Not with our troops.
3
Can;t believe this guy had the nerve to write an editorial calling for military aid from NATO. The little contretemps in the Kerch straits seems more like "wag the dog".
Lets look at the facts on the ground. Poroshenko is so far behind in the polls that he may not even make the run-off. He cooked up this little scenario in the Kerch straits in hopes of boosting his poll numbers. He is on a glide path to humiliating defeat in the forthcoming Presidential elections.
He wants to use the incident to boost his poll numbers - notice he is running around in a military uniform.
While I know the US chose for President after they arranged the coup to overthrow a legally elected President, Petro has proved to be nothing but a dismal failure.
He has lied to the Ukrainian people. He promised he would sell off his businesses - He didn't. He told the press and people that in the battle of Debaltseve Ukraine did not suffer a catastrophic defeat or take major losses. That turned out to be a lie to - returning soldiers told a different story. etc.
Now Poroshenko has declared Martial law. He wanted it to last 60 days but had to settle for 30 days. The suspicion is that he wanted to use martial law to cancel the forthcoming elections so he could stay in power.
Poroshenko is NOT a nice person and is totally untrustworthy. Perhaps Tymoshenko will return to the Presidency as she is leading in the polls.
5
The US and the EU need to take a serious look at Ukraine's borders. Remember Ukraine was never a real country until the USSR collapsed. It existed as a region in other countries like Ruthenia, Gallicia etc.
When it was absorbed into the USSR it became a Oblast. Now an oblast is nothing but an administrative district. It does not indicate a national boundary. In 1954 The Politburo joined the Crimean Oblast that of East Russia to the Ukrainian Oblast to make for easier adminstration.
When the USSR ended, no effort was made to establish genuine boundaries for Ukraine and other parts of the old Soviet Union which is why there are ongoing disputes today
No effort has been made to settle the Nagono-Karabakh dispute, the issue of Transcarpathia. Crimea, and what was formally the Donbass. The last Tsar had his palace in that region - the Livadia Palace.
It was a serious error that no effort was made to redraw the boundaries of the Ukrainian Oblast. Allowing Ukraine to keep the fruits of the 1954 Politburo decree and Transcarpathia are simply wrong. It does nothing but keep the region unstable and a source of constant friction.
There should be a commission establiahed to draw up meaningful boundaries for Ukraine based on the historical past and not losing sight of the fact that Ukraine was never an autonomous country. or that some of the regions in Ukraine would be better and off and more peaceful if they were returned to their historical boundaries.
5
Please remember that what Poroshenko thinks Ukrainians want or need may not be accurate or reliable. He enjoys the support of about 8% of the electorate and is trying to seem more of a leader in time for elections in early 2019, which of course he could try to postpone.
4
It is certainly true that something must be done to recover the parts of the Ukraine seized and end similar aggressions by Russia in the future! But logic and simple justice also indicate that China must also be punished for attacking and stealing the lands and resources of Tibet, running poaching rings around the world that are stealing and destroying resources on a global scale and plotting to take over nations in Asia and Africa ... so it can simultaneously maintain its massive and irresponsible over population and use those "masses" to attack and subjugate the rest of the world. But no one seems to be interested in stopping Chinese aggressions that also include stealing millions of manufacturing jobs (with the help of our 1%), taking trillions out of the pockets of Westerners by violating both the letter and the intent of trade agreements, stealing intellectual property doing counterfeiting of goods costing us trillions. The only logical reason that can be found for this lopsided response, little punishment for the immensely more serious damages and aggressions of China, is that our "leaders" have been bribed by the Chinese via access to 100's of millions of no rights slave workers in the Chinese police state - which also explains the fact of the doubling of the net worth of our 1% in recent decades from 10% to 20% of all US wealth. So apparently if Putin wants to get away with his aggressions, he must also set up a bunch of factories and fill them with slaves like China.
Putin and most Russians see an independent Ukraine as a historical aberration. Western Ukraine was part of Poland and after the partition of Poland in the 18th century art of the Austrian-Habsburg empire but Eastern Ukraine was part of czarist Russia for centuries. Crimea itself was part f the Ottoman empire until taken over by Russia at the time of Catherine the Great. Putin is fixated on reviving the Russian empire but even his successor will not be inclined to return Crimea to the Ukraine regardless of any condemnation by the international community.
There will not be normal relations between Ukraine and Russia as long as Ukraine insists on Russia returning Crimea to the Ukraine.
In the long run Ukraine will have to accept that fact. The best outcome for Ukraine will be to get concessions from Russia in exchange for giving up Crimea,
32
@serban, Finland has a historical claim to several regions that the Soviet Union absorbed after World War II. And Königsberg, which is now known as Kaliningrad, used to be part of Germany. So how do you think that Putin would react, if Finland and Germany attempted to reclaim these regions? He wouldn't tolerate having parts of his country annexed, and no other country should have to tolerate that kind of aggression either. Because it's barbaric and wrong.
4
@serban for the sake of debate, what other countries whose borders have shifted over the past few centuries would you likewise have cede territory to their neighbors?
5
@Niles Gazic
The finns and the germans have accepted reality. The ukrainians would be well advised to accept it also. In the name of peace...
5
WE now have evidence of the power of sanctions. Putin and his cronies did everything to stop them. When you get in their pocket books thats when the pain starts. We need to cut Russia off, completely, until the people stop the madman. In a way we are experiencing a similar situation, Trump is slowly destroying our economy by fighting with all of our economic partners and this may be the thing that allows us to get rid of him.
An "Azov" package of sanctions against Russian aggression will not turn the tide of Putin's meddling. I fear this is moving to a blockade of all Russian ships at the Bosporus Strait involving NATO. He is playing a game of brinkmanship, testing his 'lapdog' Trump .
Absolutely Poroshenko! Absolutely!
Who did you have in mind to punish Putin? Before others get involved, Ukraine should do its all first.
I share a little history. American patriots could not get others to care about the American Colonies' outcome more than those colonies themselves cared.
Before other nations would help the American Colonies and at the same time stick their fingers in King George's eye, American patriots had to show what THEY could do to justify any help.
First they drove the British from Boston. Then they captured Burgoyne's Army. Later they had many victories against the British Army, showing what else they could do. Finally, with French help they trapped Cornwallis.
We never so much beat the British as showed them they could not beat us. And when the British withdrew, we had long experience with law-making, courts, and enlightened laws to carry forward a reasonably civil enough public administration.
We were never like the Iraqis and others who were too disorganized to throw off oppressors THEN carry on with a fair, effective, peaceful public administration.
Ukraine should need more than write-in editorials, prayers, and good hopes for foreign help to discourage Russia.
Show others what Ukraine can do for itself first.
The annexation of Crimea enables Russia to control the narrow shipping strait upon which Ukraine depends for ex/im trade primarily to the West.
Really? And what the Western country has a coast line of the Azov Sea?
4
Totally agree. Putin thinks the Ukraine is his just because decades ago Russia enticed Russians to move to Crimea it is now his. Sadly, they immigrated to the Ukraine as Russians, not Ukrainians. They've been a ticking time bomb for years. They invaded Crimea (you can call it immigration, but they never assimilated. Crimea is the most important area for the Ukraine; Russia starved the rest of the Ukraine under the Soviet Union. Millions died. Funny that only now, when Trump is President and the NYTimes decides that Russia is bad, do we talk about this event. It happened under Obama and all of the UN and Nato should have been up in arms and stopped it. They didn't as too much natural gas comes from Russia. Even Romney saw this, and you all made fun of him as a result. Odd, Monday morning quarterbacks.
Russians always lived in Crimea, before Tatar invasion threw them out. Then Russia's threw Tatars out (as Spain threw Arabs from their land, even although Arabs lived there 800 years)
4
Where will Putin (and Russia) be if he decides to leave Crimea, leave Eastern Ukraine, do whatever USA tells him to do? Right, back in 2013, but now with a $1T debt to Ukraine. Does that sound attractive? At some point there is no turning back. For example, when a criminal's deeds exceed 50 years in jail, it already makes no sense for him to stop and surrender. I think we have already passed that point, few years ago. Putin may not exactly want the war itself, noone actually needs or wants to kill anyone. But he wants a new world order where he (and Russia with him) can reset all his debts. As we all know from the past, that normally happens after a war or a state collapse (or both). But who knows, maybe there is another solution nowadays.
1. In Ukraine, the present Fascist regime was installed by the American CIA in a coup that overthrew the democratically elected government . . . .
2. Crimea has been Russian since the 18th century. The people there speak Russian and consider themselves to be Russian. They have no wish to join Ukraine. It is only our American total ignorance about their history and culture that enables the lie that Crimea is victim of "Russian aggression". . . .
3. The frenzied military build up on Russia's borders by the US and its NATO
allies are one part of the preparation for the coming US attack (which will be depicted as a defense against "Russian aggression"). Articles such as this one are another, ideological part of the attack. The purpose is to arouse fear and hatred of the foreign foe, preparing the public for the great War to come.
5
Hey , where's the EU ? Shouldn't they take the lead ? We can support them (and should) .
Isn't it up to EU to decide. what to do? They decide they want to do nothing. it is their decision. Seems like you and Poroshenko want EU actions, but why EU should listen any of you?
3
Dear Pres. Poroshenko!
Hope your nation is victorious vs overwhelming odds and hope that no Ukrainian servicemen & women will have to loose their lives in the fight for independence and freedom... but if you're believe that the meek so far response will be stronger and more vigorous, you may be better served to look for DIY guide... Leave alone Germans or the rest of Europeans but even we Americans wont put our troops in direct conflict with Russia...
Good luck!
1
Both Putin and Mohammed bin Salman are proven murderers which would be ok if they did so inside their own borders. If it was done inside their own borders only their people have the rights to challenge them. However, both committed crimes in other nations and hence both should be charged appropriately. In the future after being charged neither should be allowed into any of the nations which accept the fact that they both have committed murder and if they do enter these nations they both should be charged as accessories to murder and be given the same sentences others within that nation would receive. This is fair.
Putin must be punished but who is going to punish him? Trump is so much grateful to his president maker best friend and Putin may have some materials to blackmail and embrass Trump that he (Trump) has no choice but to surrender to Putin.
Dear Mr. Poroshenko,
You are absolutely right: “If history has taught us anything, it is that appeasement has deadly costs.” Your allusion to how Britain's appeasement of Hitler led to World War II is very poignant.
But while Chamberlain, the British P.M., did it in the hope of achieving "peace with honour," Trump is coddling Putin for selfish reasons: He badly needs Putin's help to get out of the political turmoil he is in and to promote his business interests in Russia.
Please note that Trump was using Russia's seizure of Ukrainian ships only as an excuse for the cancelation of his scheduled meeting with Putin. As you know, Russia seized the ships on Nov. 25, 2018. Until Nov. 29, he had no plan to cancel it. On that day, the controversy over his 2016 presidential campaign’s alleged collusion with Russia took a sharp turn for the worse, when his now-estranged longtime business partner and personal attorney, Michael Cohen, testified in court everything he knew about Trump's questionable dealings, including the ones in Russia. It was the renewed controversy over his Russia connections that made him scrap his plan to meet Putin.
Lately, even some of Trump's Republican allies have turned against him. They have joined their Democratic colleagues in Congress who have been demanding more sanctions against Russia. Your article highlighting the miseries Russia has caused in your country, will strengthen their demand. Congratulations for taking the time to write it.
"Recently, Russia’s fighters were intercepted, not for the first time, over the Baltic region and had not filed a flight plan. Who can guarantee that this was not a rehearsal of patrols over the notorious Nord Stream II gas pipeline being built by Russia through the Baltic Sea to challenge Europe?"
