Watching the results of all "international diplomacy" on Ukraine for almost a year, I am finally 100% aligned with Roger. You are right, Sir. Of course, dozens of years of my life spent in the USSR-then-Russia, plus some knowledge of the Russian history are helpful, too. Perhaps, everybody knows that bolsheviks-and-chekists, whose direct successors currently rule the country, have calmly murdered almost 50 millions of their own people through 1917-1941. Only superior force, economic+military, can stop them, as it did in 1989, at the end of the Cold War I. I think we should realize that we are already in the Cold War II and there is no way out. As to Ms. Merkel, I think she could use a page from the book of her great compatriot Frederick the Great: "Diplomacy without military force is like music without instruments." (he was proficient in both the art of war and the art of music composition).
4
Hey guys, Russian here, living in Russia.
For those who are too lazy to read: do support Ukraine with arms.
I mean, seriously!After 2 trillion dollars the policy in Iraq created the ISIS monster - perhaps one of the worst things imaginable. US (and some of the EU) was trying to arm the "proper" "moderate" "rebels" in Libya and now in Syria,where a lot of these weapons ended up in the hands on the jihadists.
But now, when a legitimate government that emerged out of a popular uprising is begging you for help -- a tiny fraction spent by the US on the failed foreign policies in the last decade -- suddenly you get cold feet.
And please don't tell me that Putin will 'blame the US' and escalate the conflict. He controls all the major media outlets in Russia. And these outlets are already blaming US for the conflict in Ukraine 24/7. Russia is already supplying heavy weaponry and "volunteer" cannon fodder used to kill Ukrainians.
So what 'escalation' are you talking about?Honestly if these 'volunteers' stick their Russian flag patches back on their uniforms it won't make a difference. At least not to the Ukrainian soldiers and civilians they are killing right now.
And sanctions..are working and they aren't.They are hurting the country financially, no doubt about that -massive layoffs and more to come spiraling the economy down. But they won't slow down Russian war efforts in Ukraine. And guess what - they actually produce a lot of spite against the 'western world' here in Russia.
For those who are too lazy to read: do support Ukraine with arms.
I mean, seriously!After 2 trillion dollars the policy in Iraq created the ISIS monster - perhaps one of the worst things imaginable. US (and some of the EU) was trying to arm the "proper" "moderate" "rebels" in Libya and now in Syria,where a lot of these weapons ended up in the hands on the jihadists.
But now, when a legitimate government that emerged out of a popular uprising is begging you for help -- a tiny fraction spent by the US on the failed foreign policies in the last decade -- suddenly you get cold feet.
And please don't tell me that Putin will 'blame the US' and escalate the conflict. He controls all the major media outlets in Russia. And these outlets are already blaming US for the conflict in Ukraine 24/7. Russia is already supplying heavy weaponry and "volunteer" cannon fodder used to kill Ukrainians.
So what 'escalation' are you talking about?Honestly if these 'volunteers' stick their Russian flag patches back on their uniforms it won't make a difference. At least not to the Ukrainian soldiers and civilians they are killing right now.
And sanctions..are working and they aren't.They are hurting the country financially, no doubt about that -massive layoffs and more to come spiraling the economy down. But they won't slow down Russian war efforts in Ukraine. And guess what - they actually produce a lot of spite against the 'western world' here in Russia.
5
Mr Cohen
Were you around 70 years ago when Stalin , Roosevelt and Churchill redrew the map of Europe. Mr Lavrov surely have access to these records so I'll be careful to laugh to soon.
The start of the cold war was not a one sided affair , I'm sure you are aware that General Patton made public remarks that whiles the USA army was in Europe at the time , they should finish the job and wipe out communism. Stalin just having lost +- 26 million of his countrymen could not have taken that lightly.
For the very same reasons Putin will not take any threats lightly either. Banking on superior US technology to put the Russians in place ,may just reveal a couple of flaws in the USA military you are not even aware off.
For one I will mention it is clear that Russia is supplying weapons and ammunition, fuel and oil to the rebels. Yet the US satellites have yet to provide proof of how this is happening. It just makes me wonder what do the Russians have that enable them to cross the border undetected.
The sooner the USA realize that the whole fiasco is a dead loss , swallow your pride and back off , the sooner their will be peace. My personal view is that the current government in Kiev (installed by the US) is war mongers and murders , no sane man sends in his army to attack his own citizens it is just crazy !!
Secondly you are dealing with a nuclear power , and not a second rate country what you can bomb at will from a distance.
Were you around 70 years ago when Stalin , Roosevelt and Churchill redrew the map of Europe. Mr Lavrov surely have access to these records so I'll be careful to laugh to soon.
The start of the cold war was not a one sided affair , I'm sure you are aware that General Patton made public remarks that whiles the USA army was in Europe at the time , they should finish the job and wipe out communism. Stalin just having lost +- 26 million of his countrymen could not have taken that lightly.
For the very same reasons Putin will not take any threats lightly either. Banking on superior US technology to put the Russians in place ,may just reveal a couple of flaws in the USA military you are not even aware off.
For one I will mention it is clear that Russia is supplying weapons and ammunition, fuel and oil to the rebels. Yet the US satellites have yet to provide proof of how this is happening. It just makes me wonder what do the Russians have that enable them to cross the border undetected.
The sooner the USA realize that the whole fiasco is a dead loss , swallow your pride and back off , the sooner their will be peace. My personal view is that the current government in Kiev (installed by the US) is war mongers and murders , no sane man sends in his army to attack his own citizens it is just crazy !!
Secondly you are dealing with a nuclear power , and not a second rate country what you can bomb at will from a distance.
3
Mr Cohen
Were you around 70 years ago when Stalin , Roosevelt and Churchill redrew the map of Europe. Mr Lavrov surely have access to these records so I'll be careful to laugh to soon.
The start of the cold war was not a one sided affair , I'm sure you are aware that General Patton made public remarks that whiles the USA army was in Europe at the time , they should finish the job and wipe out communism. Stalin just having lost +- 26 million of his countrymen could not have taken that lightly.
For the very same reasons Putin will not take any threats lightly either. Banking on superior US technology to put the Russians in place ,may just reveal a couple of flaws in the USA military you are not even aware off.
For one I will mention it is clear that Russia is supplying weapons and ammunition, fuel and oil to the rebels. Yet the US satellites have yet to provide proof of how this is happening. It just makes me wonder what do the Russians have that enable them to cross the border undetected.
The sooner the USA realize that the whole fiasco is a dead loss , swallow your pride and back off , the sooner their will be peace. My personal view is that the current government in Kiev (installed by the US) is war mongers and murders , no sane man sends in his army to attack his own citizens it is just crazy !!
Secondly you are dealing with a nuclear power , and not a second rate country what you can bomb at will from a distance.
Were you around 70 years ago when Stalin , Roosevelt and Churchill redrew the map of Europe. Mr Lavrov surely have access to these records so I'll be careful to laugh to soon.
The start of the cold war was not a one sided affair , I'm sure you are aware that General Patton made public remarks that whiles the USA army was in Europe at the time , they should finish the job and wipe out communism. Stalin just having lost +- 26 million of his countrymen could not have taken that lightly.
For the very same reasons Putin will not take any threats lightly either. Banking on superior US technology to put the Russians in place ,may just reveal a couple of flaws in the USA military you are not even aware off.
For one I will mention it is clear that Russia is supplying weapons and ammunition, fuel and oil to the rebels. Yet the US satellites have yet to provide proof of how this is happening. It just makes me wonder what do the Russians have that enable them to cross the border undetected.
The sooner the USA realize that the whole fiasco is a dead loss , swallow your pride and back off , the sooner their will be peace. My personal view is that the current government in Kiev (installed by the US) is war mongers and murders , no sane man sends in his army to attack his own citizens it is just crazy !!
Secondly you are dealing with a nuclear power , and not a second rate country what you can bomb at will from a distance.
A breath of intelligence in this otherwise blind west.
More weapons ? Really ?
More weapons ? Really ?
