Russian Expansionism

[DGFone]

[quote="VitanisMate"]
Don't forget both Georgia and Ukraine were traditionally under the Russian Empire and under Soviet commissars so Russia sees those lands as belonging to her. Hell, Georgia even has the honor of being the birthplace of Stalin.[/quote]

From what I read, it also meant that Stalin spared Georgia much of the worst of his economic warfare that he waged on the rest of the USSR in the 30s. So in Georgia, he is even remembered somewhat fondly in places.

[SlayerOfLight]

[quote]You mean like America propping up anti-Russian governments in Ukraine and Georgia? Oh yeah the American Imperium has never interfered in anyone's affairs. *sarcasm*[/quote]

I never even denied that. I only said that I'm on none's side and that neither the West or Russia are doing things right. Speaking of America, I'm not a big fan of the U.S neither.

[quote]Don't forget both Georgia and Ukraine were traditionally under the Russian Empire and under Soviet commissars so Russia sees those lands as belonging to her. Hell, Georgia even has the honor of being the birthplace of Stalin.[/quote]

That makes no sense. Just because Ukraine was under Soviet rule doesn't mean Russia has the right to just ''simply'' add Ukraine to her territory. According to your logic that's like saying Turkey has the right to claim Greece because Greece once belonged to the Ottoman empire. Also, I'm pretty sure Russia would do just fine without Ukraine, since they already are the biggest nation in the world anyway. I see no other reason besides greed or power-hunger why Russia would want to rule over Ukraine.

[it means no worries]

^i think it is very symbolic, that bthey can take a foothold in Europe (and the west) at their leisure

[S1mb4 D4 L10n]

[quote="VitanisMate"]Don't forget both Georgia and Ukraine were traditionally under the Russian Empire and under Soviet commissars so Russia sees those lands as belonging to her. Hell, Georgia even has the honor of being the birthplace of Stalin.[/quote]

I agree with the rest here, that argument simply doesn't work.

The Dutch shouldn't have a right to invade Indonesia because of the VOC

The French shouldn't be able to invade Algeria because they were apart of the French empire

Belgium shouldn't be able to invade the Congo.

ETC.

I often see that whenever anyone mentions Russian imperialism, somebody starts talking about how Americans do it too.

Why not criticize both? Clearly Russia's actions in Ukraine cannot be supported by someone who denounces the idea of imperialism.

[juhouh]

All stupid western propaganda. Russia and every country in the world have exactly the same priviledge to help their preferred side on civil wars as NATO does. Why do people actually think Russia attacked Ukraine when they never did so. Stupid sheeps believe in media

[SlayerOfLight]

That's true, It still surprises me how the western media keeps bullsh#tting on how Russia is invading Ukraine without any concrete evidence. Russia is among the most powerful nations, so if they really invaded Ukraine, I don't think they would be too 'scared' to admit the truth since Russia's military power would pretty much run over all our European armies combined.

[Amur_Tiger]

[quote="S1mb4 D4 L10n"]I agree with the rest here, that argument simply doesn't work.

The Dutch shouldn't have a right to invade Indonesia because of the VOC

The French shouldn't be able to invade Algeria because they were apart of the French empire

Belgium shouldn't be able to invade the Congo.

ETC.

I often see that whenever anyone mentions Russian imperialism, somebody starts talking about how Americans do it too.

Why not criticize both? Clearly Russia's actions in Ukraine cannot be supported by someone who denounces the idea of imperialism.[/quote]

Russia invading Ukraine is nothing like Belgium invading Congo. It's more like France invading Brittany ( north-west tip of France ). To say there's cultural, linguistic and historical ties between the two is an understatement. This is made more true by the particular borders Ukraine is drawn with which encompass a lot of land that was never Ukrainian before the USSR. This isn't to say that it's just or legal or anything like that but this is a far cry from classic imperialism abroad.

On the topic as a whole, the Ukraine crisis is made as much in Ukraine as in Moscow/Berlin/Washington, while obviously foreign actors have taken advantage of problems there it's not like Ukraine was a wonderfully functioning country beforehand. It's the second worst economic performer of the post-Soviet countries in spite of having one of the better starting positions and benefiting from many arrangements that were holdovers from the Soviet era for some time. It's worth noting that the three countries that have performed the worst economically of the post-Soviet states are part of GUAM and CIS but none of the other organizations that have tried to tie the post-Soviet states together.

For most of these states this means they sit and suffer with their economic problems but do ( relatively ) little to bother others economically. Ukraine was different, not out of malice but out of desperation and political expedience. Through Ukraine runs the main gas pipeline to Europe, they get paid transit fees for the gas that goes through their country as Russia sells Europe a lot of gas. In the late 90s though Russia started to notice that they were still selling gas to Ukraine for rates set during the Soviet Union, about a quarter of the market rate in Europe, and they started to raise prices to the going market rate. Ukraine, with their terrible economy, could not afford this and started to siphon off gas transiting through their country, in laymen's terms they were stealing. Thus why gas was cut off on a number of occasions and why Nord Stream was built to get around the Ukrainian troubles.

Ukrainian governments during this time tended to oscillate between being fairly hostile to Russia and those who tried to balance the desire to have ties with Russia and have ties with the EU, and so this completely dysfunctional relationship continued. It should be noted that Ukraine's efforts to get into the EU were pretty much stalled at this point due to a mix of political and economic challenges that the EU wanted addressed.