Russia is a threat to its own pipeline? It is being built to supply Europe. How is that a challenge?
I suspect the American public is sympathetic to President Poroshenko's plight and would like to see its own president take a stronger stance to uphold international law. Unfortunately, the American public has no say in the matter. If President Poroshenko wants to see a positive outcome, he probably would need to offer to facilitate the building of a Trump Tower in Odessa.
1
The eastern portions of Ukraine always voted for pro-Russian candidates while the western side always voted for nationalist candidates. The nationalist candidates always won, and then they always said the elections were free and fair.
When the EU-backed coup d'etat installed the pro-EU military leaders, the eastern side rejected the effort. Ukraine will be smaller with the eastern side gone, but it will be infinitely more manageable. Sure, the western side of Ukraine without the more industrialized eastern side will be like adding another Greece to the EU, but they should have thought of that before staging the coup d'etat.
45
And therein lies Russia’s real interest in Ukraine. It has historically been rich in resources. The racism against Ukrainians is just Vlad’s strategy to drum up Russian support to violate Ukraine’s sovereignty.
6
@Real D B Cooper
didn't the US auctioned off the Ukrainian revenue generating assets in DC a while back. good luck to the Ukrainians.
1
@Real D B Cooper Interesting perspective. By this line of reasoning, perhaps if enough people of French-Canadian background live in New Hampshire and vote for "pro-Quebec candidates" (who advocate a "return to Quebec"), then we should happily give a chunk of NH to Canada? Interesting too that respect for territorial integrity is now considered "nationalistic."
6
The West needs to act?
Actually we don't.
We are sick and tired of sending poor American servicemen and women, who were not lucky enough to be born rich, into harms way again and again while the sons and daughters of privilege lounge in perverse luxury.
We're gonna' sorry but we're gonna' this one out until don jr., eric and mitt romney's five gutless republican sons enlist.
In other words...don't hold your breath.
72
@Victorious Yankee
I don't see anywhere that president Petro Poroshenko said the US should resort to military force.
9
Good point, but the problem is that if Russia is not stopped in Ukraine it will never be stopped and 2016 election interference will be nothing compared to the havoc it is capable of. Remember Russia has nothing to loose: they already lost their empire and their economy is barely surviving in overwhelming corruption. They are cornered and hurting, blaming West and specifically United States for their problems.
9
@Victorious Yankee
"The West needs to act?
Actually we don't."
Actually The West does need to act but we need to define what "The West" means. Our so-called president and his shills have adopted an isolationist approach that, in their misguided minds, is going to MAGA. Apparently that means that the US will do nothing when Putin invades the Ukraine or maybe any other of its neighbors.
Ukraine is not a member of NATO but had discussed membership very recently. Trump seems not to know this but, the basic rule for membership in the NATO club is that, an attack on one is regarded as an attack on all and all will respond. Trump publicly threatened that he may not respond if a NATO member were to be attacked - what clearer message could be sent to Putin that now would be a good time to invade a NATO country?
Once the dotard is gone (it's nearly Mueller time), the US can begin rebuilding normal relationships with its recent allies. Having said that, European countries need to spend more on defense rather than assume that the US will rush to their rescue. For example, when I retired from the Royal Air Force in 1995, there were less than 150,000 serving personnel - not enough to fill the 2 largest soccer stadiums in the UK; since 1995 that number has reduced. Having said that, why on earth does the UK need its own independent fleet of Trident-armed nuclear submarines? Hint, there's some low hanging fruit when it comes to looking for savings to offset new expenditure.
4
Yes, the United States should lead a United Nations effort to implement even tighter international sanctions on Russia, and perhaps consider putting peace keeping troops in the region. Such Russian acts will only encourage further aggression against Ukraine unless they are punished.
But here's the problem, President Poroshenko. We have an anti-democratic, authoritarian president in the White House at the moment, as well as many isolationist, anti-democratic Republicans in Congress. I understand why you wrote that "President Trump showed true leadership by canceling his meeting with Mr. Putin at the G-20 in Argentina over Russia’s seizing of Ukrainian ships and sailors." But, of course, President Trump did not cancel the meeting for that reason. President Trump doesn't consider anyone or anything but himself; he canceled for his own personal reasons.
I hope that Ukraine and its people find international support in your fight, but don't look to the United States to lead the way at the moment. We're too busy fighting back our own would-be Putin.
123
@jrinsc "Yes, the United States should lead a United Nations effort to implement even tighter international sanctions on Russia"
I think that the US should publish a list of nations we are NOT sanctioning. It is likely to be much shorter and easier to remember.
23
@Ludwig I believe the point in the original comment was that sanctions are a sight better than the alternatives. Would be curious to hear your constructive suggestions, though.
11
@jrinsc
it wasn't faulty intelligence. we concocted a lie to invade and destroy Iraq and Libya. all in the name of resource and prop up the petrodollar.
what are we doing in Syria occupied a tiny piece of real estate. isn't Syria a sovereign nation? Russia and Iran are there invited by Assad government. And the US?
we should look in the mirror once in a while. set a good sample: we should impose sanction on ourselves for the war crimes we committed in Afghanistan , Iraq, Libya, and Syria.
i
19
57 years ago Castro convinced the Soviet leadership that placing nuclear weapons in Cuba was justified because of the American attempts to overthrow his government. This decision pushed the world to the brink of self-destruction.
Ukraine occupies a much bigger place in the Russian psyche than Cuba ever did in the American, so it is really disturbing to see the enthusiasm with which the NYT cheers on the calls to punish the Russians, instead of trying to find a mutually acceptable solution.
It is about time that the US media and government openly discussed what would constitute valid Russian national security concerns in its immediate vicinity. The notion that whatever happens outside of Russian borders is none of the Russian business is not a reasonable position.
14
@Dmitri Ivanov
We should also remember the U.S. missiles that were placed in Turkey and aimed at the USSR -- a fuel of the "Cuban Missile Crisis". And recall the American hysteria over Russia's overriding influence in Castro's Cuba. Maybe Putin's action re. Crimea and the Ukraine has something to do with the encroachment of NATO on the Ukraine.
Not to excuse Putin -- but the US and NATO are hardly blameless.
6
@Dmitri Ivanov
Unless there's evidence, I don't believe Castro "convinced" the Soviets or it was the other way around...
Ukraine can occupy all of Putin's and all of Russians' mind... but it's a sovereign nation and has rights to talks about any membership it sees fit...
One of the signs of their independent spirit was a spontaneous uprising against an obvious puppeteering of Putin over then Ukraininnan President... That makes all the Russian "national security" concerns just an excuse to attack unprovoked...
3
It's a bit of a balancing act dealing with these bad actors like Putin. Work with them on mutual interests and (hopefully) reform them and guide them toward democracy. Punish them when they cross the line.
Putin understands this and has been inching over that line ever so gradually so that it never appears that he has actually crossed it.
5
Mr. President, with all due respect, Ukraine gave up 5,000+ nuclear weapons to Russia for a signed piece of paper; there was already a precedent for powerful countries abrogating such treaties in the past (e.g. Nazi Germany taking the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia via the Munich Agreement brokered by France and the U.K.). It was *highly* unwise of Ukraine to give up all its nuclear weapons in the first place; even ~5-10 nuclear warheads would have been sufficient in deterring Putin. Trust has no place in a world ruled by laws of power.
Why not ask the Netherlands for military assistance? The Dutch intelligence community has been very good (and very focused) at tracking Putin's actions since MH17.
Yet another foreign leader trying to manufacture consent for the US solving problems he at least half-helped to create. With our help--and, yes, Putin's, too.
Myself, uh, no, I don't want to risk thermonuclear war so that a government that flirts with fascism can keep fighting another government run by an authoritarian kleptocracy (and it's hard to know which government, Ukraine or Russia, I'm referring to there, isn't it?).
Meanwhile, US and NATO encirclement of Russia since the 90s, against the promise of the recently departed Bush (thanks, Bill, et al), might just have a tad to do with Russia's (re-)actions.
What's truly terrifying is that apparently sane commenters below are apparently ready to go to war--nuclear war--with Russia in order to "protect" (or even, protect) Ukraine. That would literally be the end of civilization, probably the species, and possibly all terrestrial multicellular life.
I know you hate Trump (so do I), and I know you've been imbibing nonstop Russophobic propaganda, mostly to help the Clinton Democrats cover for their epic failure, not only in 2016, but in general since the 1970s (neoliberalism, et al), but, I don't know, perhaps the risks involved in nuclear chest-beating, as we pull out of the INF treaty, with this nutcase of a president looking for any way to distract from his legal travails, might sorta give pause?
Yes, I know: I'm a Putin-loving, Trump-loving appeaser of our Hitler du jour for airing such irresponsible sentiments.
1
@Doug
"Where have all the soldiers gone? Gone to graveyards everyone! Oh when will they ever learn?" Mikhail Sholokhov, Pete Seeger
To all of the brainwashed here: When Victoria Nuland spent what she openly admitted was 5 Billion dollars to initiate the Ukraine "Regime Change" she was Hillary Clinton's top Deputy. State was vaguely under Obama's control. The CIA was prime adviser to all of these parties. These are known facts.
There was a plan and budget. There were many deep contacts inside the Ukrainian government, including with brutish, avowedly Nazi militia groups. We then had only to wait for the right trigger.
That trigger was an open and honest protest demonstration at Maiden Square and the US plan was immediately put into action. The corrupt, but democratically elected President was told that if he stayed in Kiev he was a dead man. He fled to Russia. We installed an obedient puppet who was so overtly corrupt that even the CIA couldn't stomach him. He was dumped.
Poroshenko, a chocolate candy maker was installed. Nothing changed in the world of corruption, but that Poroshenko still rules over the corruption, because he's articulate and totally subservient to what the US wants. We look aside now at the corruption.
The conflict with Russia came because we intended to put Moscow-reaching missiles in the Ukraine and threatened the existence of Russia's leased Naval base in the Crimea with it's Russian oriented population. Then Putin acted as was predictable.
Our public was kept ignorant and the Cold War began again. After the Middle East "regime changes" this was Hillary's "experience".
1
The situation today in Ukraine is reminiscent of Europe in the ‘1930s. Hitler was both threatening and acting, pushing the envelope to see how far he could advance his cruel strategy. Before the United States joined the World War in December 1941, following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the battles of that war had already been raging in Europe since 1939. The US at the time was taking an isolationist approach as they are today. There were, as well, numerous American Nazis in the US at the time supporting Hitler. Many analysts believe the 2nd world war would have ended much sooner, with far fewer lives being lost if the US had acted with the UK and Canada when they entered the conflict in September 1939. I think it suffices to say the US policy today under Trump and the GOP is isolationist, as it was in the ’30s. When it comes to world affairs and the security and well being of the US and the Democratic West, we must once again face the serious decision not to turn away from our responsibilities. Considering Russian conspiracy and collusion with the US perhaps we can recognize that NATO not acting is vital to the goal of Putin’s plans for Europe. Remember their national game is Chess.
1
Putin has directly waged a war on the US and most recently this came to light via the revelations of hacks to the NRCC. Media expresses 'mystification' as to why there are no signs of these hacked materials being leaked via 'Wikileaks' and used against our interests as they were against the Democrats in 2016? The obvious answer is that they are more elegantly used as Kompromat to pressure Republican legislators to stand silently by as Trump flouts our laws and acts as their agent.
For all the noise about Russia's aggression against the Ukraine, nothing has been done about it, and the FOX half of U.S. media is basically silent on the subject.