2
"The United States was driven by an insatiable desire for global dominance and, in Ukraine, had orchestrated the “coup d’état” last year that led to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych."
This is the only accurate statement in your column.
1. The US has mindlessly expanded NATO to include countries we have no strategic interest in. And would NEVER fight for. Risk nuclear war over Latvia?
2. The EU will NEVER step up and develop Ukraine. It will take over $50 billion and the US has tossed in all of $1 billion. The EU can barely handle Greece, much less a country of 40 million that is much worse off.
3. Ukraine is lines on a map. Crimea was always part of Russia. The west was part of Poland.
4. The US needs a stable government in Russia more than they need P***Y Riot. The US has not decisively won a war since WWII. Give it a rest.
This is the only accurate statement in your column.
1. The US has mindlessly expanded NATO to include countries we have no strategic interest in. And would NEVER fight for. Risk nuclear war over Latvia?
2. The EU will NEVER step up and develop Ukraine. It will take over $50 billion and the US has tossed in all of $1 billion. The EU can barely handle Greece, much less a country of 40 million that is much worse off.
3. Ukraine is lines on a map. Crimea was always part of Russia. The west was part of Poland.
4. The US needs a stable government in Russia more than they need P***Y Riot. The US has not decisively won a war since WWII. Give it a rest.
3
@MarkH,
You should be aware that Mr. Chamberlain had the extraordinary diplomatic skills. He tried to protect the Great Britain by pushing Germany eastward.
Actually, I believe you have never learned the original plan behind the WWII.
It was supposed to be an old-fashioned imperial war for the world colonies.
Actually, the alliance Germany-USSR-Japan should have knocked down Britain and France as the colonial rulers of the world.
They were the victims of own early success.
The initial instant victories made Germany and Japan think they were invincible so they turned against the US and the USSR too.
Without those two suicidal moves by Berlin and Tokyo, Mr. Chamberlain would have looked as brilliant strategist and Mr. Churchill would have been remembered as the ultimate fool...
You should be aware that Mr. Chamberlain had the extraordinary diplomatic skills. He tried to protect the Great Britain by pushing Germany eastward.
Actually, I believe you have never learned the original plan behind the WWII.
It was supposed to be an old-fashioned imperial war for the world colonies.
Actually, the alliance Germany-USSR-Japan should have knocked down Britain and France as the colonial rulers of the world.
They were the victims of own early success.
The initial instant victories made Germany and Japan think they were invincible so they turned against the US and the USSR too.
Without those two suicidal moves by Berlin and Tokyo, Mr. Chamberlain would have looked as brilliant strategist and Mr. Churchill would have been remembered as the ultimate fool...
4
Where to start with the lunacy in this article. First, from a practical standpoint its hard to win a war when the other side can get to Eastern Ukraine in 20 minutes by taxi or tank, and the USA is half a continent an and ocean away. Arming the Western Ukrainians will only get more of them killed as Russia can easily match and exceed any firepower we could send.
The Europeans understand this little be of common sense, and want no part of arming Ukraine. The other point that seems to get no press in the West is that the people in the Donbass region really do want to leave Ukraine. 85% of their exports go to Russia and they want no part of a country that is governed by a vehemently anti-Russia regime (which came to power after the coup). For them its a matter of feeding their families and having incomes. Yes - Russia is supporting them - but for a very good reason from their point of view. NATO has been steadily encroaching toward Russia's boarders for the past 20 years - and Ukraine really is their "Red Line". if the people in the Donbass want to leave Ukraine - they should be allowed to do so. Not start World War III trying to stop them.
The Europeans understand this little be of common sense, and want no part of arming Ukraine. The other point that seems to get no press in the West is that the people in the Donbass region really do want to leave Ukraine. 85% of their exports go to Russia and they want no part of a country that is governed by a vehemently anti-Russia regime (which came to power after the coup). For them its a matter of feeding their families and having incomes. Yes - Russia is supporting them - but for a very good reason from their point of view. NATO has been steadily encroaching toward Russia's boarders for the past 20 years - and Ukraine really is their "Red Line". if the people in the Donbass want to leave Ukraine - they should be allowed to do so. Not start World War III trying to stop them.
3
Finally someone who gets it. The only way to approach this kind of paranoia is with force. The people who take the russian side are disillusioned by the ability of russia's military to stand up to the west. The only real threat posed by russia is in it's nuclear arsenal. Their military is not prepared for an all out conflict with the west. Their economy is deteriorating by the day. They need to tuck their tails between their legs and go back and rethink their place in the world.
3
Right after Putin captures Donbass there will be:
1. attack on that will be left of Ukraine - 2/3 of its territory with the mixed ukrainian/russian population. That will cause indescribable suffering on the peoples of both countries.
2. tensions and war in Baltic countries with sizable russian population - Estonia, Lithuaniya, Latvia.
3. chinese attack on Taiwan.
1. attack on that will be left of Ukraine - 2/3 of its territory with the mixed ukrainian/russian population. That will cause indescribable suffering on the peoples of both countries.
2. tensions and war in Baltic countries with sizable russian population - Estonia, Lithuaniya, Latvia.
3. chinese attack on Taiwan.
@MarkH,
"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing." (Neville Chamberlain, 27 September 1938)
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this alleged statement of Mr. Chamberlain. The people should be smart enough not to let the fools pull them into their endless conflicts. That’s the truth. It’s tragic that the world is still ridiculing Mr. Chamberlain for speaking the truth.
Of course, the WWII had nothing to do with this brilliant statement. WWII was launched by the human greed, imperialism, colonialism and desire for the world dominance.
WWII was just a second round of the WWI. Why did we apply Chamberlain’s statement to the WWII and not to the WWI?
If the world superpowers stayed calm after an act of terrorism in a faraway country and assassination of Habsburg Monarchy heir to the throne, our world would be much better place and we could have ended up in the EU without two bloody global conflicts.
Can you imagine any western power defending today an blatant act of terrorism in such a reckless way?
As somebody who lived in Sarajevo for years I could assure you that two World Wars failed to solve the problems...
"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing." (Neville Chamberlain, 27 September 1938)
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this alleged statement of Mr. Chamberlain. The people should be smart enough not to let the fools pull them into their endless conflicts. That’s the truth. It’s tragic that the world is still ridiculing Mr. Chamberlain for speaking the truth.
Of course, the WWII had nothing to do with this brilliant statement. WWII was launched by the human greed, imperialism, colonialism and desire for the world dominance.
WWII was just a second round of the WWI. Why did we apply Chamberlain’s statement to the WWII and not to the WWI?
If the world superpowers stayed calm after an act of terrorism in a faraway country and assassination of Habsburg Monarchy heir to the throne, our world would be much better place and we could have ended up in the EU without two bloody global conflicts.
Can you imagine any western power defending today an blatant act of terrorism in such a reckless way?
As somebody who lived in Sarajevo for years I could assure you that two World Wars failed to solve the problems...
3
@Kenan Porobic
The statement was geopolitically and morally untenable. Essentially, it failed to recognize that Hitler was clearing the decks for a move for European hegemony. Opposing him in 1938 would've given the Anglo-French powers an ally with relatively modern technology and enough industrial plant to back it up. In fact, it's possible that a more resolute Anglo-French attitude could've resulted in the overthrow of Hitler. Backing down solidified his domestic base and led him to believe that the western powers would also back down over Poland.
The statement was geopolitically and morally untenable. Essentially, it failed to recognize that Hitler was clearing the decks for a move for European hegemony. Opposing him in 1938 would've given the Anglo-French powers an ally with relatively modern technology and enough industrial plant to back it up. In fact, it's possible that a more resolute Anglo-French attitude could've resulted in the overthrow of Hitler. Backing down solidified his domestic base and led him to believe that the western powers would also back down over Poland.
1
What is going on here? The NYT limousine liberals longing for more wars with the nation that never been defeated in any wars? Are they suicidal?
3
Tragedy of the American foreign policy is that for the decades we have faced a world with two sides in a conflict where nobody was worth supporting.
