5 ms·

You're making it sound like what happened is the fault of Europe and the US. How could you possibly reach such a conclusion? If anything, I believe that the re

You're making it sound like what happened is the fault of Europe and the US. How could you possibly reach such a conclusion? If anything, I believe that the reaction was not aggressive enough and that the mild economic sanctions and ultimatums have been the only thing that prevented a serious escalation of the conflict, a conflict in which I must say, Russia illegally occupied a territory and created the rebels in the east, trampling on the sovereignty of another nation and they did so in your own backyard. This wasn't an ego fight, but a calculated move that would have happened regardless of the western reaction. Because lets be honest, Putin was losing in popularity, there's nothing like a new nationalistic drive to keep an impoverished population in line, plus occupying some territory, while teaching the neighbors what happens when leaving the party does have benefits. I'm also disappointed, but my reasoning is different.

ptaipale 11y ago
What's more, Russia set a precedent of trampling down the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) - the Budapest Memorandum where Ukraine gave away its nuclear weapons in 1993 after USSR collapsed, in exchange for an assurance that others (specifically Russia) will "refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territorial integrity." So, we now know how much worth the NPT is in Russia's eyes. Nothing.
- barry-cotter 11y ago
  Don't forget that the US and UK both guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for that. The lesson from this and what happened in Libya after Gaddafi gave up his chemical weapons is left as an exercise for the reader.
  - ptaipale 11y ago
    So US and UK should have been more aggressive over Russian involvement in Ukraine?
rorykoehler 11y ago
If I recall correctly EU expansionism was the catalyst for all that happened.
- ptaipale 11y ago
  Of course you can call it "EU expansionism" if Ukraine slipping away from Russia's sphere of influence and making a trade deal with EU since it believes this will be in the long-term interests of its people. However, I believe in the right of people and nations to decide their own destinies. A "catalyst" is not a reason, nor is it a justification.
  - rorykoehler 11y ago
    If you look at it from an entirely neutral perspective it is clear provocation. This has nothing to do with democracy. It is pure empire building and it is dishonest to dress it up as anything else. The terms of the trade deal were EU exclusivity and the termination of strong existing Russian ties. This is nothing but provocative. It's reckless and incendiary. Sure I would prefer people to have European values over Russian ones (I'm very happy we just legalized gay marriage in Ireland for example), but not like this. Ukraine is much more Russian culturally than it is European, and if it came to a EU wide referendum I would vote against Ukraine becoming an EU member. I wouldn't be surprised if I am part of the majority in this opinion. The EU, a project I strongly believe in, is struggling to hold itself together as it is without pissing in the hornets nest. We need stronger ties with Russia, not weaker ones. Weaker ties only bring us closer to a hot war and that will help nobody. What happened in Ukraine was a microcosm of what could happen on a much larger scale if we do not act more subtly and inclusively.
    - peterfirefly 11y ago
      If you look at it from an entirely neutral perspective it is clear you are an idiot... or maybe that's not actually such a neutral perspective after all?
      - 11y ago

ptaipale 11y ago

What's more, Russia set a precedent of trampling down the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) - the Budapest Memorandum where Ukraine gave away its nuclear weapons in 1993 after USSR collapsed, in exchange for an assurance that others (specifically Russia) will "refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territorial integrity." So, we now know how much worth the NPT is in Russia's eyes. Nothing.

barry-cotter 11y ago
Don't forget that the US and UK both guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for that. The lesson from this and what happened in Libya after Gaddafi gave up his chemical weapons is left as an exercise for the reader.
- ptaipale 11y ago
  So US and UK should have been more aggressive over Russian involvement in Ukraine?

rorykoehler 11y ago

If I recall correctly EU expansionism was the catalyst for all that happened.

ptaipale 11y ago
Of course you can call it "EU expansionism" if Ukraine slipping away from Russia's sphere of influence and making a trade deal with EU since it believes this will be in the long-term interests of its people. However, I believe in the right of people and nations to decide their own destinies. A "catalyst" is not a reason, nor is it a justification.
- rorykoehler 11y ago
  If you look at it from an entirely neutral perspective it is clear provocation. This has nothing to do with democracy. It is pure empire building and it is dishonest to dress it up as anything else. The terms of the trade deal were EU exclusivity and the termination of strong existing Russian ties. This is nothing but provocative. It's reckless and incendiary. Sure I would prefer people to have European values over Russian ones (I'm very happy we just legalized gay marriage in Ireland for example), but not like this. Ukraine is much more Russian culturally than it is European, and if it came to a EU wide referendum I would vote against Ukraine becoming an EU member. I wouldn't be surprised if I am part of the majority in this opinion. The EU, a project I strongly believe in, is struggling to hold itself together as it is without pissing in the hornets nest. We need stronger ties with Russia, not weaker ones. Weaker ties only bring us closer to a hot war and that will help nobody. What happened in Ukraine was a microcosm of what could happen on a much larger scale if we do not act more subtly and inclusively.
  - peterfirefly 11y ago
    If you look at it from an entirely neutral perspective it is clear you are an idiot... or maybe that's not actually such a neutral perspective after all?
    - 11y ago