Energy prices are in the toilet. Russia is a totally energy dependent economy. Putin needs enemies without to prop up his corrupt regime.
But, Putin and Russia are also more vulnerable than ever to sanctions and economic pressure exerted by the U.S in concert with NATO. The NRCC hacks are about preventing that from happening if Putin can help it. The same goes for behind the scene pressure exerted through pawns in the right wing media and Trump's cabinet agitating for ramping up hostilities between the West and Iran.
Putin should be leaned on by the Congress and Senate, and the Republicans should be called out on failing to stand up. They no longer have Russian agent Dana Rohrabacher in the House come January 1. Hold them to account America! And impeach Trump!
2
Putin is a war monger with no respect for international law, as seen in Syria, Georgia and the Ukraine. The only people who support him are primitive Russian nationalists who dream of a new Russian empire. Meanwhile the people in Poland and the Baltic states are truly worried about a possible Russian invasion. Something has to be done to stop Putin.
22
@Robert Dole
Putin has a much better record in terms of respect for international law than every U.S. president since he came to power. His popularity, which has been reduced lately as a result of sanctions, is higher than any U.S. president since he came to power.
Public opinion in Poland and the Baltic states can be manipulated by scare-mongering militarists just as public opinion in Canada can be manipulated by a Ukrainian diaspora determined to involve their newly adopted country in the internal affairs of Ukraine, especially after they manage to have one of their own appointed as foreign minister.
5
Where is NATO?
@Gordon Alderink
Brussels
And what about the murder of reporters?
1
President Poroshenko, please do your
job. Ukranians are unhappy with you.
Your approval rating is hovering around 10% ,a few months before the election.
This distraction won't help you much.
2
Ukraine has been mired by conflict with Russia for
Centuries!!!!
The political process doesn’t work with despots or infiltrated governments like the Ukrainians
Have dealt with since the Cold War
Europe either wants the Ukraine to succceed or it doesn’t
Honesty would help .
Waterways control always instigates war talk and aggression
This is no longer our problem America
We have our own loss of freedom and justice
On a state by state level due to racism and pseudo slavery resurgence .
Ukraine and America have Russian intervention in elections to thank for the world we live in now.
Oh yeah .......greed and grafting and grifting
As well with Russia.
Only after Trump is indicted and impeached on charges of treason for his whorish devotion to Putin will the USA be able to intervene effectively in the contrived Crimea/Ukraine conflict. Though I enforce Title 50 violations [the prohibition on trade with Russia because of Crimea] as part of my duties as a Federal law enforcement officer, these strict laws are too easily overrun in the name of making money from the vast petroleum and mineral wealth that Russia knows the USA cannot resist. Don't look to the USA to mount any substantive opposition to Putin or his policies unless and until we depose our own despot in the White House.
1
The history of Europe shows hundreds of areas where over time land changed hands through force.
Boundaries were drawn and redrawn.
Poland did not exist until after WW1, having been scarfed up by Prussia and Russia two hundred years previously.
Even so after WW2 Russia and Stalin moved the historic border 200 miles to the west to give Russia maneuver room in case Europe ever wanted to invade Russia.
Adolf Putin is the worst parts of Hitler and Stalin with a shiny suit and atomic bombs.
Ever notice the refugees aren't fleeing into Russia.
Now, who wants to be at the bow of the American destroyer that punches through that bridge into the sea of Asov and enforcing UN Laws of the right of passage? How about Kushner or Don Jr. We can find a navy uniform for them.
1
I am somewhat surprised that NYT gave space to Mr. Porosenko's war drum- beating piece. There many other better ways of resolving the dispute with Russia.
I guess this is how a desperate man sounds when he polling in 4th place in the upcoming Ukrainian presidential elections.
Mr. Poroshenko where was your love for Ukraine in the 90's and early 2000's when the country was getting picked apart by oligarchic vultures like yourself until there was nothing left to steal? You were right there stealing, making your fortune along with the rest of your coterie of thugs!
And now that your country has rotted to the core politically socially, militarily and economically, not least thanks to your own efforts, your strategy is to try and blame Putin for your woes?
You have no one else to blame but yourself. Now I think that Russia's seizing/harassing of Ukrainian ships is wrong and I hope that Russia comes to it's senses and releases both the ships and the sailors.
But what happened to your navy, Mr. Poroshenko? Perhaps you would like to explain to the readers of the NYTimes why the entirety of your navy defected to the Russian side in 2014? Was this also Putins doing? Or was it because Ukrainian sailors had such a tiny salary that they were forced to sleep on their ships?
Do know why Mr. Putin is so brazen in his adventurism in the Ukraine? It is because he knows that your days, Mr. Poroshenko, are numbered. That is why he is not even taking your phone calls. Putin knows that it won't be long before the Ukrainian people turn against you and that is precisely why he is turning up the heat to let the borscht boil over faster.
2
Unfortunately we have a Putin loving Trump and GOP so nothing is being done here in the U.S. to stop the aggression of a psychopathic, murderous, thug and dictator. An actual enemy of America as well as the Ukraine.
I hope with the Democrats taking over the House we can now support you by issuing more sanctions against Putin for our sake and yours.
1
@Andrea Landry
Trump was the one who gave weapons to Ukraine... unlike Obama who sent them towels and MRE's...
It's not helpful to have an ideological myopia cloud your mind... Obama was also the one who ordered countermeasures to Russian election interference in summer of 2016 when he was informed about it by intelligence services and offered actionable plan to do so...
And the counterbalancing nation has an appeasing coward for a president.
This will work out well.
Ha, ha, ha! This guy should be on Comedy Central. Trump-Putin is not going to do anything to help Ukraine. Trump Tower Kiev? I don't think so.
the US mustn’t do anything it doesn’t want to and this is not our battle......pass! Figure it out for yourselves
Ukraine, we are with you. Stay strong!
2
Wow! Talk about turning things upside down and presenting them as right side up. Mr. Poroshenko is pulling a political maneuver to increase his pitiful political clout in the upcoming elections where his approval rate now stands at about 8%. This incident -orchestrated by Poroshenko - is a cynical political move on his part and nothing more.
Since 2003 there has been an agreement between the two nations on maritime movement in the Kerch Straits. Thus far, it has worked well when vessels identify themselves and their intentions. This time, the Ukrainian vessels failed to do so despite repeated demands by Russian naval forces. One should listen to the rather colorful recordings of the radio messages and then decide who did what and why.
One other thing: Poroshenko should really study history more carefully (as should many of the commentators) because the idea that The Crimea is Ukrainian is just nonsense. It has been Russian from the time of Catherine the Great. It was the Ukrainian born Kruschev who, in the 1950s, gave the Crimea to Ukraine when the Soviet Union was one big, unhappy family. Kruschev gave something that wasn't his to give. A thief can not pass good title to that which does not belong to him.
Since the time of Peter the Great, to Catherine the Great, to Nicholas the First in the Crimean War, and to the indescribably brutal battles fought during World War Two, Russia has paid for Crimea with a sea of Russian blood. Russia will never give it up. Never.
3
Oh, really. You want to "punish" a nuclear superpower, a country with vast resources whose population defeated the Nazis and has never been successfully invaded? Good luck.
1
All this couldn't really be happening, could it?
Mr. Poroshenko: YOU have to figure out how to punish or get rid of Putin. We are dealing with our own lunatics.
1
He forgets that this was enginered by the USA and NATO.
Threatening Russia with missiles on Ukraine was not a good Idea, remember how the US went balistic with Cuba.
And anybody who believed that Russia would abandon Sebastopol must ne brain damaged.
1
Russia is purchasing Ukraine. “Sanctions” are simply a roundabout method of payment. Selling arms and support services to Ukraine is also part of the bargain, consequently you can be sure that the U.S. will never provide enough to prevent the larger deal from going through. We will never take up arms against Russia, so the idea is to make as much profit as possible. Playing both sides maximizes profit. It’s the art of the deal, baby!
Mr Poroshenko, thank you for your recent article. Mr Putin is indeed a mob boss who thrives on chaos and intimidation. Russia’s attempts to sway the election and remove sanctions have been disastrous. Indeed, Putin lives in some parallel world of corruption and stagnation which is the Russian way apparently. Putin can be stopped, it will take time, but his dark ways will not meet with success as long as patriots such as yourself and the people of Ukraine continue to hold the line.
2
Not as disastrous, as the Western help to Ukraine. Due to this wonderful help Ukraine is rated 90th in the Human development index, a little bit bellow than Venezuela, while Russia is rated 49, a little bit higher than Bulgaria and Romania. And Ukraine is lucky. the Western help to Moldova put its rating in 112th, lower than Paraguay.
2
While we are at it, why not also punish Poroshenko? After all, he has led his beleaguered country into the depths of corruption, arbitrary rule, economic instability, unnecessary civil war; and now he wants to be bailed out by the West again.
2
Trump's cancelling lunch with Putin means nothing. It's a hollow show and the world needs to understand the end-game for Putin and Trump. They want to flip the world order, take what they want and do what they want.
If the world wants to stop Putin, we have to first stop Trump.
2
Putin clearly acts knowing that Trump is his poodle and Lavrov's dog. The leash is tightly held. Trump's defense that he's opposed to the law (*Trump has made clear he doesn't agree with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act because it forbids "competing" with foreign businesses by offering bribes to foreign government interests). Disagreeing with laws against bank robbery has never been successfully mounted as a defense. Taking the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination would seem a more reliable route for Trump to consider.
1
Mr. Poroshenko, would you be so kind as to inform the readers on your personal popularity ranking among the fellow-Ukrainians ahead of the forthcoming presidential election? Have you finally managed to push it up to 15 or so percent?
7
Let's look at the facts, since the era of Donald the Destroyer:
Putin interferes with our elections, and executes what could be considered acts of war against the Ukraine, AGAIN. Trump professes love for his bestie Putin, 24/7. No help for the Ukraine.
North Korea doesn't stop its nuclear weaponry. Instead, they're full steam ahead. Trump thinks Kim Jong Un is "the bomb" (in the cool urban sense of the phrase, of course). We leave South Korea and our other allies in the region flapping in the breeze.
A Saudi Prince murders a Washington Post reporter in cold blood, and laughs at the world when he's caught. Trump leaves the facts for dead and supports the murdering Prince, 100%. Trump's actions put journalists around the world in grave danger of false imprisonment and assassination.
Trump will not punish any of our adversaries, Because of his corrupt business dealings and whatever dirt our enemies have on him, Trump will bow down to them instead. This is extremely dangerous for our nation and the world.
How much corruption do we need to see before we can our Commander in Chief?
Like millions of the world's citizens, I can't wait until he's in an unfashionable orange jump suit that matches his spray tan. He is a traitor who must be punished for the heinous crimes he has committed against our country.
4
Didn't Ukraine commuted the act of war by seizing Russian ship few month ago? I guess what we have today is just the Russian response to the unfriendly Ukrainian action.
1
Putin needs to be punished for interfering in our elections. Trump didn’t forego his meeting with Putin for Ukraine’s sake but to save his own skin, coward that he is, but perhaps your unctuous complement to him will appeal to his flattery. Remember, he is already bought and sold by Putin.
3
Why Putin should be punished for American political system that allows a loser to be the President? Why he should be punished for misdeeds of American politicians that are not approved by the American voters? Talking about transparency. Clearly, Americans believe transparency is good, just not in the US.
Sadly, Obama did nothing to deter bullies around the world including Putin, China and Erdogen. When Crimea and eastern Ukraine were overrun, Obama yawned or pretended not to notice.
