our economic muscle? How fooled by tough rhetoric with nothing to back it up would Putin be?
Those of you making Chamberlain analogies must think Britain could have won WWII without the US coming in ( and that would have been too late had Russia not engage Hitler with a second front!) Hitler invaded Poland in 1939. We didn't show up with troops until 1942! Y'all seem not to remember Dunkirk but somehow think " standing up" to Hitler in 1938 with Britain and going it alone even with French help would have resulted in Hitler's defeat. Until Pearl Harbor, no President could have gotten us into another European war either!
And, how threatening do you think our economic muscle is? Sanctions are a long term strategy and even then only works when countries have little economic self-sufficiency.
You don't mind the deficit increasing dramatically when we go to war? Economic collapse isn't a worry now?
In THIS era, thanks to our inability to pull together,24/7 news and an election cycle that never ends every weakness we have is exposed. You don't think our internal division doesn't encourage our enemies? Putin doesn't need spies or even tactical models from the past, he needs to watch our " political analysts" on TV!
No one is talking about giving them stinger missiles. However, if we are talking about basic infantry weapons such as rifles, ammo, mortars, etc, then give them to them.
Turn every civilian into a sniper and they can do plenty of damage. See Nazi report on invading Switzerland.
They ask for arms, we send food. If the Ukrainians want to fight for their freedom,...~JJ
Why not a bloodless plebiscite?
Do you really want to introduce arms into this Ukranian Donnybrook ?
9:09 Remember that Hitler declared war not Roosevelt.
Ah, yes, now I see Our Daily Lecturer has arrived!
"However, if we are talking about basic infantry weapons such as rifles, ammo, mortars, etc, then give them to them." Opines Military Stragerist Kingfish.
Why did you omit bows and arrows, derringers and tar pots to pour down on the Russians from atop the forts? Those would come in handy as well.
KF, first of all, Ukraine has an army and a government. This is one country threatening to attack another, not a civil war as yet.
The government isn't asking to arm their citizens with sniper rifles. They want and need military support in weapons and troops.
Perhaps, those in authority in the Ukraine would be smart to ask for the tools of civil war and turn their army and police forces into guerilla fighters.
But, today,to what group are you sending sniper rifles ? What are your logistics here?
Where are the people of the Ukraine with the national identity to fight? Are they joining the army and just waiting for arms to arrive? Are they throwing molotovs and turning out en masse and setting up barricades?
Keep in mind, most Ukrainians lived under Soviet rule and not during the Stalin years.
Good Lord, what is a Stragerist?
Yes 8:26, applying Morgenthau's work to the situation is a really binary (that thur's real splitting, my psychoanalyst would say) thing to do.
Let me guess, you still think invading Iraq (and sacrificing (4,400 American lives-with scores of thousands maimed-not mention the most thousands of innocent Iraqi killed) was "the right thing to do." For democracy of course.
Let me guess, you still think invading Iraq (and sacrificing (4,400 American lives-with scores of thousands maimed-not mention the most thousands of innocent Iraqi killed) was "the right thing to do."
Clinton's Secretary of State and US Ambassador to the UN, Madeleine Albright, said it first to CBS' Leslie Stahl. UN Secetary Kofi Anon said the same and went on to win the Nobel Prize for Peace. Albright is an emigre from that other WWI "construct" state, Czechoslovokia.
April 20, 2014 at 8:23 PM = LOVER of involuntary subjugation
"LOVER of involuntary subjugation"
Under which "subjugation" the subjugated populace injoyed the highest living standards in all the Middle East, including a 98% literacy rate and free medical care.
Right. We'll educate you, provide you with free medical care and summarily kill you on a moment's notice for any reason, real, contrived or other.
I don't know how many anonymous posters are replying to other anonymous posters or what they're referring to - I suspect, a la The Rutles, someone is arguing with himself on this thread, but the rest of us have no idea who is claiming or disputing what. '
Incomprehensible gibberish from people who can't communicate clearly. Time for people to read (or re-read) back issues of The Underground Grammarian by Richard Mitchell.
12:04 PM must be a greenhorn.
Ukranian "anti-terrorist" police gave peace a chance:The En Masse surrender of their AK-47 firing pins to the people.
Meanwhile, tomorrow, POTUS Obama will meet with his Neo-Con advisors to target some poor soul and his extended family in Pakistan or Yemen for an extra-judicial lynching by UAV.
Modern Russia is not Bolshevik Russia.
Post a Comment