Every time our elected officials have fallen into the deadly trap and supported one side. Every time we paid the bloody long-term consequences. Will we ever learn? If there is nobody worth supporting, then don’t support anybody.
Prerequisite for being the superpower is having wisdom and strength to know when to stay out of trouble.
Every time both sides break the basic moral commandments let’s just stay neutral.
Why should we intervene in Ukraine if both sides are the same and hate each other?
If they loved the human beings, their brothers and sisters, there would be no problems. I wished we heard anybody talking nice about their first neighbors...
Every time our elected officials have fallen into the deadly trap and supported one side. Every time we paid the bloody long-term consequences. Will we ever learn? If there is nobody worth supporting, then don’t support anybody.
Prerequisite for being the superpower is having wisdom and strength to know when to stay out of trouble.
Every time both sides break the basic moral commandments let’s just stay neutral.
Why should we intervene in Ukraine if both sides are the same and hate each other?
If they loved the human beings, their brothers and sisters, there would be no problems. I wished we heard anybody talking nice about their first neighbors...
2
Mr. Lavrov referred to the obvious fact of the contemporary history: France and U.K. were against immediate reunification of Germany.
Everyone knows. Elsewhere.
But the raging Russophobia rules.
That's okay. We Russians used to it.
After all, it all relates to 32 U.S.-aligned states. The rest of the world is on our side. And it should be yet seen how it all ends up.
I certainly hope the U.S. plutocracy will accept the reality of the 21st century.
Everyone knows. Elsewhere.
But the raging Russophobia rules.
That's okay. We Russians used to it.
After all, it all relates to 32 U.S.-aligned states. The rest of the world is on our side. And it should be yet seen how it all ends up.
I certainly hope the U.S. plutocracy will accept the reality of the 21st century.
1
antitank missiles, drones.. But who should give it to the Ukraine? If anyone, it should be Europe, or the European wing of NATO. It should not be the United States. We can help, but we shouldn't be the primary contributor. E.U. combined economy is far greater than U.S., and if we can afford it, so can they.
1
Well the west has trouble "predicting the past" too.
1
Haven't we learned anything. Avoid escalation. Keep talking. Keep up the sanctions. Wait. Have patience. The last time it took 40 years. Better than a nuclear war.
But what a mess. The world doesn't need a Putin. Nor does Russia.
But what a mess. The world doesn't need a Putin. Nor does Russia.
2
There is no doubt in mind that arming the Ukraine will turn a cold war into a hot war. It's like playing chicken; we know who is going to blink first.
America survived the original Soviet expansionist threat because we had strong leadership. With a celebrity daydreamer at the helm, the United States finds itself unable to meet this threat. Such a difficult decision to honor old committments seems FAR more than President Kardashian could do.
With the U.S. failing at a time when the Western democracies have all put their hopes on our armed forces, are the democracies doomed?
With the U.S. failing at a time when the Western democracies have all put their hopes on our armed forces, are the democracies doomed?
2
But let's get to what's really important.
How can this issue (as with all other issues) be framed to benefit the democrats in the next election cycle? What clever messaging can we develop that will convince our ignorant voters that events in Russia and Ukraine simply DEMAND they vote democrat?
Whatever messaging we develop must include the standard ingredients: portraying repubs as racists; fear mongering that total war (preferably nuclear) will break out if repubs are elected; wedge Bush's name in there as many times as possible.
I'm sure there are many ivy league geniuses working on this as I type.
How can this issue (as with all other issues) be framed to benefit the democrats in the next election cycle? What clever messaging can we develop that will convince our ignorant voters that events in Russia and Ukraine simply DEMAND they vote democrat?
Whatever messaging we develop must include the standard ingredients: portraying repubs as racists; fear mongering that total war (preferably nuclear) will break out if repubs are elected; wedge Bush's name in there as many times as possible.
I'm sure there are many ivy league geniuses working on this as I type.
I second the motion.
Give Ukraine the ability to defend their Independence and liberty.
The French provided US with arms during the American Revolution.
Let's do the same for Ukraine before it's too late!!!
Give Ukraine the ability to defend their Independence and liberty.
The French provided US with arms during the American Revolution.
Let's do the same for Ukraine before it's too late!!!
2
The author conveniently leaves out details which immediately pre-dated the Maidan uprisings. Notably, that the EU forced Yanukovich to choose between competing European and Russian trade treaties. Anyone who has any understanding of the Ukrainian and Russian relationship knows that such a situation would be impossible for Yanukovich to consider. The Ukrainian economy is closely inter-locked on trade with the Russian Federation, and to fracture that would lead to catastrophic consequences. And this was known to Brussels, and in forcing the matter, it led to the Yanukovich abandoning the European deal in favour of the only option he could choose. This is what led to the Maidan uprisings, which were far from popular. To further claim that the 'coup' wasn't a 'coup' is simply idiotic by any definition. It's fine for the Times to take an anti-Russian line if it wishes, but omissions of context and fact are rather a disservice to the readership. Even if this is only an opinion piece.
3
Another truly insightful; column by Mr. Cohen. Russia respects History, but only if it is their version of it. We Americans do not yet have a proper respect for it; because, we are still such a vey young nation. However, Europeans honor and take pride in what their countries and peoples have done.
Russian History and its people's mindset are quite strong, especially when viewed through Vladimir Putin's multi-colored glasses. He still believes that the failed Soviet way was, indeed, the best for Russia; however, he really seems to want to become the new Soviet Czar. Vladimir I.
He never really was a politician or a diplomat. He never seemed to have gotten out of the old KGB style of doing business. My way…or you die! Unfortunately. Putin lacks the flexibility to properly negotiate and adjust his strategy to the here and now, rather than constantly viewing things as they had been--but, in his recollection of the past.
Fortunately, German Chancellor Angela Merkel problem knows and understands Putin best. When she was one week old, her Father moved the Family to East Germany where she grew up, learned to speak Russian, earned her Ph.D. and entered politics.
In fact, she says that Putin's German--since he was stationed in East Germany with the KGB--is better than her Russian. But, Merkel's understanding of how he thinks is a very valuable asset for the West.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Russian History and its people's mindset are quite strong, especially when viewed through Vladimir Putin's multi-colored glasses. He still believes that the failed Soviet way was, indeed, the best for Russia; however, he really seems to want to become the new Soviet Czar. Vladimir I.
He never really was a politician or a diplomat. He never seemed to have gotten out of the old KGB style of doing business. My way…or you die! Unfortunately. Putin lacks the flexibility to properly negotiate and adjust his strategy to the here and now, rather than constantly viewing things as they had been--but, in his recollection of the past.
Fortunately, German Chancellor Angela Merkel problem knows and understands Putin best. When she was one week old, her Father moved the Family to East Germany where she grew up, learned to speak Russian, earned her Ph.D. and entered politics.
In fact, she says that Putin's German--since he was stationed in East Germany with the KGB--is better than her Russian. But, Merkel's understanding of how he thinks is a very valuable asset for the West.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
1
And when arming Ukraine doesn't work then what would Roger Cohen suggest? One would suspect the Russians could easily match and trump any buildup of western arms to Kiev.
Given our involvement in the coup in that started this mess, I'd say we've already done more than enough there.
2
Well Mr. Cohen, a quick internet search would have yielded this: 'The Stalin Note, also known as the March Note, was a document delivered to the representatives of the Western allied powers (the United Kingdom, France, and the United States) from the Soviet Occupation in Germany on March 10, 1952. Soviet leader Stalin put forth a proposal for a reunification and neutralization of Germany, with no conditions on economic policies and with guarantees for "the rights of man and basic freedoms, including freedom of speech, press, religious persuasion, political conviction, and assembly" and free activity of democratic parties and organizations.'
So Mr. Lavrov was obviously right.
I honestly wonder how fierecly the US will demand every country's right for self determination, if Greece, Cyprus or Turkey should choose to joing the Russian block, or if Germany decided to leave NATO and become neutral
So Mr. Lavrov was obviously right.