@Joe Yoh: This from a man that refuses to update the 70s-era carpeting in his own home. How credible can he be?
Putin is a kind of Russian George W Bush (Bush liked him & saw his soul) though smarter than W. Does it meanhe controls everything in Ukraine? Poroshenko is a corrupt unpopular leader, in July a Ukrainian opponent, Julia Timoshenko accused him of wanting to impose martial law to delay elections next year. Azov is the name of a sea but also of a neonazi battalion, the NY Times should investigate the neonazis in Ukraine that have so much power. See: https://forward.com/opinion/401518/violent-anti-semitism-is-gripping-ukraine-and-the-government-is-standing/
What is happening in the relationship between Russia and Ukraine is not a simple Manichean affair. Following the advice of the corrupt Ukrainian president would risk launching a war between Nato and Russia. Americans should remember the warning of their first president, George Washington about "foreign entanglements". Full quote: "Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification"
The US, Nato should not follow Poroshenko into his quarrel and corruption--whatever one thinks of Putin or Russia (a much less powerful nation than China or the US).
3
NYT is not the correct forum for this type of writing. In any case, russia/putin should be given a chance to rebutt.
In any case, russia built the bridge because ukraine is blockading crimea’s land border.
Nordstream Ii is being built because ukraine was taking gas from the pipelines through ukraine without paying for it.
Mr. Poroshenko should concentrate on the massive economic problems ukraine has.
The west should not let itself be drawn into hostilities over a country with no strategic value (except as a buffer to russia which is also what russia wants) and arbitrary borders drawn up after WWII.
Finnland gets along with russia just fine. Ukraine in nato would be castrophe.
5
We as Americans must support Ukraine. Russia’s wanton aggression cannot go without a response. No more appeasement. Is the annexation of Crimea the prelude to something worse, as the Anschluss was in the early 20th century?
1
The only effective permanent solution for Ukraine is to become a member of NATO.
This is why Putin hates NATO. NATO is a much more powerful military force than Russia and Putin knows it.
He would have never messed with Ukraine had Ukraine been a NATO member.
NATO is a brilliant mutual defense arrangement for smaller countries faced with the might of Russian military forces. Of course the US, being the strongest military force in the world, is a huge component in NATO.
But even so, no single country in Europe can match Russia's built up military forces, making NATO a matter of survival.
Concerning Russia's latest aggression against Ukraine, you can view this video produced by Ukraine that clearly lays out the sequence of events that transpired when the Ukrainian navy ships were attacked:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=198&v=JnU_F2LwHrI
2
The West does not need to pick up fights with Russia over Ukraine. Ukraine is not a true ally of the West. Just another neo fascist country in the waiting.
Ukraine borders, which were practically drawn during the collapse of the Soviet Union, taking advantage of voiceless Russia of that moment, should not become a fighting point for our democracies. And Crimea was Russian before it was turned into Ukrainian hands anyway.
If the West is going to do anything for Ukraine, it must demand first that that country will finally acknowledge and admit the vast massacres of the jews by the hands of its own citizens, during second world war, beg for forgiveness for their collaboration with the Nazis, and pay financial restitution to the victims families for the loss of life and theft of their properties.
6
There is no question but that Russia is an unapologetically malign force wherever it raises its ugly head.
However, the "hard currency in which the Kremlin trades" is anything but strength. It might show nakedly aggressive military might, but a country the size of Russia with an economy the size of Italy's is not strong and it is not sústainable.
Like any thugocracy, Russia is very weak.
2
What, exactly, would you like “ the West “ to do ??? I’m afraid that as long as Putin and Trump are both in Power, nothing CAN be done. The Russians and Saudis are Trumps biggest Customers, and that’s what matters. Seriously
2
The REAL problem here is that for some reason Liberals and Democrats seem to actually believe that the U.S. IS the policeman of the world.
As I understand it, Democrats would send ALL Republican and Conservatives (because liberals and democrats don't believe in serving in the armed forces) off to fight EVERY insult to their beliefs.
We should start a war with Russia because they invaded Ukraine.
We should bomb Saudi Arabia out of existence because the Crown Prince ordered the murder of a Saudi Citizen (Khashoggi).
We should spend our ENTIRE federal budget on stopping climate change, and when that isn't enough, we should confiscate the homes, property and livelyhoods of every U.S. Citizen and spend it on climate change. And when that doesn't work, we should confiscate ALL of the money in the world and spend it on climate change.
And when that doesn't work, we should murder every human being alive because they caused climate change in the first place.
1
Ukraine must put its house in far better order before the world finds it credible enough to believe what it says about itself as well as about Russia.
2
Remember, Obama did not lift a finger when Russia annexed Crimea. Do not say Trump will not act because he is beholden to Russia
I disagree. I think it would be wise to garner event-specific evidence regarding both alleged Russian adventurism in the Crimea and the Ukraine, and crimes alleged to have been committed by the RF against civilians, before leveling such charges. Also, I think that it would be wise if a political system was to be applied in the Ukraine which avoids the constraints against the public which Martial Law entails. The bridge across the Kerch Strait was a cherished program of Hitler's, but that does not mean that V.V. Putin is anything at all comparable to Hitler, any more than poisoning incidents are directly linked to the Kremlin. The situation in Syria was instigated by the west, whose support the political persona who authored this opinion seemingly has to rely on. Most of the people in Syria are likely grateful for the Russian assistance in combating the illicit occupation of international outlaws, made so by interference of the western powers in the internal affairs of certain Middle East countries. It should not be necessary for the Ukraine to be used by the west as an attempted springboard for the purpose of colonizing Russia.
Magnitsky Act Putin. That will get his attention especially when his global assets are frozen. See: Congress needs to get a spine, first.
1
To claim that Putin's man in the White House showed "true leadership" by meeting merely privately and informally with Putin in Argentina, rather than publicly and formally is silly pandering to a narcissist, as if petting Putin's poodle will bring real action against Putin.
Remember: It's not Trump who imposed sanctions on Putinists; it was Obama-era careerists and specialists; and Congress.
Putin knows that EU fear of chaos gives him license to creep back into a Soviet-style sphere of influence. And he has Russian citizen support, because they lack a non-authoritarian tradition on which to base their sense of nationality. Russia has always been czarist, be it Leninist...to Putinist.
The Plan Of the East seems to be that China and Russia divide the non-Atlantic Alliance regions of the world between themselves: China gets all of south Asia and east-central Asia; Russia gets west Asia and basically the Soviet bloc again.
And the G-7 can just eat it, because the fear of war is too great—and desire to avoid global recession too great—to stop authoritarianism from creeping back into something that smells like the late 1930s.
A most convincing piece. Still more convincing would be if Mr. Poroshenko stopped exporting to Russia chocolates produced by the factory he owns.
1
I got a few ideas to spitball and possibly refine a little bit here and there.
We'll start off by having Lindsay Graham yell "Hey you guys, cut it out" at the top of his lungs.
It worked in the Kavanaugh hearings, right?
He'll have Putin shakin' in his Reindeer boots in no time, he is one intimidating son of a gun when he wants to be.
So glad he's on our side for these tricky foreign policy situations.
As a "backup" plan, we could have Jeff Flake play "good cop" to Lindsay's "bad cop" and have him give one of his patented floor speeches aimed at squarely at Putin's humanity.
Admittedly, that may be a fairly small target, but if anybody can pull it off, Jeff Flake can.
As a "backup to the backup" plan we could have Bob Corker chime in during one of his impromptu walk and talks with the media.
Maybe something like "Well, uh, I just don't see that as an optimal situation for Ukraine".
There you have it, and you're very welcome.
2
Putins very own Fake News aimed at Ukraine...I am ashamed of our western world leaders that we stand by as this terror unfolds, ... as Ukraine is once again under the cruel attack and tirade of the Russian wolves, as news reporters are nonchalantly assassinated and chopped to pieces by Putins besty, as the world melts down from global warming? We all deserve whatever results from our apathy. Yes, we have our own problems but this may be the beginning of bigger more serious ones.
I am sorry I decided to check on the news tonite - I have been blissfully ignoring all the evil prevailing in our world right now - It takes a toll on people..never ending corruption and greed.
My heart goes out to the Ukraine from where my ancestors fled from previous Russian bullying, betrayal and complete disregard for human rights. So much for progress.
3
Obama refused to provide any lethal aid to Ukraine, despite Ukraine repeatedly asking for it and Congress having authorized it.
In contrast, Trump has sent Ukraine hundreds of our most advanced anti-tank missiles, the Javelin, to kill Russian soldiers. Trump has also sent our special forces to train Ukrainian soldiers on how to best use the Javelin. The Javelin uniquely attacks from the top where tank armor is thinnest.
So liberals are saying Trump is in Russia’s pocket while Trump kills Russian soldiers. Ok, sure.
1
There is a myth being propogated by Russia that Crimea and eastern Ukraine are predominately ethnic Russians. This is not true. Ethnic Ukrainians still do live and have lived in those areas for hundreds of years. Crimea has being mostly Crimean tartars land for hundreds of years until Stalin killed them or deported them after ww2. Russians and some Ukrainians and others did not live there until 1954 when Crimea was transferred to Ukraine. It made sense to do that because Crimea is geographically attached to Ukraine. In 1992 crimeans overwhelming voted to stay with Ukraine. The last vote came with a gun at their back. With the exceptions of some elderly Russians most crimeans would still vote to stay with Ukraine. Same thing with eastern Ukraine. Kharkiv was the first free Ukraine. The east is still predominately Ukrainian. Let all those who were displaced throughout Ukraine return and thave a carefully monitored vote and they will vote to stay with Ukraine. What some people are repeating here is typical russia disinformation. And innocent readers should not continue believe the lies.
2
Actually, in 1992 Crimean Parliament voted for independence of Crimea from Ukraine. The referendum was in 1994, but there was no question about independence at all. The Crimeans approved greater autonomy, dual Russian/Ukrainian citizenship and the right of the Crimean President to issue the laws.
2
trump wouldn't know true leadership if it hit him over the head with a red christmas tree. Don't count on donnie, Mr. Poroshenko. (Hey, 'don't count on donnie', should be trump's new campaign slogan.)
1
The west needs to act?
Why? I wonder whether you were urging something similar when Bosnia happened. Remember when Slavs slaughtering "those" people? Which side were you on at that time.
Let's leave Europe out; they are disinterested in anything other than a colony to loot and pillage. Are you expecting, say, Italian and French troops to swoop in to deliver justice? I suspect Germans plan to never send troops to Russia.
You say: "The Ukrainian people will not watch as Russia continues its creeping annexation of our country."
Really? The Ukrainian people would steal the supplies of energy, and military ships and such - only if they had a place to keep them, and if they had assurances that Russia would kill their neighbor's cow. It is very hard to sympathize with a culture of complete and unapologetic thievery.
Why should the west expend capital to protect a country that is so devoted to stealing and looting from itself, pretty much hates itself, and makes for a lousy global citizen? What has Ukraine ever done for anyone else?
2
The West needs to act? aka. the U.S? How about stop embodying justice and exploiting foreigner/smaller countries in the name of democracy?
1
Mister Poroshenko, Sadly for all, Mr. Putin owns Donald Trump. Surely you must know that. To ignore it in your political calculus will only cause you to arrive at the wrong answer. If there is a God, and if he answers prayers. Trump will be in prison sooner than later. Even if there isn't a God, Trump is likely to be in prison very soon.
1
This sounds like a YOU problem Ukraine. The United States has enough problems at home in terms of our own border and healthcare. Our people are sick of pointless proxy wars and getting involved in this is not in the United States’ interest. We wish you the best of luck.
