You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
Some things we can do to get Russia to reverse course on Crimea
2014-03-04
The U.S and major allies strained on Monday to rally a strong Western front to persuade Russia to step back from a military takeover of Ukraine's strategic Crimea region. But several acknowledged there are few options beyond already-threatened economic and diplomatic penalties, and critics said Obama administration efforts were too little, too late after years of pressing for friendlier relations with Moscow.
Here's a good one: Expose Russian Oligarchs' holdings in Western banks.
President Barack Obama called the Russian advance in Crimea a violation of international law. He urged Congress to approve an aid package for the Ukrainian government, and repeated earlier threats that the U.S. would take steps to hurt Russia's economy and isolate it diplomatically if President Vladimir Putin does not back down.

The Pentagon announced late Monday it was suspending engagements with the Russian military, and a senior U.S. official said the U.S. would not move forward with meetings designed to deepen the trade relationship between the two countries. Lacking authorization to speak publicly about the trade meetings, the official requested anonymity.

Obama met Monday evening with his national security team, including Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, to discuss Ukraine. Hours later, Kerry was to leave for Kiev to reinforce U.S. support for the new Ukrainian government that only weeks ago ousted its pro-Russian president.

But French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Russia's control of Crimea would not be easy to reverse. And the suggestions he offered — sending in observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation, questioning Russia's membership in the Group of Eight economic organization and holding out for a diplomatic dialogue proposed by Germany — were an indication of how limited the options were for the U.S. and Europe.

Still, alternately threatening and cajoling Putin, Western leaders pointed to the damage that his nation's natural gas, uranium and coal industries could suffer if sanctions cut off exports to the European Union, its largest customer.

Britain's prime minister warned of diplomatic, political, economic "and other pressures" that could be brought against Moscow. And the European Union's foreign ministers issued a Thursday deadline for Putin to pull back his troops or face a rejection of visa-liberalization and economic cooperation negotiations that have long been in the works.

"I think the situation is relatively clear, you need to see a return to barracks," EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said in Brussels, where ministers also froze preparations for the G-8 summit of major economies that is set for June in Sochi, Russia.

In Washington, Obama declared, "The strong condemnation that has proceeded from countries around the world indicates the degree to which Russia is on the wrong side of history."

"So there are really two paths that Russia can take at this point," Obama said. "Over time, this will be a costly proposition for Russia, and now is the time for them to consider whether they can serve their interests in a way that resorts to diplomacy as opposed to force."

The White House said Obama met for more than two hours Monday night with the National Security Council and the other cabinet members, discussing what steps the United States can take with international partners to further isolate Russia and persuade them to de-escalate the situation.

The Defense Department announced late Monday it was suspending military-to-military engagements with Russia, including exercises, bilateral meetings, port visits and conferences. But the West stopped far short of suggesting that its own military force might be used to push Putin's troops out of Crimea — even as Ukrainian officials reported that four Russian navy ships in Sevastopol's harbor had blocked two vessels controlled by Kiev.

Russia, too, tried to steer the world debate.

At a U.N. session in Geneva, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Ukraine should return to a Feb. 21 agreement that sought to end months of unrest in Kiev by addressing an array of issues at the heart of the dispute between protesters and the government of then-President Viktor Yanukovych. However, that agreement did not address the grievances that caused the protests, and the pro-Russian Yanukovych fled Kiev for protective sanctuary near Moscow within days of signing it.

"Instead of a promised national unity government," Lavrov said, "a 'government of the victors' has been created."

U.S. officials say the Feb. 21 agreement could form the basis for a political resolution to the crisis but would have to be significantly altered.

Both Kerry and Lavrov are to attend meetings in Paris on Wednesday about refugee spillover in Lebanon from the other war on a NATO border — the three-year bloody conflict in Syria. It is likely they will discuss the crisis in Ukraine.

Obama for years tried to cultivate Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, the former president, as a friend of the United States. Significant changes were made to Bush administration plans for a European missile defense to try to ease Russian concerns, and a new arms control treaty was signed, as part of Washington's hopes to "reset" U.S.-Russia relations.

"When you implement a policy of appeasement toward Moscow, that policy is going to spectacularly backfire," said scholar Nile Gardiner of the conservative Heritage Foundation. "We've seen that with regards to Crimea and Ukraine."