I honestly wonder how fierecly the US will demand every country's right for self determination, if Greece, Cyprus or Turkey should choose to joing the Russian block, or if Germany decided to leave NATO and become neutral
3
Hillarious, Finn!! So Eisenhower should have relied on the "guarantees" of Joseph Stalin of all people that he would grant freedom of speech, press, religious persuasion, political conviction, and assembly to West Germans - freedoms they already had, of course, and East Germans did not. Yeah, sure - we should have just trusted Joe Stalin - a guy who murdered even more people than Hitler in an effort to keep exactly those freedoms away from the Soviet people.
So if Uncle Joe was so interested in giving these freedoms to the subjects of his East German satellite dictatorship, why didn't he just give them to him? Why did he need a deal with the West to do so when it was only the people under his own control who didn't have those freedoms?
Finally, how much is the Kremlin paying you, anyway? I hope your check is denominated in dollars or Euros and not rubles or you might walk any time now!
So if Uncle Joe was so interested in giving these freedoms to the subjects of his East German satellite dictatorship, why didn't he just give them to him? Why did he need a deal with the West to do so when it was only the people under his own control who didn't have those freedoms?
Finally, how much is the Kremlin paying you, anyway? I hope your check is denominated in dollars or Euros and not rubles or you might walk any time now!
3
The top 20 Reader Picks reject this Roger Cohen, so different from the Roger Cohen who often writes about Iran and in doing so gets our support. We have to reach number 21 to find a reader who supports Cohen and thinks Putin should be given "a sharp punch in the nose" high-level thinking that made this comment a Times Pick.
I, an American, will be European on this one. I assume that Sweden as nation supports the Merkel approach, but can note that my Swedish newspaper reports that Saab Dynamics sells AT 4 anti-tank weapons to the USA which then perhaps delivers them where Swedish law perhaps forbids delivery.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
I, an American, will be European on this one. I assume that Sweden as nation supports the Merkel approach, but can note that my Swedish newspaper reports that Saab Dynamics sells AT 4 anti-tank weapons to the USA which then perhaps delivers them where Swedish law perhaps forbids delivery.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
1
I have looked at the most "Recommended" comments, and this is my distillation of their message:
"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing." (Neville Chamberlain, 27 September 1938)
"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing." (Neville Chamberlain, 27 September 1938)
When one side only of a story is heard and often repeated, the human mind becomes impressed with it insensibly. - George Washington
2
I am much more concerned that the Russian leadership will initiate a nuclear strike on the united states in retaliation for the decline in oil prices engineered by the Saudi's. A decline aimed straight at the economy of the united states, with any damage to Russia as collateral damage.
The danger here is that Putin's Russia is so completely divorced from reality that any eventuality is possible.
The danger here is that Putin's Russia is so completely divorced from reality that any eventuality is possible.
Obviously, Mr. Putin is not doing a "cost-benefit analysis". If he would do that, he would be out already. He will not back off, because obviously he considers the loss of face more important, than the death of more Russian soldiers. The only way to end this, is to offer him a way out that allows him to keep his, face and to convince him to take that exit. Arming up Ukraine would set a spiral in motion, which the West could never win i.e. the USA can never arm up the Ukraine to a level, which would allow a military victory, as long as Russia is prepared to support the "insurgents" indefinitely. Mr. Cohen et al.: Please think this issue through to the end! Are you prepared to end up in a Cuba Missile Crisis style face-off - nuke on nuke - for the Ukraine? If not, better do not start walking down that path.
Usually perspective, especially with regard to the Middle East where Roger Cohen urges compromise and reconciliation, his analysis of the so-called illusions of the West with regard to Russia borders on the irresponsible. Shaun Narine has set out the case against the West's military intervention in the Ukrainian struggle. John Measrheimer in an Op-ed piece in the NYTimes on Feb.8 reenforces the case against intervention and suggests action pointing towards a political solution, a solution that finds favour in Germany and France. With humour Mr. Cohen speaks of the past to call Sergei Lavrov to order. Well done. But before answering Mr. Cohen's call to arms, it is useful to recall earlier voices urging US military intervention. Setting the Middle East to the side, recall that Senator McCain gave Mikheil Saakashvil, President of Georgia, a flak jacket urging him to stand tall. And that was just before Saakashvil launched the Five Day War of August 2008. The Senator's voice is heard again today. Anti-tank weapons stand in for the flak jacket.
2
You are absolutely correct except you are "arming" the wrong people.
Historically, and currently, the only thing standing between Russia and the rest of Europe is not Ukraine nor Poland for that matter; it's Germany.
Forget "The Land Where the Iron Crosses Grow"; from Crimea to the Ukraine is "Russian" turf and will become Mr. Putin's legacy as he follows an almost historical drive to incorporate both into greater Russia. Arming Ukranians will do nothing to stop this; perhaps delay it a bit and make lots of money for Western "Arms Dealers".
A strong, well armed and well backed Germany is this "crisis"'s "red line ". Let Mr. Putin have the territories he wants; all that will happen, as in the past, is a smoldering, long term, guerilla style war against what the allies called "partisans" and what Mr. Putin, in a long standing "tradition", will call "bandits".
This "strong Germany", however, must be backed by more than "sanctions". The full weight of NATO with TOTAL American backing must be committed to this effort if Mr. Putin and his army is to be stymied. As it seems he is ready to return to "The Cold War" then no sanctioning on earth is going to stop him. Since the West's "intelligence" seems clueless as to his intent, I recommend using the "intelligence" of history and just reason that his plan is similar to those in the past. When Bismarck said "The secret to politics? Make a good treaty with Russia" he was speaking from a position of strength.
Time to heed good old Otto
Historically, and currently, the only thing standing between Russia and the rest of Europe is not Ukraine nor Poland for that matter; it's Germany.
Forget "The Land Where the Iron Crosses Grow"; from Crimea to the Ukraine is "Russian" turf and will become Mr. Putin's legacy as he follows an almost historical drive to incorporate both into greater Russia. Arming Ukranians will do nothing to stop this; perhaps delay it a bit and make lots of money for Western "Arms Dealers".
A strong, well armed and well backed Germany is this "crisis"'s "red line ". Let Mr. Putin have the territories he wants; all that will happen, as in the past, is a smoldering, long term, guerilla style war against what the allies called "partisans" and what Mr. Putin, in a long standing "tradition", will call "bandits".
This "strong Germany", however, must be backed by more than "sanctions". The full weight of NATO with TOTAL American backing must be committed to this effort if Mr. Putin and his army is to be stymied. As it seems he is ready to return to "The Cold War" then no sanctioning on earth is going to stop him. Since the West's "intelligence" seems clueless as to his intent, I recommend using the "intelligence" of history and just reason that his plan is similar to those in the past. When Bismarck said "The secret to politics? Make a good treaty with Russia" he was speaking from a position of strength.
Time to heed good old Otto
Russia needs some good friends surely - not the same old enemy, the West. And why exactly are we enemies of Russia? America might have won the War in the Pacific, but it was Russia who really defeated the Germans. And since then the West has romanced the Germans and created Russia as the enemy. Why do we always have to have an enemy, anyway? Is it just to sell arms? Ukraine was Russian. And didn't they have a referendum last year - or recently - when 75% of the population voted to go with Russia? Why does the West conveniently ignore that? Their pensions immediately doubled, free health, education, etc. Surely the fiasco that is now the Middle East is quite enough to have created, without engaging in more conflict. Especially when it was Saudis who carried out 9/11.
1
There are two things that should make one think twice before sending arms to Ukraine. Firstly, modern weaponry is powerful when it is integrated, when guns are connected to radars through command & control systems, for instance. NATO arms cannot be integrated with the systems used by the Ukrainian army, and that will make the weapons and the advisers who will have to train the Ukrainian personnel extremely vulnerable and ineffective. Secondly, arms sales cannot change incompetent command and policy making. So, the presence of American arms and military advisers will only help Putin fan patriotic hysteria and prop up his popularity with those who are only too eager to blame the West for everything they don't like around themselves.
1
The rebels seem to have been able to make due with the twenty or so weapons systems they got that weren't available in Ukraine.