2
I left Ukraine as a child and never went back. I am Jewish, not Ukrainian. But still, when I read about the Russian aggression against the land of my birth, I am outraged. For the first time in modern history, a country is being dismembered in the middle of Europe and the world stands by, idly watching or turning away. The supposedly “liberal” readers of the NYT who explode with Twitter rage every time Putin’s trolls place some inane ad on Facebook, seem to be fine with the deaths of thousands, land grab, and destruction of a beautiful country of whose culture and history they know nothing. Shame on you and shame on the US and EU that won’t punish Russia! But as a former Ukrainian, I have some advice to Mr. Poroshenko as well. Stop the corruption that is eating the country alive and styming its economic development. I know Ukrainians. Putin will never win, even if he starts an all-out war. The land will drown in blood before Ukraine surrenders. But corruption can destroy a country more effectively than bullets and missiles, and this is what is happening to Ukraine.
31
@Mor We have seen this coming in slow motion since Trump/Manafort knocked out the Ukrainian plank from the GOP convention. Ukraine must understand, Trump is not their friend. He was elected from the same gang that used Viktor Yanukovich as a beard.
3
@Mor "Jewish, not Ukrainian". What country is that?
2
Normally, I am one who hopes that my country, the US, will withdraw from being the world's police force, to try and save our own economy, but Putin is that great of an enemy, Russia is that dark of a force, I see that the United States has no other course but to oppose him everywhere.
Putin did what he could to weaken the US, in the elections, so that he could have a free hand in taking Ukrainian land. It is obvious his stooge in the White House is loyal to dictatorships around the world but we do have an independent judiciary and Congress, who just may be able to get something done.
Hugh
26
OK but like what about the US and its invasions around the world? For instance, the beloved Bush 41 who lied about the Kuwait invasion - no consequences for him? How about everyone who does bad things starts facing some consequences?
3
First time in seven decades? I think you are letting them off a bit light.
President Poroshenko should not be decieved—President Trump did not cancel his meeting with Putin because of Russian aggression; he canceled it because events here in the United States put a spotlight Trump did not want on his possible misdeeds vís a vís Russia. Had Michael Cohen not suddenly pleaded guilty to yet more crimes the day before, Trump would have happily met with Putin.
This was not a show of leadership. It was a show of naked self-interest.
4
@AussieAmerican
. . . or someone from our security/intelligence services told Trump that he can't meet with Putin because both he (that is Trump) and they (our security/intelligence services) know that Trump is compromised. Trump is being allowed to stay in office only to maintain a semblance of democracy and to minimize social strife. Our intelligence services already have the goods on Trump but are allowing the wheels of justice (e.g. Muller) to grind along until Trump resigns or loses reelection.
@AussieAmerican Exactly.
"Putin Must Be Punished"
Sure. But don't hold your breath about it.
Putin not only likes it when Russia is caught in something like the altercation in your country or interfering in our elections, he actively promulgates these incidents with that in mind. His getting caught red-handed (so to speak) only enhances his reputation as a strong man, who can do what he wants, whenever he wants, to whomever he wants. The West can't go around thinking they can contain or control him. Putin wants to recreate the Russian Empire, and the West is standing in the way of that. So, he thumbs his nose at us through these actions.
And you know that our so-called "President" is fully incapable of responding to Putin in any way. Where are the sanctions that Congress has already approved? Putin is Trump's puppet-master. Trump is weak tea by comparison.
17
How is it Putin is likely the richest person in the world and Russia’s GDP per capita sits a 62, just behind Costa Rica? How long is the average Russian going to live in squalor and poverty while a few oligarchs and this new Tsar strip the country of all its wealth. The common mistake of many despots and their henchmen is believing they’re not living on borrowed time.
24
@Trento Cloz The Russian people had never had a democratic government; they are used to be ruled by autocrats. The tragic history of Russian in the 20th century shows that the Russian people can live with great suffering. In addition, it is very difficult for citizens to overthrow a police state.
I'm afraid the free democratic countries of the world will have to deal with Putin's Russia for the foreseeable future.
1
@Trento Cloz
"How is it Putin is likely the richest person in the world"
You can't make a statement like without some sort of documentation.
"Russia’s GDP per capita sits a 62, just behind Costa Rica"
Most Russians are much better off now than when Putin came to power and they are well aware of it.
"How long is the average Russian going to live in squalor and poverty"
I don't think Costa Ricans consider themselves to be living in squalor and poverty. By some measures they are the happiest people in the world and are considered the most successful country in Central America.
2
Poroshenko is a failed president with 9% approval rating. He has multiple businesses in Russia and profits directly from the war he's fueling. This latest stunt, with military boats trying to pass in international waters without disclosing nature of their trip, is a provocation that US swallowed whole. Of course MSN are repeating the same narrative. Why I'm not surprised.
4
Let us hope that "The West" turns down Oligarch Poroshenko's urging "Let's you and him fight".
That's just part of the offensiveness of the President's missive. He sounds like a 1946 advocate of rearmament: "all the Red Army needs to reach the Channel is shoes".
Poroshenko raises the alarm. If the seizure of the three small boats at Kerch is not overturned (by us Ukrainians? No way!), who knows how far the victorious Russians will go. The Democratic West has to stop The Threat at the Sea of Azov.
Oh. Oh. Maybe they only need shoes...
Ukraine is a corrupt mess run by an oligarch. Russia is a corrupt disgrace with nukes, run by the capo of its oligarch mafiya.
Each of the great leaders is in trouble with his population. Now, there's a Great Leader/Great Moderate Playbook for dealing with such situations. Play No. 1 is "start a war".
Seen against the spectrum of aggressions, ranging upward from the Berlin Blockade, The Siege of Mariupol is a rather petty incident. Russia's and Ukraine's main foes run the two countries. Dealing with them is much more important.
The last thing we need is a NATO escalation. This would lead to national rallying, for a while, and turn Poroshenko and Putin into "wartime leaders" with much higher ratings.
The hope for Ukraine and Russia is a democratic uprising and reconstruction of each country, a la 1991. Their tough guy leaders are taking them in the opposite direction: national chauvinism.
We shouldn't help them.
1
Any punishment that truly fits the crime is not going to happen with the help of the United States given the fact that Putin helped Trump get elected.
Further, since the Republican Party allowed Trump get nominated and elected don't expect much help from them. Will the next step be the consolidation of the GOP aned the Communist Party here in the United States?
At least then we will know what we are dealing with.
Poroshenko is Ukraine's Yeltsin: an often drunk kleptomaniac surrounded by oligarchs. Just as Yeltsin he bends backwards to please the West in the hope that it will support him while he neglects to govern his own country. By supporting him the US risks a future backlash just as it saw in Russia after the departure of Yeltsin. Remember that Poroshenko's approval rate is 8%!
Poroshenko deliberately sent some battle ships to the Kerch Street because he wanted to provoke an incident to improve his ratings. We shouldn't condone such behavior.
4
It all started not in Ukraine. It was Georgia. When Russians seized South Osetia, West did nothing to stop them. Small country, small economy, weak military. Who cared then? Who cares now? The only thing they did wrong is tried to make their country more look like european, wanted to join NATO to protect themselves from Russians. West gave them no help, Russians gave them war.
Georgia was small, insignificant for West. Now its Ukraine's time. Who will come next?
"The problems of others are not our concern". How can that world be "civilized" at all?
1
President Poroshenko your entreaty to the West and especially to Mr. Trump has fallen on deaf ears. Trump take his cues from the Kremlin. As long Trump stays in the pocket of Putin he will not make any moves to aid your cause financially or militarily. Hopefully in 2020 we will have a new president with a spine whom can stand up to Putin.
Putin has such support among American Conservatives, especially the NRA and the President, that I doubt any kind punishment will be forthcoming. GOP Senators will make noise, but, seriously, no one expects anything responsible from any of them (looking at you, Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul, Susan Collins, Jeff Flake).
11
How can the Western countries prevent Russia from dominating The Ukraine? There are not enough conventionally armed troops on hand to manage that, and even if there were, the cost in loss of life would be not be worth the effort. Nuclear war is out of the question. The Western European countries also are dependent on Russian gas pipelines, which Putin can turn of and on at will.
@Penseur This is precisely the sort of appeasement which leads to world war. Delay .... delay .... while Ukraine bleeds.
I don't think Trump is capable of standing up to his bromance buddy Putin.... but what he has done is a start.
Putin needs to be denounced everywhere, and shut out of all civilized conversation/contact with the rest of the world.
2
Ukraine should work on persuading the US Democratic leadership in our House of Representatives to frame a bill designed to checkmate Putin, stopping his aggression. This may be enough to tilt the political calculus of NATO decisively against Russia. Regardless, it is a winnable strategy, considering Putin and Russia are our common foe, despite Trump being in Putin’s pocket. Persuade the Democratic House Leadership to support Ukraine forcefully and the rest should fall into place.
We may not like Russia or Putin, but let's remember that the US violated an agreement between Gorbachev and Reagan that NATO (created to counter the Soviet threat) would not move its borders east. NATO was promptly moved to the Soviet border, next to a nation that had suffered two invasions and a loss of at least 40 million lives through invasion in the 20th century. The US regularly has bombers fly near the border between the two nations. and military drills are held there on the ground regularly.
This situation requires negotiation, not threats.
10
@JFP
Excellent.
These are the most important facts of the decade following the overthrow of the USSR by the democratic revolution of August 1991.
Many New Cold Warriors have written along the lines of "Oh no, it wasn't the move of NATO into east Europe that upset the Russians; that's just an excuse for their (!) causing the whole new period of hostility."
Of course, we don't get upset about such things either.
Except in October 1962, when the Russians moved missiles to Cuba, almost to our border and Kennedy threatened WWIII if they weren't removed.
This is the only occasion on which anybody has ever threatened nuclear war.
The New Cold War is our baby. We could have had long-term peace. Macho was a lot more fun.
Thanks. Don't stop saying it.
4
Regardless of the pros and cons, Trump and his party aren't going to do anything to annoy Putin. It's also doubtful that if Putin were to send his little green men into the Baltics, or Poland, or any other NATO country, it's unlikely that Trump would fulfill US NATO obligations (even if other NATO members did resist).
4
Russia attacked the U.S. in 2016, though not in the same way that it has attacked Ukraine. Many Americans, unknowingly, support the Russian side, and there are "news" services, like Fox to reinforce their feelings. Fortunately, most Americans don't support this Russian puppet, but, unfortunately, he's still the U.S. president.
With a new Congress, perhaps the U.S. will do more to rein in Russia.
8
All the public hand-wringing doesn't change the fact that America has a President who admires despots and Europe has allowed itself to become depended on Russian gas to the point where any meaningful gesture of disapproval threatens its energy supply.
5
Any hope of an arms deal with Kim of North Korea rests on punishing Putin. Russia and the US are faithless parties to the guarantee of sacrosanct Ukrainian national borders in the tri party agreement pursuant to which Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons.
Only after the last shipment of enriched uranium left for Russia did Putin invade.
1
NK doesn't need to look at Ukraine, it just had to remember Libya.
2
Petro,
The "West" is no longer really capable of spending a lot of time and energy containing countries where disputed borders are relevant.
Perhaps you have noticed that the USA is 22 Trillion in debt with a bunch of old people who want free money for the rest of their lives on the books?
Even if Trump were not Putin's put poodle, the USA would not respond.
"W" Bush was in charge when Russia invaded Georgia and there was nary a peep from his warmonger staff.
So, the "world" needs to warm up to the fact that local populations will have to do local defense.