American Enterprise Institute security expert Gary Schmitt outlined a number of steps that he said the West should embrace to pressure Putin. Among them, he said, is the buildup of NATO forces in neighboring nations to make clear to Russia that there is a line it cannot cross in Europe. He also said Navy ships and assets should be moved to the Mediterranean Sea, and possibly the Black Sea, "to remind Russia there is a military cost for its activities."

He noted that Russia paid little for invading Georgia in 2008.
Posted by:gorb

#13  Now comeths ...

* DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > [Turner Radio Network] US AIRCRAFT BATTLE GROUP NEARS BLACK SEA.

USS George W. Bush CVN CBG + 3 Missle Subs + Other.

* JAPAN TIMES > US PREPARES US$1.0BILYUHN AID TO UKRAINE [Energy], PUTIN RESERVES RIGHT TO USE FORCE.

versus

* WORLD NEWS > RUSSIA SAYS WILL BUILD BRIDGE TO UKRAINE'S CRIMEA.

* RUSSIA TODAY > RUSSIA ALLOWED [by Treaty] TO HAVE [up to] 25,000 TROOPS IN CRIMEA, + OTHER FACTS YOU DIDN'T KNOW.

RELATED BHARAT RAKSHAK > BRITISH FM HAGUE SAYS RUSSIA ENTITLED TO HAVE TROPS AND NAVAL FORCES AT ITS BASES IN CRIMEA.

TOPIX, WORLD NEWS = BRITAIN WILL NOT SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION AGZ RUSSIA IN CRIMEA.

* DRUDGEREPORT > PUTIN FIRES WARNING SHOTS AGZ THE WEST, vee pre-scheduled LR ICBM test.

* SAME > [Times of Israel = Fars News Agency] IRANIAN GENERAL: OBAMA'S THREATS ARE "JOKE OF THE YEAR".

GEN. Masuoud Jazayeri, whom also labels POTUS Obama as a "LOW-IQ" US PRESIDENT.

* TOPIX, BHARAT RAKSHAK > OFFICIAL: WEST MUST PRESUME RUSSIA CONTROLS CRIMEA.

* Also from SAME = ... ...
> NEW POWERS {conspicuously] ABSENT DURING UKRAINE CRISIS.
> UKRAINE CRISIS AS 1962 CUBAN MISSLE CRISIS: WILL OBAMA HOLD THE LINE LIKE KENNEDY, OR BLINK LIKE KHRUSCHEV?

RELATED TOPIX > OBAMA FACES MAJOR FOREIGN POLICY TEST IN SHOWDOWN WID PUTIN.

At "High Noon" not-starring Gary Cooper + Grace Kelly???

As goes the CRIMEA, so goes East Asia + Pacific + Persian Gulf, Other???

* SAME > JAPAN TIMES > JAPAN EMBRACE OF RUSSIA [agz China] UNDER THREAT WID UKRAINE CRISIS | ABE BETWEEN ROCK + A HARD PLACE AFTER PUTIN NABS CRIMEA.

Posted by: JosephMendiola   2014-03-04 20:03  

#12  Again, wid Germany now as Russia's strategic ally + BFF, IMO Putin's focii are the Muslim powers across the pond, i.e. Islamist-pressured Turkey [Neo-Ottoman?] + Bammer, Globalist-desired future OWG Global Co-Superpower Rising Iran.

Iff post-1991 Russia wanted to keep the Ukraine including the Crimea, it would never had allowed the Ukraine to become independent - AFAIK, as per the MSM-Net, Putin semingly wants a sovereign Ukraine to become part of his proposed Eurasian Union or Customs Union, not to return to Mama Russia as another $$$-costly SSR/RFR.

IMO Putin's best bet is to convert + lease the Crimea into Russia's version of Guantanamo Bay US Base in Cuba, where Russia-n-only-Russia has sovereignty on the Crimean Milbases despite being in official "leasehold", + Russia-n-only-Russia decides when to vacate the bases in some future time. All land outside the Russian Milbases are sovereign Ukrainian territory.

In return, Ukraine on its part will be allowed to base NATO forces on its soil wid Russia's assent.

Wid Radical Islam's soon-to-be-nuclear Hard Boyz/Jihadis planing andor beginning to penetrate into Europe, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR WESTERN JUDEOCHRISTIANITY TO FORM A PREEMPTIVE, MULTI-BLOC/ OWG GLOBAL FED UNION SECURITY ALLIANCE AGZ THE COMING [Nuclear = Nuke-WMD] EURO-JIHAD, + ENTRENCH ITSELF FIRMLY + POTENTLY.