Then political instability started to rear it's ugly head. Now it should be noted that, not unlike Russia, there was a lot of corruption going on the oligarchs were a part of Ukrainian life as much as they were across the border, though lacking a Putin to reign them in. In 2004 this resulted in a rigged election in favor of Viktor Yanukovych, this resulted in the 'Orange Revolution' where street protests in Kiev got the court to order a recount, instead putting Viktor Yushchenko in charge. This was one of those more hostile to Russia and more pro-EU sorts, he served his time in office but his party had a bit of an internal conflict, in particular with Yulia Tymoshenko in the next election he was crushed and eventually someone we know won.... Viktor Yanukovych.

This time though the vote was considered by international observers to be legit and so the same guy that had been rejected due to fraud last time was now in charge, no doubt to the consternation of more then a few. The problem was that like many places political leanings are regionalized and this is more true in Ukraine then many places, South and Eastern Ukraine liked Yanukovych, North and Western Ukraine liked Yushchenko and then Tymoshenko. You might guess which regions favored ties with which bordering nations, east & south with Russia, west & north with EU, what you might not guess is that it was the east & south who were producing the bulk of the country's GDP.

His reign is where the wheels really come off the bus, though not entirely because of his actions as I hope you'll see. First there was joining CISFTA which was a free trade area among many of the post-Soviet states, but at the same time he continued to pursue closer ties with the EU, and in particular an Association Agreement. This came to a head when they chose to put the agreement with the EU on hold until ties with the EU would be sufficient to make up for the losses caused by reducing ties with Russia. Three-way talks between the EU, Ukraine and Russia were proposed and rejected by the EU, the EU pressed for Yanukovych to sign to the agreement but was rejected.

Then Euromaidan kicks off, eventually leading to Yanukovych being 'displaced' from power, to put it kindly, some call this a coup some call it a revolution I call it silly when elections were coming up pretty soon. The west recognizes the new government, Russia doesn't and is awfully ticked at seeing someone they could work with not just removed from power but removed in a completely undemocratic fashion. Needless to say tensions rise.

Euromaidan however was not an all-Ukraine affair, it was generally supported in the North & West, and not supported in the East and South, Kiev is in the first category obviously so now everyone who didn't support the revolution/coup is ticked off as well, further dividing the country. Not helping any of this there's a bunch of very inflammatory rhetoric coming from the new government threatening to do stuff like ban the Russian language. As a Canadian I can imagine how Quebec would feel about banning French, I view this as extremely foolish behavior on the part of the government and in retrospect, yeah, it was definitely just that.

Russia seizes Crimea with troops that were based there ( Russia had an agreement with Ukraine to base soldiers and ships in Sevastopol ) claiming to protect the Russian people living there, close relations between the Russian troops, the Ukrainian troops and the local population insured that this happened with remarkably little bloodshed. Perhaps if the government hadn't given Crimeans such good reasons to be worried then Crimea would still be part of Ukraine.

Eastern Ukraine, which was expecting to see all the downside of a swing towards EU ties in expense of Russian ties and little upside rebelled of their own accord, there was also an attempt in Southern Ukraine that was put down. I'm not sure if Russia was happy or frustrated to see other regions try to join them at the time as it turned their 'fait accomplit' in Crimea into a more prolonged engagement that would only increase tensions and ultimately produce conflict. Unlike Crimea eastern Ukraine was were much of the GDP of the country was generated, letting go was not an option and so rebels fought revolutionaries-turned-government. Russia did make an effort to support the rebels though the extent of such is pretty controversial.

The US got involved after Crimea, mostly because they didn't want the Russians to get the idea that they were allowed to use military force like that, this is also when previous restrictions on IMF loans were loosened up. It's important to understand that Ukraine has been on the verge of bankruptcy for quite some time, which is part of why Yanukovych needed some sort of financial support to proceed with the Association Agreement with the EU which would invariably mean lesser ties with Russia. Now Ukraine is being kept half-alive on western loans, but given that that started after Russia's 'aggression' I can't help but feel that the lifeline will run out the moment the west loses interest.

After a fair bit of fighting that was mostly embarrassing for the Ukrainians ( as well as hugely destructive because well... civil war ) there were efforts to calm the conflict down and thus the Minsk agreements.

Now I hope it's clear that nobody is innocent in this, least of all the Ukrainian governments and politicians themselves who's divisive politics helped create this incredibly unstable diplomacy, economy and a divided electorate. Neither are Russia or the EU and US innocent of being too stubborn to work out an arrangement that might work for everyone, all sides made reflexive moves that they would come to regret in time.

For the record I'm a Canadian and not an ethnic Russian, nor am I close friends with any Russians ( not many in Vancouver ).

[Biovr]

Guys, I'm Russian, and I can say only one thing - Russia is in deep pit and the government morons. No medicament, no money, no food. Officials have blatantly steal openly from the budget of the country, but ordinary people can not get salary. Sanctions products are destroyed by tractors, but this time in the country a lot of hungry people. In Moscow, the delay in the transfer of medicines in hospitals, and in other regions there is no delay - there is generally no cure.
All. Very. Bad.
Russia did not attack Ukraine. Crimea joining voluntarily. Putin has decided to "help" Crimea and now he is investing hundreds of millions in Crimea, although Russia itself in poverty. By the way, most of these investments, again, goes into the pockets of officials.

[Chavratheserval]

That's real sad to hear that. I'm sorry what's going on in your country! I don't hear much about Russia, where I live. I didn't it was bad over there! Hope you get through.Just need faith to get through hard times. From the US to Russia. I give this message to you.

[Biovr]

Oh, please, do not tell me about faith ...
Our country goes slowly in the Middle Ages. Church extends beyond its borders. Now, public schools began to teach religion on a par with other subjects. Religion is now climbs and the Law appearing real articles in the criminal code (And there were real cases of application of these laws). And this is all despite the fact that under the Constitution, Russia - a secular state