2
@Michael,
Nobody said we had to do it alone. I've been telling our government since 2014 it was time to arm the Ukrainians and even do some black ops against Russian aggression. There is an nice shiny new base across the border from eastern Ukraine. It would be a shame if something nasty happened to it.
As for the bridge, we should knock it down. It's been weaponized. And, Crimea really isn't recognized Russian territory anyway --- is it? An missile strike should do the trick. We bombed a Russian air base in Syria, surely we can do this.
@Michael
If we go in to help Ukraine, based on what occurs in Ukraine and based on our experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq, I can say with total certainty that the Ukrainians will first off, fight us to the last man. Then they will steal everything we take with us over there, and demand payment before doing their darnedest to kill us. What Petro is asking us is for money (to line the pockets of the Ukrainian kelptocracy), military equipment for them to steal, and target practice for his people.
Not a chance Petro. We stay here.
2
@Michael
I don’t disagree with you’re larger point, but that so-called “free money” I’m looking for next year when I retire is money that has been taken out of my paychecks for my entire working life. I worked for it - it wasn’t/isn’t free.
This is all kind of simple.
1 Putin was/still is KGB.
2 For some reason, Western governments have forgotten how, they dealt with KGB deception, disinformation, and propaganda because that is exactly how Russia is run today. Nothing has changed. The KGB and the "Supreme Soviet" collapsed, lost control for a bit, then reassessed, regrouped and here they are again, strong as ever.
3 We're not dealing with an entity that plays by any rules. They play the game their way by their rules, changing the rules as they see fit in order to give themselves, or appear to give themselves the advantage even when they know they don't have an advantage. They will accuse everyone of engaging in the same behavior they are engaged in. Witness Putin's assertion that Ukraine planned and was responsible for this latest episode. Distortion, deception, disinformation. Implausible accusations and explanations served up as credible. Government officials standing by their incredulous remarks, while the rest of the world knows they're lying but Russians simply don't care. THAT is Russia. Russia today is nothing but a Neo-Soviet Union.
The Paleo-Soviets considered society as embroiled in a never-ending war in which politics was merely a non-violent stage and Neo-Soviets think the same way. They are always "At War" with their perceived and real political adversaries. That is the way they maintain control over their country.
The KGB/FSB/Putin Government is one in the same.
2
If I'm not mistaken, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in the l990's in exchange for guaranteed security as a sovereign country.
Why isn't the free world keeping its promise? Or don't treaties mean anything anymore?
20
@Jane: Countries don't honor their promises if it's inconvenient. In the Nonproliferation Treaty, the US pledged to pursue good-faith negotiations for general and complete disarmament of all nuclear powers. Have you noticed that happening? Or even attempted?
3
@Jane yes it did, but what is a priority - the agreement of 1992 or people of Crimea? they are happy to be with Russia and always wanted to be, I know as I have friends and relatives there. If you tell that agreement means low and that's why it is important, then I will ask you about Kosovo which was part of the sovereign country. I think that this case is more complex than the agreement of 1992 and it is not the situation when the US should worsen relationships with Russia.
@Konstantin A quick check of Wikipedia shows that in 2014 Russians constituted less than 2/3rds of the Crimean population. 15% are Ukrainians and 11% Tatars. So it is quite a stretch to say that the people of Crimea are "happy to be with Russia and always wanted to be." In 1887 Russians were only 1/3rd of the population. Under Stalin "more than 100,000 Tatars, Russians, Ukrainians and other inhabitants of the peninsula starved to death, and tens of thousands of Tatars fled to Turkey or Romania.Thousands more were deported or killed during the collectivization in 1928–29." So it is even more of a stretch to suggest they "always wanted to be."
2
Invest in green energy, and get rid of oil and gas. It is not only good for the climate. It will also send the price of oil and gas down the drain, thereby depriving regimes like Russia and Saudi Arabia of the money they need to wage war and interfere abroad. It will also remove one of the most important conduits of Russian corruption money into Europe.
16
It pains me tremendously to see the nascent Ukrainian nation get bogged down in what Freud called the "narcissism of small differences". Back in 1991, Ukraine's future looked bright: with its fertile land and mild climate, a highly developed industrial sector and highly educated population, it appeared to have all that was needed to become a Better Russia: modern, prosperous, democratic and free. Alas, instead of restoring its leadership in the Russian World, Kiev fell victim to oligarchic capitalism and toxic nationalism, both in far more pronounced and grotesque forms as those the Russian Federation suffered from in the 1990s but has since largely, if imperfectly, overcome. Ukraine has no choice but to exorcise its demons from within; neither Europe nor Russia have the will and the power to help it.
11
Let all Ukrainians who want to leave and join Europe do so. But the land must remain Russian. The West interferes in other countries internal affairs, then creates breakaway provinces eg. Koreas, Sudan, Indonesia, etc. Let them leave but the real estate and resources remain with the motherland , Russia in this case.
13
A secure Ukraine means a secure Europe.
This is why the West needs to support Ukraine, militarily and economically in its time of need.
Russia has now illegally occupied seven per cent of Ukraine’s territory and has an appetite for much more. In particular Mr Putin has his eye on Ukraine’s Azov Sea coast, in order to create a land bridge to Russian occupied Crimea.
The US and Britain are signatories of the Budapest Memorandum under which Ukraine was given security assurances in exchange for giving up its nuclear arsenal.
32
When West punishes Putin it actually helps him, that's what Putin wants. The ordinary people are to suffer, while new sanctions and escalation just help him to build an image of the external enemy and shift focus from internal to external problems. West should be wise in it's strategy, the best way to my opinion is to be more open with Russian people. Hopefully, Poroshenko will lose these elections and next president of Ukraine will deal with Russia and EU to work out the political solution in regards to East Ukraine.
6
The U.S. should respond by bumping up its military and economic aid to the Ukraine. The Crimea is probably gone for good, but we can help make sure Russia knows it will pay a very high price if it wants to grab more of the Ukraine.
10
@John Chenango Your aid is falling directly into crooked and corrupt leadership's pocket. Time for the US to learn from endless previous mistakes of supporting the wrong actors.
2
@John Chenango
With Putin’s stooge in the Oval Office....not going to happen.
Ukraine should remain a neutral country and not be part any militay block..at least not until Europe gets out of Nato, which they should, considering the push of the US to place more nuclear weapons on its territory and Pompeo giving anti-i European speeches in Brussels. Of course Ukraine can have close economic ties to Europe without being part of the EU or Nato.
9
CNN just posted a story about a US warship being prepared to sail through the Black Sea. In this 21st century, Ukraine is not expendable but as important as an of our democratic allies. Putin has again and again shown his evil, destructive tendies that have seriously disrupted the US elections and government, the Brexit issues and France and Germany's strong democratic, egalitarian forces.
Petro Poroshenko is speaking to are best angels We should sacrifice some of our comfort (won by our forefathers with blood, sweat and lives) now while the costs are relatively small and before these Russian oligarchs have more time to disrupt the growth of the freedom of law and democracy.
6
If the United States can't control espionage, which they're not doing a very good job of it, then how can President Donald Trump if he's all for Oligarchs and Autocrats?
5
Here's the thing: the whole legitimizing argument the West in general -- but specially the USA -- makes against Putin (and, by association, "Putin's Russia") is that he's the candidate of the oligarchs.
The narratives vary, both in length and in sophistication, and crosses the political spectrum. But that's the central pillar of all of these anti-Russia arguments: Putin=oligarchs.
However, this argument has an obvious weakness: Putin is not an oligarch himself. The main difficulty the Western propaganda machine has with Russia's demonization is precisely that: they must first stick Putin to the image of the Russian oligarchs, and then push for the main argument.
But here, in Ukraine, we have literally a post-Soviet oligarch in charge of the country.
So, we have this situation: the West is defending Ukraine against Russia under the ultimate argument Russia is, essentially, a mafia state. But, by defending Ukraine, it is literally defending an oligarch -- in order to condemn another oligarch!
In other words, this is Cold War all over again: we have our proverbial Nixon defending the new batch of Latin American dictators because "they are OUR dictators". Or our proverbial Vietnam War general/politician ("in order to protect democracy, we have to destroy it").
10
@VK writes:"So, we have this situation: the West is defending Ukraine against Russia..."
Really? Because the last time I checked, the "West" isn't doing much of anything to defend Ukraine. We should have helped to stop the Russian invasion when we had the chance, like when we expelled Saddam Hussein's forces from Kuwait in 1990.
@VK First, I did not realize São Paulo is in Ukraine. Anyway, Putin's net worth is estimated to be $200B, so that may well make him and "oligarch". It's unlikely he made that working for the KGB. Finally, what the general said was "It became necessary to destroy the TOWN to save it”, not democracy. Please at least get your American history straight.
Punished? How, by sanctions?
It seems that Putin's salary is around $170,000 per year but his net worth is between 70 and 200 Billions.
Eventually any sanction would hit regular Russian citizens, not him or any oligarch who can continue to live very well their lavish lifestyles.
Last but not least Putin's best supporter is an American named Donald Trump.
6
What follows might seem strange coming from a person of (western) Ukrainian parentage, but Putin did what he was forced do when he annexed Crimea.
Crimea became part of the Ukraine only in 1954, as a result of a decision by Nikita Khrushchev for reasons that today remain murky. The vast majority on Crimea speaks Russian, not Ukrainian, and they voted in favor of Russian annexation.
Crimea has played an important role in Russia’s defense posture since about the time of our own Revolutionary War. It has great strategic value to Russia—and much less value to Ukraine.
The US has been meddling in Ukraine since the so-called Orange Revolution, attempting to integrate it into NATO. If I were Russian, I would consider that a hostile act, just as I would consider it a hostile act if Russia attempted to do something similar with respect to Mexico or Canada. (Actually, the USSR tried to do something something similar in Cuba nearly 60 years ago, which could have resulted in nuclear war. US hostility to Cuba persists under Trump despite Obama’s efforts to get passed it.)
Finally: The rest of the world (not to mention many Americans) are getting tired of “punishing” countries that don’t toe the line. Economic sanctions are increasingly ineffective, and the US military can’t seem to make any more headway in Afghanistan than it did in Vietnam.
Ukraine, let’s not forget, is a notoriously corrupt country. My parents thanked their lucky stars to leave and to come here.
44
@Myron Jaworsky
The vast majority of "Crimeans" were Tartars, until Stalin deported them. ALL of them.
So using your explanation perhaps the Tartars should be given their territory back?
5
@Myron Jaworsky, I am hereby asking the New York Times to investigate the nature and posting history of this account. Because everything here reads like blatant Kremlin propaganda. NYT, be advised that Russia's disinformation campaigns are not limited to posts on Facebook and Twitter.
5
@Myron Jaworsky Completely agree. Also, no one seems to be mentioning the fact that declaring military law might be a step towards cancelling the presidential election imminent in Ukraine, for which Mr. Poroshenko currently has very poor prospects, being seventh in the polls. It is difficult to justify or defend extended military action in mainland Ukraine, but this factor has to be mentioned.
2
Action needs to be taken to convince Russia to stop this kind of aggression with any state. It's not just with the Ukraine. At the same time, we should hold ourselves - the US - to the same standard. Then, perhaps, Syria, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Saudi Arabia might take notice that aggression against their own people and neighbors will not be tolerated by a strengthened UN and NATO.
2
Poroshenko deserve to be chastised. This is a deliberate provocation and attempt to escalate tensions to divert public opinion from the five years failure of the maidan and his personal and attempt to to influence coming elections in his own favour. Poroshenko understands that he will face the criminal indictment the moment he will step down from the office .