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/02/tracking-the-weapons-used-to-f...
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/02/tracking-the-weapons-used-to-f...
2
It was not only Russia that assured Ukrain's territorial integrity and political independence in 1994 in exchange for nuclear arms. United States and United Kingdom were also a part of the agreement.
When territorial integrity of Ukrain has been violated by one signatory, the two other should at least help Ukrain with arms to reclaim its territory, not to destroy Russia.
Don't fall for the nuclear black mail. Soviet Union helped North Vietnam to win over South and drive US forces out in the 60s and 70s. US armed Afghan fighters to push back Soviet Army in the 80s. Nobody threw nuclear arms on anybody.
When territorial integrity of Ukrain has been violated by one signatory, the two other should at least help Ukrain with arms to reclaim its territory, not to destroy Russia.
Don't fall for the nuclear black mail. Soviet Union helped North Vietnam to win over South and drive US forces out in the 60s and 70s. US armed Afghan fighters to push back Soviet Army in the 80s. Nobody threw nuclear arms on anybody.
1
Mr. Cohen, born in South Africa, living in England and with some ancestral ties to the part of the Ukraine which used to be Poland, is relentless in his desire to spend American blood and treasure for what - to keep Crimea in Ukrainian hands, to reintegrate Russian speaking eastern Ukrainians into the warm embrace of their brothers in Kiev.
We are finishing up a half century in which America has been ginned up to use military force in one foolish venture after another (Cuba, Vietnam, Granada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again). Always the same scenario - we must confront evil or we will be Neville Chamberlain. Always the overblown threat. Always the result, never worth the sacrifices of life and dollars.
There are at least half a dozen conflicts in Africa where death and devastation is thousands of times greater than what is happening in the Ukraine but they never seem to generate an op-ed constituency.
There is a strategy in place that is squeezing Russia. It will not yield immediate benefits, but is much more likely to work than a lame plan to introduce "defensive" weapons. Supplying arms in a place where we are at a strategic disadvantage is a non-starter. The world is awash with truly evil people who mean us harm and operate with weapons we gave to freedom fighters.
Let it rest.
We are finishing up a half century in which America has been ginned up to use military force in one foolish venture after another (Cuba, Vietnam, Granada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again). Always the same scenario - we must confront evil or we will be Neville Chamberlain. Always the overblown threat. Always the result, never worth the sacrifices of life and dollars.
There are at least half a dozen conflicts in Africa where death and devastation is thousands of times greater than what is happening in the Ukraine but they never seem to generate an op-ed constituency.
There is a strategy in place that is squeezing Russia. It will not yield immediate benefits, but is much more likely to work than a lame plan to introduce "defensive" weapons. Supplying arms in a place where we are at a strategic disadvantage is a non-starter. The world is awash with truly evil people who mean us harm and operate with weapons we gave to freedom fighters.
Let it rest.
2
Roger is right.
Not too smart appeasers say: "don't resist Putin, he is a madman! He could start World War III! Kneel, and give him what he wants: Georgia, Moldavia, Ukraine, even Hungary..."
So we give, and then what? Putin's economy will still be sinking under the weight of militarization. Putin is on the attack, because then he looks like the great defender, and he gets Hitler-like approval ratings of 85%.
What Putin needs, what will satisfy Putin, is not territory, it's war. So he will go on so that Russia feels at war. Give him Ukraine, he will invade WEST of Ukraine (as he is already doing in Moldavia).
The only thing that could, and will, stop him? External force. Psychologically, and politically, Putin needs war. Just not too costly a war.
Spurning a Republic under fascist attack was tried in 1936-1939, when Spain was attacked by the dictators Hitler and Mussolini. Do we need a repeat?
Then France declared she would sell weapons to the Republic. Britian and the USA thought that would be a very bad idea, for the exact same reason evoked today to protect Putin.
Result? Spain fell, millions died there. Worse: the Nazis learned to use modern weapons, and caught the Brits and French by surprise in 1940... From the training they had done in Spain.
Ukraine gave up its nukes under defense guarantees. They are violated. Western powers, which gave these guarantees, are becoming liars.
https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/02/06/pacifist-disease-kneeling-t...
Not too smart appeasers say: "don't resist Putin, he is a madman! He could start World War III! Kneel, and give him what he wants: Georgia, Moldavia, Ukraine, even Hungary..."
So we give, and then what? Putin's economy will still be sinking under the weight of militarization. Putin is on the attack, because then he looks like the great defender, and he gets Hitler-like approval ratings of 85%.
What Putin needs, what will satisfy Putin, is not territory, it's war. So he will go on so that Russia feels at war. Give him Ukraine, he will invade WEST of Ukraine (as he is already doing in Moldavia).
The only thing that could, and will, stop him? External force. Psychologically, and politically, Putin needs war. Just not too costly a war.
Spurning a Republic under fascist attack was tried in 1936-1939, when Spain was attacked by the dictators Hitler and Mussolini. Do we need a repeat?
Then France declared she would sell weapons to the Republic. Britian and the USA thought that would be a very bad idea, for the exact same reason evoked today to protect Putin.
Result? Spain fell, millions died there. Worse: the Nazis learned to use modern weapons, and caught the Brits and French by surprise in 1940... From the training they had done in Spain.
Ukraine gave up its nukes under defense guarantees. They are violated. Western powers, which gave these guarantees, are becoming liars.
https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/02/06/pacifist-disease-kneeling-t...
3
Ukraine and the Ukrainian people deserve our support. How many Ukrainian people have immigrated to America,Canada why? Freedom from Soviet Russia and later to get out from control of Russia. Since WW2 the united states has been the back bone of Europe keeping the former Soviet Union at bay now Russia.
JFK said it best ..we well defend freedom st any and all cost based on the principles of the United States and the People of the United States.
Sanctions should be increased against Russia also we should be making the cost of PUTIN invading Ukraine as costly as we can by giving Ukraine the means to defend there country. When the body bags start going home to Russia by the truck loads then and only then well the Russian people wake up. The Russian Generals and the rich are not and well not let Putin Destroy Russia.
JFK said it best ..we well defend freedom st any and all cost based on the principles of the United States and the People of the United States.
Sanctions should be increased against Russia also we should be making the cost of PUTIN invading Ukraine as costly as we can by giving Ukraine the means to defend there country. When the body bags start going home to Russia by the truck loads then and only then well the Russian people wake up. The Russian Generals and the rich are not and well not let Putin Destroy Russia.
2
How many Irish had emigrated to the US to escape the oppression and poverty? According to your logic, the US should intervene immediately. Stop watching propaganda and question if our government takes any money from companies that are happy to sell weapons to spread the democracy.
2
Recently a German journalist of the leading newspaper Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung who after 17 years resigned and published a book called 'Gekaufte Journalisten' or 'Bought Journalists' . He mentioned that most leading journalist are paid by their governments but even more so by the CIA to write favourable articles that hide the truth.
Well Mr. Cohen when I read your article I realize that you are probably paid by the White House to write these lies and propaganda misleading the American public.
And finally, what the hell is America doing in Europe anyhow interfering in an ALL European affair, Europe also didn't impose sanctions on the USA during the Cuba Crisis in 1962.although the risk for WW III were very real!
Well Mr. Cohen when I read your article I realize that you are probably paid by the White House to write these lies and propaganda misleading the American public.
And finally, what the hell is America doing in Europe anyhow interfering in an ALL European affair, Europe also didn't impose sanctions on the USA during the Cuba Crisis in 1962.although the risk for WW III were very real!
7
So right. Thanks for your position. Its amazing but the world seems set of zombie. Hey, world! 70 % People of south-east of Ukraina not want to live in EU. You want to teach them by missiles and bombes. Well. Then you will know what the missiles and bombes on yours own back is. By the way. Is there some proof of invasion Russian troops or supplies of Russian military hardware in Ukraina? Not? So, go pass by.
