Your Preferred Solution to the Crimean Crisis?

[Barrister]

I think the only reason why there are no Russian tanks yet at the Dniepr is that the Russians got surprised by the political and market reactions over the Crimea shit. With bullies like Putin's Russia (or the Soviet Union) you stand up to them, or submit to them. There is no convincing of them with kindness.

Remember that, unlike the Crimea, the weather in the Ukraine at the moment is really bad for military operations: in February-March, the ground tends to thaw during the day (becoming muddy) and freezes at night, trapping vehicles. While in April - early May it's just very muddy and hard to do anything practical in a military sense.

And the idea of the TVs showing pictures of the Russian military struggling to unstuck their armoured vehicles as their advance is turned to a crawl by the weather is hardly appealing for the Kremlin.

Umm, the Russians aren't going to be sending in the tanks rumbling across open fields.

The Ukrainian state is still in partial disarray, including the military.  If the Russians invade, it will be the same as Crimea - they'll just drive in along the roads.

Besides, the weather in, say Kharkiv, seems quite pleasant right now.

http://www.weather.com/weather/tenday/Kharkiv+Ukraine+UPXX0014

[chipwich]

Ukraine should sell Crimea for cash. Perhaps be made to, since Ukraine is nearly bankrupt.

[derspiess]

Ukraine should sell Crimea for cash. Perhaps be made to, since Ukraine is nearly bankrupt.

That was my idea! 

But then it's hard to sell something that's already been stolen from you.

[derspiess]

The Ukrainian state is still in partial disarray, including the military.  If the Russians invade, it will be the same as Crimea - they'll just drive in along the roads.

Then I'd love to see them get bushwhacked like they did in the Winter War.

[Barrister]

The Ukrainian state is still in partial disarray, including the military.  If the Russians invade, it will be the same as Crimea - they'll just drive in along the roads.

Then I'd love to see them get bushwhacked like they did in the Winter War.

I'm not saying that wouldn't be amusing.

But *if* the Russians invade eastern Ukraine, and *if* they are resisted, it will be Euromaidan-style - lots of barricades across important roads, lots of defenders in homemade armour with homemade weapons.

[Solmyr]

The Ukrainian state is still in partial disarray, including the military.  If the Russians invade, it will be the same as Crimea - they'll just drive in along the roads.

Then I'd love to see them get bushwhacked like they did in the Winter War.

Russia won the Winter War. Also, Ukraine is not exactly Finland.

[Martim Silva]

That data doesn't support the notion that we would be starved if we were cut off. Just that we'd have to change our feeding patterns, which is perfectly fine. If food supply became an issue we could also switch from cash crops to edible stuff and there's plenty of abandoned villages over here where one might start cultivating again.

No, it's not 'perfectly fine'.

Remember, we are trying to build a strong Great Power, that can represent European interests in the world without being under the shadow of Washington or Moscow. It wouldn't show great strength to the european peoples if our 'power' resulted in a change of eating habits (like 'less meat' and 'less of a lot of stuff'), even in peacetime. In fact, it would probably anger many people about why are they in the EU in the first place.

Also, we can't be dependent on imports from the other powers if we want to be influent. Otherwise, when we have trouble with Russia, we'd be very dependent on the US. And if we are in a dispute with the US, we'd be at the mercy of Russia. Not a way to go if we want to take our place as a Great Power.

Americans know their country can put food on their table. Russians know this as well. Europeans cannot be sure of it. And that just won't do.

Also, this is just one problem. We have a lot more, besides the political and economic ones (like need of access to oil, gas, rare minerals and other stuff), and they won't go away soon.

But *if* the Russians invade eastern Ukraine, and *if* they are resisted, it will be Euromaidan-style - lots of barricades across important roads, lots of defenders in homemade armour with homemade weapons.

Not exactly. The Eastern Ukraine can easily be taken by road - it's very close, and few if any resistance would occur. But any move beyond Dnepropetrovsk (or even Sumy) would be resisted, and not just by mobs.

We would send all help possible to the Ukraine, and Kiev is already mobilizing what it can - they did try general mobilization of all males 18 to 40, but general logistics eventually dictated that they are now reducing that to a 'National Guard' for now.

That said, that is still some hundreds of thousands of troops, even if lacking in mobility, and be sure that they cannot be dislodged without manouvering outside roads. Not to mention that the weather can easily close this time of the year and deprive the Russians of airpower.

All it shows is that Putin learned from Yeltsin's mistakes and doesn't want a 'Winter War'. Let's just say there is a reason why Yanukovych said he'd be restaured 'soon' to power and why he's doing press conferences in Rostov (where the HQ of the Southern Military District is located).

Needless to say, the crimean referendum is a sideshow - very much a local initiative. If you remember, after the crisis but before the announcement by the crimean authorities, Putin was saying that he defended ukranian territorial integrity.

The basics is that we showed Moscow that we can outfox them in terms of diplomacy and coups. Sadly, the Maidan protesters did not accept just the Feb 21st agreement that we achieved and went full on to depose Yanukovych the next day. That gave us a chance to get all of Ukraine, but also made Moscow feel that they were duped.

So, they will now try to play to their strenghts (military power) instead of their weaknesses (diplomatic manouvers).

Which is why Merkel has just said that the Kremlin is ignoring our proposals for a contact group. 

[Eddie Teach]

Why would Europe and the US be at odds? 

[derspiess]

Russia won the Winter War.

They got smacked around and only gained a tiny bit of territory.  And I doubt the Russians of today would be willing to tolerate a ~50% casualty rate.

Also, Ukraine is not exactly Finland.

Don't ruin it for me

[Barrister]

I have never, ever, heard anyone who supported european integration say that the ultimate goal was to make Europe a "great power".

[Beenherebefore]

I have never, ever, heard anyone who supported european integration say that the ultimate goal was to make Europe a "great power".

I'd think the goal now was to make Europe "a power".

[alfred russel]

Why would Europe and the US be at odds? 

There are issues out there. For example, the labeling of sparkling wine.

[Barrister]

Why would Europe and the US be at odds? 

There are issues out there. For example, the labeling of sparkling wine.

It's called champagne!

[Beenherebefore]

Cava! 

[crazy canuck]

Why would Europe and the US be at odds? 

There are issues out there. For example, the labeling of sparkling wine.

It's called champagne!

Why must you always demonstrate you are from Edmonton when given the chance?

In any event, why would Europe become a superpower by subsidizing even more farmers to be unproductive?