20
There is no CLEAR American Ukraine policy because the American Commander-in-chief is personally & politically conflicted over his ties to Putin's Russia.
Putin's recent aggressions in the Sea of Azov only underscore this reality. There will be no clear pushback from this White House or from Trump.
10
@RC Wislinski
Let me remind you that among the papers seized from the Ukrainian gunboat was an official order outlining how the provocation was to take place ... so much for 'Putin's aggressions'.
President Poroshenko, Trump neither has the desire or the resolve to deal with Putin and his aggression. Do not look for help from the US until 2020 when we replace Trump as president.
3
@Steve
In 2020 America will wring it’s hands and express deep concern and be “troubled” under hopefully different leadership, but’s that won’t do Ukraine any good. We won’t be putting our military up against Russia for the sake of Ukraine, and economic sanctions are just the price of the takeover. Goodbye, Ukraine. Sorry. On the bright side, Chernobyl, the worlds most imminent nuclear threat, will once again be Russia’s problem.
Dialogue with Putin? a GREAT idea. So says William J Perry. NATO puts the pressure on, moves to the borders of Russia, a third world petroleum state. He now has a super weapon, we are making our current nuclear arsenal 3X more lethal/accurate, and we are spending trillions on next gen technology. So glad we got rid of our State Department. They get in the way of thee Boltons, and the generals.
5
Dear Pres Poroshenko, Honestly Ukraine does not a significant geopolitical interest to the US or Europe. Your country has never been stable and is immensely corrupt. Why should we risk the danger of gas shutdowns or a potential military confrontation with Russia right on their borders? Russia will continue to gradually carve as much of Ukraine as possible using “asymmetrical warfare” tactics to do so. We cannot rule out the fact that Russia could launch a full scale invasion of Ukraine, like Crimea, but that would be last resort. While our response might look like appeasement, we realize Russia has vital strategic interests in Ukraine and the west is not willing to risk a large scale conventional or nuclear confrontation over small potatoes. NATO membership will not happen anytime soon.
6
Ukraine is a European problem and of little concern frankly for the U.S. Both the EU and the U.S. are in disarray so any hope from them or us is probably futile. So then, Mr. Poroshenko, what are your options? Frankly, the West is not coming to your rescue so figure out a "Plan B".
10
@JohnH
To say that a European problem is of little concern frankly for the U.S. is to repeat the U.S. foreign policy mistakes of the first half of the 20th Century.
Isolationists in the U.S. were initially successful in keeping the U.S. out of WW1 and WW2, until certain military actions forced its hand in both cases.
Even so, the severe disruption to trade caused by both conflicts in Europe (actually was wider) would have seriously damaged the U.S. economy, and in the case of WW2, kept the U.S. in the Great Depression even beyond 1940.
In WW2 the U.S. started losing merchant ships to enemy action as early as November 1940. The SS City of Rayville was the first American vessel sunk during World War II, and was sunk by a German mine just off Cape Otway, on Australia's east coast.
@JohnH - and neither is the middle east a european or american problem. Leave them all to their own devices.
I wouldn't really rely on U.S at all at this time, moreover no one wants a war or even a military confrontation between two nuclear countries.
Keep up Petro and don't be naive
3
This is a poor persuading letter.
It comes with as much disinformation as it claimed from Russia.
Crimea was not invaded or conceded either. It declared itself independent and after 7 days asked to be annexed by Russia.
Shortly after, following an economic agreement with EU signed by Ukraine,Russia seized the moment to subsidize the Donbas (a peripheral ukrainian province adjacent to Russia),with which it has stronger ethnic ties.
Now it's the time of skirmishes in the Black Sea, where Russia has some right since having direct national access, and crimean access, plus national access to the Azov sea, while Ukraine has the other half one.
So, Russia is blocking maritime (ukrainian) ships anchored there, since the military ukrainian ships were seized in the crimean maritime zone by russian. There is no such direct threat to EU or NATO ( Ukraine is not a member of any of them. Why ask them for help, then?). And obviously Russia will build a bridge to give land access to Crimea, what nations won't do the same with its "territories"?
But there are 2 fundamental mistakes in the letter.
1) Communication:It states Ukraine has the sustain from mr. Trump, and it doesn't resonate well with american liberal media.
2)Diplomacy: You can't ask for US to act, when it is doing the same bully-patrolling you're accusing Russia in the South China Sea, invading chinese maritime "sovereignty".
China will be next to be punished?? This spells like a potential worlwide disaster to me.
13
Russia is an aggressor state. Creeping annexation of territory of sovereign Ukraine. Creeping annexation of territory of sovereign Georgia. Military adventures unfortunately seem to be good for Putin’s popularity. Tighter sanctions, especially financial, are needed. Plain talk denouncing Russian aggression, and standing together with allies against Russian aggression is needed.
3
@Janet Plain talk against aggression? Do you happen to know by any chance that Ukraine we can see on the world map today is a plot of Joseph Stalin's geopolitical workings? That whole regions of the country, like the Cernauti (Chirnivtsi) area were simply torn away from other countries before WW II?
Ukraine is part of the "Bloodlands" of WWII and the USSR.
If Russian reclaims Ukraine, it will loom over Europe, because who controls the Bloodlands controls the continent. The countries that line the "march" between Russia and western Europe must remain independent for peace to be kept and
Russia not to dominate.
We do have a major stake in peace in Europe and building a boundary around an expanding, fascistic Russia.
We need to actively pursue a coordinated strategy once again to contain Russia (which wants to reconstitute the former USSR).
1
How much leverage does Putin have over Trump is the big question. Our American congress wonders about the permissive attitude Trump shows toward Putin and some feel he is compromised by his personal financial dealings for decades. Having a president so compromised by two autocrats Putin and MSB who gave each other enthusiastic high five greetings at G-20 cripples our foreign policy.
1
This surely puts Trump in a pickle since Putin was instrumental in getting Trump elected.
Impeachment is imminent FBI has done its homework now Congress must do its job.
1
I'm very sorry to say, Mr. Portobello, but sadly the United States is currently under the Presidency of Donald Trump, who is a friend of Vladimir Putin, and he cares little about punishing Mr. Putin, in part because he is indebted to Putin for helping to elect him in 2016, and also because he admires despots like Putin.
You see, it's the era of despots and monarchical dictators who order killings at will and fear no consequences since the the U.S. is itself under the control, for now, of Donald Trump, who is a despot at heart, and cares little for the unlawful annexation of Ukraine and it seems even less for the premeditated killing of Kashoggi.
4
What a call to action, by a desperate nation being mutilated in it's sovereignty by an abusive 'czar', Russia's Putin. Apparently, Putin's kleptoctacy at home must distract his own people with ouside aggression and influence. Indeed, this abuse must be counteracted by further restrictions on Russia's trade. Just don't count on Trump, as he continues to cover Putin's back in spite of the evidence.
1
The West is focused on profits, so the West might be willing to cold shoulder Putin for five or ten minutes...nothing meaningful.
One can very easily learn that Poroshenko's popularity is in the gutter, in single digits in areas coincidentally under martial law. His concern is upcoming elections that he is bound to lose, not Russia. To the point on Russia: there exists agreements on movement of ships between the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, and both parties have been calmly behaving within these agreements. That is until Ukraine's recent creation of an incident, to which in turn Russia has reacted only responsibly.
In the Donbass, it is Ukrainian citizens who are resisting the government in Kiev, not Russian invaders. Americans do not understand; the Ukrainian parliament is heavily larded with members of quasi-fascist militias from the West of Ukraine: Right Sector, Azov Battalion, and Svoboda etc. Ethnic Russian Ukrainians in the East (Donbass) hate Fascism and want autonomy as separatists in the 6% of Ukraine they live on. Russia should be applauded for helping them as their own government bombed them. Crimea is disassociated with Russia by choice - it had a plebiscite. Crimean citizens will fight Ukrainian troops should they try to take it back, which tells you more about the corrupt government in Kiev than anything else I can say.
Western Ukrainians are bonded to the right wing politics new fascists. Eastern Ukrainians hate fascists to their core. This paper ought to be ashamed to give this man a forum without a counterpoint article at least explaining that.
22
Didn't Ukraine bomb its civilians in the East Ukraine? Didn't Ukraine few month ago seize the Russian ship and hold its crew for several months? why does the Ukrainian President think it is OK for him to seize ships but it is not OK for Putin?
14
So, who's gonna punish Russia. It can only be done militarily and this is could well be World War III. Do we really want that? I doubt any U.S. president from 1950 on would be so foolhardy as to take this on. Sure Trump is in Putin's pocket, but so are we all considering the consequences of such an act.
2
DISPATCH FROM 1938
Can’t be afraid of bullies. Stop. Must stand up to them. Stop. Once they sense weakness they will never stop. Stop. Crimea was invaded and stolen and the world did nothing because it was afraid. Stop. And the bully smiled. Stop. Ukraine will be invaded. Stop. NATO ships must be sent to the Kerch Strait to prevent this invasion. Stop. This is not becoming a hawk or a warmonger. Stop. It is refusing to be a Chamberlain. Stop. Sometimes principle and realpolitik are the same thing. Stop.
As for MBS…
5
Russia has the GDP of Maryland; economic sanctions work great against Russia
1
Oh yes. A president that came to power as a result of a coup and now established direct military rule over the Russian-speaking parts of the country as a result of a blatant military provocation.
Poroshenko should be punished for his crimes against Ukrainian people.
16
Why would the U.S. try to punish Russia for doing the same things that U.S. presidents feel they have the right to do -- unilaterally invade, destabilize, and attack other countries? After all, we have to test and use our weapons systems somewhere to justify the massive military budget expense.
26
Mr. Poroshenko is deceiving himself if he thinks that the West will intervene militarily in Ukraine. His appeals to Merkel and other Western powers for aid have been constantly rebuked because they fear either direct military confrontation on continental Europe or damaging the economic ties they have with Russia through oil. Poroshenko is in a very difficult spot indeed, where Putin views Ukraine in his sphere of influence and will stop at almost nothing to ensure that Russia's influence in the near abroad is protected. Frankly, the West has done all it can with sanctions and other political maneuvers. Mr. Poroshenko's only option for stability in his nation is to work with Putin, which may seem like a worst-case scenario, but that's because there are not better solutions. At this point, Ukraine can only hope to regain complete sovereignty over regions in which it can project military influence. With this, we are possibly facing a return to an era of state power we thought to be long gone, but Putin seems to have a special ability to "turn back the clock" on Europe.
1
Poroshenko is indeed in very difficult spot. His popularity is about 10% and elections just 4 months away. He lost trust of his people and his European sponsors who view him as another one corrupt politician who robs his country and wants the West to protect him.
14
"Russia’s objective is obvious: It wants to return to an era where property and land are seized by force. It starts with Ukraine and continues westward as far as the democratic world will allow."
This is an oversimplification. Eastern Ukraine is ethnically and culturally very close to Russia and has been for centuries -- perhaps closer to Russia historically than it is to Western Ukraine. And Crimea historically was never part of Ukraine; it was added to Ukraine administratively during Soviet times. But while these facts may make Russian aggression understandable, they of course do not justify it. Military aggression rationalized by historic ties is a slippery slope leading to endless war, especially in Slavic countries where boundaries have never been stable and no ancient grievance is ever forgotten. Putin surely understands the dangers here.
In the larger picture, once you move west past Ukraine and Belarus the emotional and cultural ties to Russia diminish rather quickly. Unlike the Donbas and Crimea, there are no long-term residential populations that identify themselves as primarily Russian. Military incursions will not automatically generate local support. Further west Putin will content himself to destabilize democratic regimes, not conquer them. Indeed that is his current strategy with respect to Ukraine generally. He seeks to humiliate and undercut Poroshenko by exposing his weakness, not directly overthrow him.