1
Roger, you ridicule communist propagandists here, but I must say 'it takes one to know one'. How could any objective observer deny that NATO expansion east to Russia's doorstep would unnerve Russian leaders of any political persuasion? Of course Ukrainians would welcome the EU's largesse. Didn't the Cubans welcome help from the USSR, and how did our politicians feel about that? Crimea was part of Russia until Khrushchev gave it to the Ukraine, but that's not part of history too? Speaking of history, for how many centuries has Ukraine been in Russia's sphere of influence? How many times in history have German and Russian interests collided in this part of the worlld? I just have to wonder what your motives are for betting on a dog in this fight. Why is it our interests as Americans to rattle the Bear's cage when he's cornered?
7
Think with your heart. Feel with your brain.
If you think with your heart you will never do anything morally wrong. Always do the right thing, even if it’s not profitable. Your brain will sometimes fool you into being selfish and greedy. Your brain will always fool you into short-term thinking. Give me now, give me here!
From a proper time distance, the retroactive analyses will always show that you and your country would be better off if you thought with your heart and did the right thing the first time. Just go back and reexamine our national policy and strategy from the 50’s and 60’s. If we made those decisions with our hearts, we would have never erred!
Before you implement some revolutionary “cost-cutting measure” in your businesses, use your brain to understand how you would personally feel if you were at the receiving end of such a policy or strategy.
If we thought with our hearts and felt with our brains, we would not have the colossal national debt and chronic trade deficits. We would not have exported our industrial base and manufacturing overseas and left our neighbors unemployed and in deep debt. We would not have waged the wrong foreign wars and supported the worst world dictators.
Don’t you see that our brains fool us if we let them overrule our hearts?
Regarding Ukraine, it’s utterly wrong to support any side in this conflict. Both sides should be blamed and criticized for not loving their neighbors.
Hatred is the worst weapon of mass destruction.
If you think with your heart you will never do anything morally wrong. Always do the right thing, even if it’s not profitable. Your brain will sometimes fool you into being selfish and greedy. Your brain will always fool you into short-term thinking. Give me now, give me here!
From a proper time distance, the retroactive analyses will always show that you and your country would be better off if you thought with your heart and did the right thing the first time. Just go back and reexamine our national policy and strategy from the 50’s and 60’s. If we made those decisions with our hearts, we would have never erred!
Before you implement some revolutionary “cost-cutting measure” in your businesses, use your brain to understand how you would personally feel if you were at the receiving end of such a policy or strategy.
If we thought with our hearts and felt with our brains, we would not have the colossal national debt and chronic trade deficits. We would not have exported our industrial base and manufacturing overseas and left our neighbors unemployed and in deep debt. We would not have waged the wrong foreign wars and supported the worst world dictators.
Don’t you see that our brains fool us if we let them overrule our hearts?
Regarding Ukraine, it’s utterly wrong to support any side in this conflict. Both sides should be blamed and criticized for not loving their neighbors.
Hatred is the worst weapon of mass destruction.
2
amen
It is so sad to see Roger Cohen, who is has been always so reasonable about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and US-Iran relations turning into someone who believes that war can improve anything. Because, yes, sending arms into Ukraine is war, whether we like it or not. And although Putin is a odious dictator starting war with him is still not the same as starting war with Hitler. And remember, Saddam Hussein was an odious dictator gassing his own people, we declared war, deposed him and made a paradise of Iraq..or didn't we ? An old proverb, an ounce of peace is worth more than a ton of war, is true, we should continue talking.
2
smattau:
"Neo-facism is what keeps Putin in power."
And what keeps thousands of paid kremlin disinformators in all Western blogs 24/7, including many below on this tread, hiding behind pseudo-"anglo"- screen names, working in with outright mendacity Kremlin fascist approach to Ukraine to be accepted by the Western public.
"Neo-facism is what keeps Putin in power."
And what keeps thousands of paid kremlin disinformators in all Western blogs 24/7, including many below on this tread, hiding behind pseudo-"anglo"- screen names, working in with outright mendacity Kremlin fascist approach to Ukraine to be accepted by the Western public.
5
G,
Why don't you call out some of these "disinformators"...?
Why don't you call out some of these "disinformators"...?
For Roger Cohen and the readers who believe claims of an extreme right in Kiev are Russian fabrications:
http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/02/21/chief-rabbi-of-ukraine-urges-jews-t...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/opinion/ukraines-festering-divisions.h...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/02/12/who-are-th...
http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-soldiers-government-were-coming-next-15584...
http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/02/21/chief-rabbi-of-ukraine-urges-jews-t...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/opinion/ukraines-festering-divisions.h...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/02/12/who-are-th...
http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-soldiers-government-were-coming-next-15584...
1
The US wants to destroy and blame in Ukraine war Russia only because at the moment the only country that can deter U.S. A aggression is Russia! Ask the residents of Libya, the former Yugoslavia, Iran how they live now? Nobody asked the US to invade their territory! because the smaller the country, the easier it to make what US wants. The only purpose of the U.S. is this strategic territory and minerals. Crimea was the nearest point to Russia, USA failed to win, now USA want to divide Ukrainians and Russians on the territory of Ukraine, as it is easier to win! in 1991 USA destroyed Soviet Union , today they want to destroyed Russia in any way!Awake at last!!!there are no Russian troops in the Ukraine! There are fascists-radicals, which spun off from Kiev and businessmen in Kyiv, which need more money from Europe and the USA. Donetsk and Lugansk voted in a referendum on secession from Ukraine-so release them! NO!!! this will not be as thia is an important strategic area and the United States will not want to miss it, and Russia doesn't want to have NATO and fascists in neibouhood. More then 1 mln from Ukraine fled to Russia from the Ukrainian army that kills ordinary people, not in Europe but in Russia!!Russia sent 14 humanitarian convoys to people in Ukraine but not Poroshenko!! He is enterprising businessmen, don't care for his own people!! Europe -if real war will start you first have disappeared from the face of the earth! don't go on about US! Stop USA together!
2
I suppose it's a good thing that the Times allowed this hysterical and incoherent rant onto this board, as it proves that Putin's propaganda has worked its way deep into the minds of the Russian people.
1
Bring back the Warsaw Pact and offer Mexico a membership. Let us see how the United States reacts then...
1
Ukraine?!
Who cares about Ukraine? They are supposed to take care of their own problems. They should know how to live together and cooperate with their first neighbors. If they don’t love their neighbors, that’s their problems, not ours!
What about Croatia? Should we care about that country? They just elected their new president! Do you know what she did? She immediately resigned from her old political party. Why? As elected president she is supposed to represent all the Croatians, not just her party colleagues.
When did the last time our elected representatives – the Presidents, the Senators, the Congressmen and the Congresswomen – quit their political parties to fairly represent the best interests of all Americans?
Without partisan loyalties there would be no political paralysis and bickering in Washington D.C and America would be much better country...
Who cares about Ukraine? They are supposed to take care of their own problems. They should know how to live together and cooperate with their first neighbors. If they don’t love their neighbors, that’s their problems, not ours!
What about Croatia? Should we care about that country? They just elected their new president! Do you know what she did? She immediately resigned from her old political party. Why? As elected president she is supposed to represent all the Croatians, not just her party colleagues.
When did the last time our elected representatives – the Presidents, the Senators, the Congressmen and the Congresswomen – quit their political parties to fairly represent the best interests of all Americans?
Without partisan loyalties there would be no political paralysis and bickering in Washington D.C and America would be much better country...
It is gibberish to say Crimea was annexed by Russia, is it not not allowed self-determination? Was this not allowed in the yugoslav states? And as for the US and Europe backing Ukraine and the illegal government whose aim is to trash the Eastern provinces is sheer hypocrisy. I respect America but you have got this one completely wrong.
I watched the newsreels as forty 'Ukrainians' were burnt to death as the protested their rights with not a word uttered in the West. I watched as a Junta took over the elected government with no protest from the west. I watched as a representative of this 'Junta' said she would like to 'nuke' the Eastern provinces. If Eastern Ukraine wants self-determination so be it.
America, do not dig yourself a hole you cannot get out of: Remember... Things do not happen. Things are made to happen. John_f_kennedy.