Before its too late, before traditional inter-Christian competition + geopol rivalry lends itself once again to unified, Jihadi-led Euro, Global Muslim conquest, save this time wid Nukulaar = Nuke-WMD goodness.

ITS NOTSOMUCH WHAT PUTIN DOES PARTICULARLY THAT MATTERS, BUT THE COUNTER-RESPONSE FROM THE US-WEST.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2014-03-04 19:04  

#11  Let's not forget Ukraine is an economic basket case, and things will only get worse.

Not long before the poor Russians in Ukraine vote with their wallets to become much better off Russian Russians.
Posted by: phil_b   2014-03-04 17:12  

#10  All will be sweet in the short term. The Russ have thrown up a demobilization scheme. All will quieten in the Crimea proper, then it's just a matter of waiting a year or 2 for the unhappy Russian majority in the East to explode in a nationalistic outrage that must not be stopped. Then the Tartars and Ukrainians move to the rump state and the board is cleared for the next round.
Posted by: Shipman   2014-03-04 16:37  

#9  Champ uses any international crisis to help 'run out the clock' and provide a diversion from the sordid events of his failed presidency. Otherwise, I'm with you SteveS.
Posted by: Besoeker   2014-03-04 15:17  

#8  As for Obama, I don't think he really gives a rat's ass about the international scene. Sure, it's a nice opportunity to give serious speeches and moralize, but for him, it's all about grabbing and holding power here at home. And vacations. The man does love his perks.
Posted by: SteveS   2014-03-04 14:29  

#7  Putin won't back down over the Crimea and can't back down because it represents a major strategic interest for Russia. They would go to war over this. Serious shooting war, way beyond that holiday in Georgia thing.

They would *like* to have a friendly regime on their doorstep (eastern Ukraine), especially if they can get it with threats alone - chess is all about maneuver and threats. Personally, I think Ukraine will end up in two parts ala Czechoslovakia, with the Crimea under Russian control in whatever form that takes.
Posted by: SteveS   2014-03-04 14:26  

#6  Somebody is behind Obama and always has been: Who? Is he part of a communist 'long game?' The facts are more consistent than other explanations. If so, Ukraine could even be an arranged venture.
Posted by: Glenmore   2014-03-04 14:22  

#5  Long term: we could improve our independent energy production, export LNG to Europe, get Europe to fracking on their own continent, help Israel and Cyprus export NG to Europe, and persuade the Euros to reverse the decline in their military capacity (and reverse the decline in our own). Then we could make Russian oligarchs uncomfortable, track Russian funny money in the west, and counter Russian propaganda.

And that Zero does none of that (or the other things I mentioned this weekend) shows which side he's really on.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2014-03-04 14:02  

#4  Putin indeed can't back down.

Moreover, he doesn't need to. Who's going to stop him?

There is nothing we can do at this point to persuade the Russians to "reverse course" on the Crimea. It's theirs, they just took it. The Euros need Russian natural gas, and the Russians have too many ways of causing trouble for the U.S., for us to stand up to this.

Indeed, if Russia were to take all of eastern Ukraine there's precious little we could do to stop them.

Long term: we could improve our independent energy production, export LNG to Europe, get Europe to fracking on their own continent, help Israel and Cyprus export NG to Europe, and persuade the Euros to reverse the decline in their military capacity (and reverse the decline in our own). Then we could make Russian oligarchs uncomfortable, track Russian funny money in the west, and counter Russian propaganda.

All that presumes that we have the will to stand up to the Russians, something our current administration does not have.
Posted by: Steve White   2014-03-04 11:39  

#3  Putin can never back down. That is the totality of his ju-ju. He only has one gear and no reverse. His image is all he's got.
Posted by: bigjim-CA   2014-03-04 11:24  

#2  And remember, WE'RE one of them.

With Obama at the helm, we've fallen and can't get up.
(Not until the next election, and pray Hillary DOESN'T get it, (Count those dead carefully))
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2014-03-04 11:16  

#1  "Possession is nine tenths of the law"

Just keep in mind the currents of history where a country seeks to reestablish it's 'greatness' usually leads in the end to a lot of pain and suffering for all.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2014-03-04 11:02  

00:00