7
@woofer That is because Russia has been a empire for centuries. This is a very bad argument. It's no excuse. I'm seeing a lot of Chomsky here, for all the sense he make in his criticisms of the US, has exposed himself as quite a Russian apologist. If we were anything like Russia we would destabilize Canada and Mexico to the point of civil war for their oil riches unless the sent us protection money.
4
Poroshenko doesn't need help he is pretty good in humiliating himself, by being a corrupt Ukrainian politician. Remember, Panama papers? His name was there. No wonder his popularity is less than 10%. Of course, it is much more convenient to blame Russia for every Ukrainian trouble, than try to solve or at least acknowledge the problem, but why should he, if the US blames Russia for American system that elected Trump? I am surprised that Macron didn't blame Russia for the yellow jackets.
1
A dictator seeks to take over and install a puppet president who will not interfere with goals of a dictatorship. And FYI - stop the ancestry analysis. A country, Ukraine, has been duly recognized by the world stage. A Russian dictator has no right to “steal” a country, to patch over his failed economy in Russia.
1
"Democratic countries must now make a choice" -- democratic countries do not declare martial law so quickly, Mr. Poroshenko. If Ukraine wants to be seen as a Western democracy, it has to act like one.
19
@Ilya Shlyakhter
"democratic countries do not declare martial law so quickly,"
You think after four years of Russian aggression is too soon?
Should he wait for the built up Russian military forces near the border to cross into the rest of Ukraine?
5
@Ilya Shlyakhter, Mr. Poroshenko only instituted martial law in those regions that are adjacent to the Russian-occupied regions of his country. And personally, I can't blame him for doing that. It's very easy to judge, when your country is not the one that is in danger of being invaded... again.
5
@Ilya Shlyakhter
The war started with Russia’s annexation of Crimea in March 2014. Do you really think that four years and nine months is too soon for a martial law?
I, at least, have no interest in punishing Russia. I find the idea frightening. A diplomatic conflict between Russia and Ukraine can be settled diplomatically in or out of the United Nations.
16
@Nancy most "diplomatic" conflicts don't result in 10,000+ deaths and rogue nations seizing foreign naval vessels. Or perhaps you're using Putin's definition of "diplomacy"?
6
@Nancy
10,000 Ukrainians have been killed in your "diplomatic conflict" so far.
1
You are dreaming. Dictators don’t work on settlements. They steal, they murder, they attack. They count on the West having no backbone.
1
Since the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia have all violated the security assurances that were given to Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, when these countries returned their nuclear weapons to Russia in accordance with the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, I would propose that perhaps we should consider giving these countries some of -our- nuclear weapons, as a type of defensive compensation. Because nothing else will deter Vladimir Putin from attacking the weaker of the former Soviet states.
12
@Niles Gazic Right. A Cuban missile crisis in reverse. Isn't it enough to have started one world war in 1914, already?
7
What a brilliant idea, although I am not sure Europe will be very please.
2
@Niles
"our- nuclear weapons" where did you get it? You are so funny "our nuclear weapon"
I’m for this contribution from the US: we vote with our one UN vote to support whatever action is agreed upon against Russia, and then send as much funding and/or as many troops as the other countries do (but no more than the rest do). The US needs a smaller role; the UN needs a bigger role.
7
@Doctor
Russia has a veto on the Security Council.
2
We are repeating history and NATO needs to act if sanctions are not increased.Period.
16
Acting in what way? To stack Russia? I don't think that the idea will fly with European members of NATO, after all they are closest and will be a legit target for Russian response.
1
Punish Putin Donald will not do
The West this refusal may rue
Low IQ or big cash
The decision is rash,
The Repubs who decry it are few.
13
@Larry Eisenberg
Well what do you think we should do?
Send in a warship or two?
That's world war three!
The world will see
millions of soul bid adieu.
1
Much as I (almost always) disagree with NYT's own Bret Stephens, he got it spot on last week: a flotilla of US and NATO warships through the Kerch Strait would send the right message. The prevailing alternatives at the moment seem to be "do nothing" or "do nothing at all." When supposed allies are content to watch a tyrant slowly but steadily occupy a democratic neighbor and erode its institutions, who needs enemies?
48
The Treaty of Montreux, 1936, places control of the Bosporus and Dardanelles straights under Turkey, but tightly restricts the number of warships which countries not on the Black Sea can put into the Black Sea through those straights. So the U.S. can’t put a “flotilla” of warships in the Black Sea, at least not without creating a problem for Turkey with Russia. The U.S. and Turkey (and other NATO members and Turkey) do not have a good relationship right now and Turkey must keep its options open as between Russia and the U.S. Whereas, Russia sits directly on the Black Sea and can legally put as many warships and submarines as it wants into the Black Sea. If too many U.S. and Russian warships were put in close proximity in the Black Sea and an unintended incident occurred the Russians could operate land-based war planes and missiles against our naval forces. We should never forget that two nuclear-armed powers have never engaged in a real war. Engagements are unpredictable. If we did go to war with Russia it would need to be for far, far more than Ukraine. We have zero interest in Ukraine. Zero.
Even assuming we bullied the Russians for a few weeks, we can’t stay there and referee ship traffic on the Black Sea and the even smaller and less maneuverable Sea of Azov. Ukraine must work this out on its own. None of our NATO allies have sought to intervene or urged the U.S. to join them to intervene.
17
@Duane Coyle
Thanks for writing, "We have zero interest in Ukraine," because this offers an opportunity to rebut such myopia.
For any state to enlarge its territory by forcible seizure is malum in se -- evil in itself.
People who don't understand why this is truth, may educate themselves by studying how land grabbing led to the slaughter of about 50,000,000 human beings in the world wars.
A primary purpose in establishing the United Nations was to end this barbaric practice.
To permit the annexation of territory from ANY member state of the UN is to diminish the sovereignty of every state with aggressive neighbors.
U.S. membership in the UN creates a positive duty to oppose land grabbing, regardless of the degree of "interest" in the victim state.
If a vicious criminal hacks off the leg of someone in my community, that is a hideous crime which must be ferociously opposed, whether or not I have an "interest" in my mutilated neighbor.
This is not difficult to understand.
6
@Duane Coyle
In some ways I agree but I think you reach the wrong conclusion. Unless the US stands firmly with the rest of NATO, NATO is on shaky ground when standing up to a bully like Russia. While we could debate about whether that's fair or not and argue that other NATO countries should spend more on defense (I realize this is something that Trump has stated but hey, even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then), now is not the time for that conversation.
A real President would stand up to Russia, NOW!
2
What exactly is Petro asking for? There should be nothing doubt that Russia's response to Ukrainian vessels entering their waters was a criminal overreaction that has only stoked tensions. Trump, perhaps wisely, perhaps not, did not meet with Putin during the G20. I'm with him with sanctions, but his implication that the US and NATO should react military against Russia seems very reckless and unlikely to be supported by the public in any case. Perhaps we should look at it this way- before 2014 Ukraine was a Russian protectorate, since then, most of it is a US protectorate. Perhaps we should be realistic about what to expect out of the historically Russian-domainted region.
18
@Alina Starkov the rules-based global order, territorial integrity, and respect for democratic institutions ought to prevail over historic (or current) domination by force. This is where the West and Russia are at odds. Unfortunately for Ukrainians, only one side seems willing to back up its convictions with tangible actions.
15
Russia protects no one but Russia. Criminal overreaction ? No. Desperate move to alleviate a failing Russian economy. Dictatorships are not profitable. One cannot eat or sell KGB lies. Putin wants to own Ukraine because his Russia cannot excel without freedom and democracy.
1
@Alina Starkov "before 2014 Ukraine was a Russian protectorate" according to whom? Certainly not Ukrainians. Suggesting that we should be "realistic" about a region where Russia has consistently and flagrantly violated Ukraine's territorial integrity is to abandon any respect for the rule of law. Mr. Putin depends on precisely your line of argument to make a mockery of Western promises. Thus far he has succeeded with flying colors.
Historically speaking, I never expected Russia to readily give up a few of their scarce warm-water ports. That should not, however, result in Ukrainians being obliged to be “Russians” against their will. A political solution would of course be preferred, if such were possible. Under the tyrant Putin, it is not. For this, among numerous other reasons, Putin must go. If we ever have a real President again, we may help him do just that.
60
@John
I was in Crimea during the independence vote. NOBODY there was willing to stay in Ukraine. The official result was 96% of the vote in favor of joining Russia and these results were very much real. Even BBC reported as much.
13
@John: Putin will go when and if the Russian oligarchs choose for him to go, and not one moment before. American views on the subject are not apt to be taken into consideration.
1
Shouldn't Russians decide who should go and who should stay, after all it is their country?
1
The west will do nothing substantial to help. To the west Ukraine is an artificial country, a hodgepodge of slavic peoples enslaved by great power competition for hundreds of years. Congress Poland, Ruthenians, Galicians, whatever the name of the populace, the sad reality is that modern Ukraine is nothing but a buffer zone where great power combat is the rule instead of the alternative. Better to fight and destroy the buffer zone than the respective "HomeLands" of the belligerants.
The west will pay Ukraine lip service only as Ukraine continues to be a burr under the saddle of great power relations. To think that the west will help when hundreds of years of history has shown the opposite is to reveal a painful truth....that Ukraine is expendable.
11
@Vimy18 -Ukraine is a sovereign nation consisting mostly of Ukrainians. It's not a hodgepodge as you suggest, although eastern Ukraine has a population of ethnic Russians who were resettled there by Stalin. Putin is seeking world domination. He won't stop at aggression in Ukraine, that's why he needs to be sanctioned now.
12
No, the Eastern Ukrainian population always had a lot of Russians before Stalin just because Ukraine never was a separate country before 1991. It is only natural that Russians lived in the parts of Ukraine because Ukraine was a part of the Russian Empire. And who doesn't want a World domination? Americans definitely wants to dominate the World, why should it be so wrong for Russians?
@Iryna
What? "Resettled by Stalin"?
Most of the Eastern population was there since before the Revolution.
Russia wants to exploit the land, the West wants to exploit the people. Ukraine is left as its long history has been exploited and used by both sides.
Both Russia and the West see this as a two sided negotiation (with the Ukraine as the unrepresented third party affected by the negotiation not at the table).
Ukraine need to be able to divorce both West and East and do what is best for its people as an independent country devoid of tampering by both sides. What everyone seems to fail to notice is that the Ukraine has nuclear arms, not enough to win a war, but definitely enough to start one and Europe is in the trailing winds (for those that forgot Chernobyl).
We have two nuclear armed countries with nukes aimed at each other and the world is dangerously treating it like a school ground fight. This is something the world needs to come down on both the West and Russia to allow Ukraine to have a say in its future and a peaceful outcome else face a 15 minute nuclear exchange that will end decades of peace and lead us to the horrors of war again.
10
@James Wallis Martin
Your understanding is horribly out of date, the Ukraine does not possess either nuclear weapons or the capability to produce them, which was part of their deal for independence and part of their commitment to the 1994 non-proliferation treaty.
They at one time housed 1/3 of Russia's arsenal and a significant portion of its production capacity, but that is no longer the case and has not been for over 20 years now.
29
@Sam partially correct, but also interesting that Ukraine gave up the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal in exchange for security assurances from the US and others. Looks like they messed up by trusting us, frankly.
50
Weren't all those nuclear weapons returned to Russia in the 90s. Might want to check that...
1