I watched the newsreels as forty 'Ukrainians' were burnt to death as the protested their rights with not a word uttered in the West. I watched as a Junta took over the elected government with no protest from the west. I watched as a representative of this 'Junta' said she would like to 'nuke' the Eastern provinces. If Eastern Ukraine wants self-determination so be it.
America, do not dig yourself a hole you cannot get out of: Remember... Things do not happen. Things are made to happen. John_f_kennedy.
3
A far better solution for the world would be to get rid of Putin. He is a menace just as are the conservative republicans in this country.
1
How do you propose getting rid of Putin?
The only way to stop Russian aggression is to arm Ukraine.
The only way to stop Russian aggression is to arm Ukraine.
2
Western Ukranians may yearn to join the west, but do residents of the Eurozone want to subsidise another newcomer's learning curve?
1
When two people describe an event in radically opposed ways, you whiff either the pungent stench or the perfumed fragrance of situational "irony". Or, both. It depends on where you stand, on the issue. The speaker’s description may better define the speaker than the referent, to the savvy listener.
When each party's divergent description matches, rationalises and justifies said party’s own apparent interests, but denies, contradicts and condemns the other party’s, one or both of them must be suspect of "hypocrisy". Hypocrisy is imitating what you criticise, not practicing what you preach, saying one thing and doing another, publicly condemning while privately committing, with aplomb.
When two hypocrites confront each other against a 'painted landscape' whose fore-, middle- and background(s) drip thick brushstrokes of situational irony, each will be tempted to reach for figures of speech and intonations that convey some degree of "sarcasm". Sarcasm is ‘biting contempt’ expressed in words.
When you have two 'hypocrites' castigating each other for a mote in the other's eye, beaming with self righteousness, swimming in an amber prison of 'irony', tempted to 'sarcasms', skirting round 'logical' argument to avoid neurotic guilt, unconcerned with reality... You have the spitting image of the 'masters of the universe': two former superpowers steeped in self-serving narratives, doing no one any good.
For once, the beginning of diplomacy would be talking straight.
When each party's divergent description matches, rationalises and justifies said party’s own apparent interests, but denies, contradicts and condemns the other party’s, one or both of them must be suspect of "hypocrisy". Hypocrisy is imitating what you criticise, not practicing what you preach, saying one thing and doing another, publicly condemning while privately committing, with aplomb.
When two hypocrites confront each other against a 'painted landscape' whose fore-, middle- and background(s) drip thick brushstrokes of situational irony, each will be tempted to reach for figures of speech and intonations that convey some degree of "sarcasm". Sarcasm is ‘biting contempt’ expressed in words.
When you have two 'hypocrites' castigating each other for a mote in the other's eye, beaming with self righteousness, swimming in an amber prison of 'irony', tempted to 'sarcasms', skirting round 'logical' argument to avoid neurotic guilt, unconcerned with reality... You have the spitting image of the 'masters of the universe': two former superpowers steeped in self-serving narratives, doing no one any good.
For once, the beginning of diplomacy would be talking straight.
1
As so often happens, lack of understanding of the long-term history of an issue leads to incorrect assessment of it. Subjection of the Chechen, Georgian, Ukrainian and other states to Moscow did not spring forth as issues for the first time during the last 25 years. They have been part and parcel of the great march of Russian imperialism during a period of five centuries from the time of Ivan IV. Russia has been an imperialist and expansionist state throughout that period. Russia was still Russian under the USSR; indeed, for practical purposes, Russia was the USSR. And during the USSR, the central government saw to it that citizens of the Russian Republic were forcibly settled on the territory of other republics, among them Ukraine, and the Baltic states forcibly incorporated during WW2.
The Russian speaking inhabitants of Eastern Ukraine may more rationally be seen as multigenerational fifth columnists planted by Moscow during the time of Stalin and his spiritual descendants, rather than oppressed minorities crying au secours to that Great Russian champion of human rights, Vladimir Putin, himself one of the long line of totalitarian tools haling from KGB, NKVD, Cheka and Tsarist agencies before them back to Ivan's oprichkini. Seizure of Crimea merely whetted his appetite. I am no shill for foreign adventures. Deny Ukraine if you will, but realize that cession of Eastern Ukraine may have consequences similar to ceding Hitler the Sudetenland.
The Russian speaking inhabitants of Eastern Ukraine may more rationally be seen as multigenerational fifth columnists planted by Moscow during the time of Stalin and his spiritual descendants, rather than oppressed minorities crying au secours to that Great Russian champion of human rights, Vladimir Putin, himself one of the long line of totalitarian tools haling from KGB, NKVD, Cheka and Tsarist agencies before them back to Ivan's oprichkini. Seizure of Crimea merely whetted his appetite. I am no shill for foreign adventures. Deny Ukraine if you will, but realize that cession of Eastern Ukraine may have consequences similar to ceding Hitler the Sudetenland.
3
America promised to protect these people. Too bad holding to promises is way too Uncool and like the stuff all those Old Guys used to do when they ''ruled.''
Madness Mr Cohen is saying the same think over and over again. Why should Russia trust Europe? Tribal Europe will always be finding excuses for war--especially when the temperature drops and the crops again start to fail.
Europe at best has a sic percent crop surplus. Cold years mean imports and/or war. A warming globe might well be a Russian dream.
Do we really want European morals in Russia? Which major European nation do you trust? Netherlands 40% of our banking, commercial! and industrial ownership. England and Belgium own another 30%. Wall Street's lack of morals that we are just now digging out from now--European ownership set the moral standards and played the dance tunes.
Bribery, money laundering of Russian money--has anyone even tried to claim that those who may have corruptly acquired large amounts of of capital store it in Russian banks. Hell, no. European banks and London and NYC realtors will happily let you invest. Transparency bad in Russia. Well, what has the NYT been writing about NYC real estate investment by shell companies or how about Nevada and Delaware?
Europe at best has a sic percent crop surplus. Cold years mean imports and/or war. A warming globe might well be a Russian dream.
Do we really want European morals in Russia? Which major European nation do you trust? Netherlands 40% of our banking, commercial! and industrial ownership. England and Belgium own another 30%. Wall Street's lack of morals that we are just now digging out from now--European ownership set the moral standards and played the dance tunes.
Bribery, money laundering of Russian money--has anyone even tried to claim that those who may have corruptly acquired large amounts of of capital store it in Russian banks. Hell, no. European banks and London and NYC realtors will happily let you invest. Transparency bad in Russia. Well, what has the NYT been writing about NYC real estate investment by shell companies or how about Nevada and Delaware?
1
IT'S OK FOR AMERICA to threaten nuclear holocaust if the Soviet Union accepts Cuba's (90 miles away!) invitation to bring missiles to Cuba! BUT IT'S NOT OK for Russia to try to stop the Ukraine (ZERO miles away?) from joining the EU and maybe (gasp!) NATO... by squeezing Russia, making them suffer, and moving closer to a nuclear confrontation with Russia.
If this is a bit confusing, then you are not appreciating how a Nobel Peace Prize President advances... peace?
If this is a bit confusing, then you are not appreciating how a Nobel Peace Prize President advances... peace?
4
Bravo, Roger! Thank you for calling Russia on its invasion of a neighboring sovereign state against all international law, and the outrageous lies it continues to spread to justify its continued destruction of Ukraine. Shame on the "vaunted" American academics arguing for "Russia's sphere of influence" and a "neutral" Ukraine a la Austria. A bully like Putin will only stop if he thinks his opponent has the means to stand up to him. That's where a stronger defense for Ukraine comes in. Let's help Ukraine get out from under the
Russian yoke and at long last become the democratic and prosperous nation for which so many risked their lives.
Russian yoke and at long last become the democratic and prosperous nation for which so many risked their lives.
3
If the U.S. is truly serious about denying Ukrain territory to Russia, and supports its smooth incorporation into the NATO alliance, then we should be providing strategic nuclear weapons to the Ukrain government. It was the United States, after all, that assisted in the dismantling of Ukrain's considerable post Soviet nuclear weapon stockpile. The Ukrainians agreed to this under the presumption that Soviet expansionist policy died with the old Soviet empire.
Clearly this is no longer the case. The U.S. should, therefor, answer Russian aggression, first with a declaration of NATO's and the U.S.'s extension of its strategic nuclear umbrella over Ukrain, followed by the basing of deterrent nuclear forces on Ukrain's soil. Ultimately, it is only the threat of an autonomous Ukrainian nuclear response that will give pause to the shirtless oligarch in Moscow.
Clearly this is no longer the case. The U.S. should, therefor, answer Russian aggression, first with a declaration of NATO's and the U.S.'s extension of its strategic nuclear umbrella over Ukrain, followed by the basing of deterrent nuclear forces on Ukrain's soil. Ultimately, it is only the threat of an autonomous Ukrainian nuclear response that will give pause to the shirtless oligarch in Moscow.
Only wish you were America's Commander-in-Chief!
This comment completes Cohen's logic: let's play chicken with Putin, and don't even think about swerving. The only reason we are alive today is that this particular game has only been played once, during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.
Well, since this is a democratic country, I would like to do a simple poll. How many Americans are willing to die to "win" in Ukraine?
Well, since this is a democratic country, I would like to do a simple poll. How many Americans are willing to die to "win" in Ukraine?
1
As I recall, the Soviets did, in fact, blink during the Cuban crises. I also recall that the Russian military machine was roughly as inferior to the West's military might as we see today. Much of the Russian strategic arsenal is in an advanced state of decrepitude. They rarely deploy their ballistic missile submarines (due to their nasty habit of spontaneous combustion), and their bomber fleet is something right out of a WWII magazine (propellers!) That leaves their strategic rocket forces as their remaining deterrent. Many of these weapons are in serious need of maintainance, and many more would be vulnerable to the ABM systems already fielded in Eastern and Western Europe. What really makes the argument academic, is the fact that Russia's oligarchy is not about to risk the cushy lifestyle they have enjoyed since the breakup of the Soviet Union. I do believe they would "remove" Vladdy Putin if they thought he was going to fight a nuclear war with the U.S.
fighting and losing might be better than not fighting and winning.
1
Putin has to be stopped even if it means sending arms to the Ukrainians. He is bluffing with the nuclear rhetoric but will advance until he suffers serious defeats. If he is not stopped now, he will carve up Ukraine and set sight on other delectable territories, including the Baltics. I mean, does anyone really think he will stop with Ukraine? If Ukraine fights back with armed support, it will take far more Russian blood to subdue it. And THAT will not play well in Moscow. Putin is on thinner ice than most people realize. The ruling oligarchs are both terrified and outraged and a palace coup is not out of the realm of possibility. Putin will not come back to his senses because he has lost them only the strongest measures will work on stopping him.
2
When neocons are after something, even the so-called liberals jump on the wagon.
Mr. Cohen, we do not want to own the Ukrainian conflict. No amount of arms can make Ukraine win a war with Russia. Tell us why you want more Ukrainians to die?
According to UN High Commission of Human rights, out of the so far 600,000 people who have fled the warring areas, over 400,000 of them have fled to Russia. What that tells us is that Ukrainian government forces are killing ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, and many are fleeing to Russia.
It's amazing to me that despite the Nuland recordings where she even picked who should head Ukraine, you continue to deny our role in the uprising.
As for "..the territorial integrity” and “political independence” of Ukraine, in direct violation of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter.", I don't see you worry about Article 2 of United Nations Charter when it comes to the country much more dear to you Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Cohen, we do not want to own the Ukrainian conflict. No amount of arms can make Ukraine win a war with Russia. Tell us why you want more Ukrainians to die?
According to UN High Commission of Human rights, out of the so far 600,000 people who have fled the warring areas, over 400,000 of them have fled to Russia. What that tells us is that Ukrainian government forces are killing ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, and many are fleeing to Russia.
It's amazing to me that despite the Nuland recordings where she even picked who should head Ukraine, you continue to deny our role in the uprising.
As for "..the territorial integrity” and “political independence” of Ukraine, in direct violation of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter.", I don't see you worry about Article 2 of United Nations Charter when it comes to the country much more dear to you Mr. Cohen.
6
Why twist the UN's statistics to bolster your case, when we can all read the report for ourselves? And why engage in a barely veiled anti-semitic jibe in your closing line? Roger Cohen articulates in this op-ed a noble concern for the Ukrainian people, whose citizens in the East are being bombarded to fulfill Putin's neo-imperialist objectives.
More to the point, as the UNHCR reported five days ago, the number of INTERNALLY displaced citizens within Ukraine is now reaching over a million. In short, over a million Ukrainians have been forced to flee to Ukrainian cities that are (so far) safe from Russian-supplied bombs and artillery. Yes, hundreds of thousands have also sought refuge in Russia: do most have any choice? Hardly. Most are yearning (with any luck) to eventually return home to Ukraine:
"KIEV, Ukraine, February 6 (UNHCR) – The UN refugee agency reported on Friday that fighting in eastern Ukraine's Donetsk region is creating new displacement and pushing the number of registered internally displaced people (IDP) close to the 1 million mark.
Ukraine's Ministry of Social Policy puts the number of registered IDPs countrywide at 980,000 – a figure that is expected to rise as more newly uprooted people are being registered. In addition, some 600,000 Ukrainians have sought asylum or other forms of legal stay in neighbouring countries, particularly the Russian Federation, but also Belarus, Moldova, Poland, Hungary and Romania, since February 2014."
More to the point, as the UNHCR reported five days ago, the number of INTERNALLY displaced citizens within Ukraine is now reaching over a million. In short, over a million Ukrainians have been forced to flee to Ukrainian cities that are (so far) safe from Russian-supplied bombs and artillery. Yes, hundreds of thousands have also sought refuge in Russia: do most have any choice? Hardly. Most are yearning (with any luck) to eventually return home to Ukraine:
"KIEV, Ukraine, February 6 (UNHCR) – The UN refugee agency reported on Friday that fighting in eastern Ukraine's Donetsk region is creating new displacement and pushing the number of registered internally displaced people (IDP) close to the 1 million mark.
Ukraine's Ministry of Social Policy puts the number of registered IDPs countrywide at 980,000 – a figure that is expected to rise as more newly uprooted people are being registered. In addition, some 600,000 Ukrainians have sought asylum or other forms of legal stay in neighbouring countries, particularly the Russian Federation, but also Belarus, Moldova, Poland, Hungary and Romania, since February 2014."
3
@Westsider
Where are you getting your information re the UNHCR? Back in December, they reported "some 514,000 people had been internally displaced by the conflict as of the beginning of December." The report also mentions 233,000 seeking asylum or refugee status in Russia with another 222,000 asking for residence permits there; that's 455,000 total. That there are more IDPs than people who applied for some sort of status in Russia undercuts your premise. Likewise, the UNHCR says nothing about the ethnicity of the refugees or the IDPs.
http://www.unhcr.org/548190aa9.html
The Nuland records didn't involve her picking anyone; it did involve diplomats appraising the opposition leaders, which is what they are supposed to do.
Where are you getting your information re the UNHCR? Back in December, they reported "some 514,000 people had been internally displaced by the conflict as of the beginning of December." The report also mentions 233,000 seeking asylum or refugee status in Russia with another 222,000 asking for residence permits there; that's 455,000 total. That there are more IDPs than people who applied for some sort of status in Russia undercuts your premise. Likewise, the UNHCR says nothing about the ethnicity of the refugees or the IDPs.
http://www.unhcr.org/548190aa9.html
The Nuland records didn't involve her picking anyone; it did involve diplomats appraising the opposition leaders, which is what they are supposed to do.
Mr. Cohen. You need to go learn some history. WWII ended in 1945 and was followed by occupation of Germany by Allied forces. Germany was cut into FOUR pieces with each country having a section. The Berlin wall was established in 1961. Fill in your gaps and you will understand what Lavrov was talking about.
1
Since Cohen understands history, the cutting up of Germany was seen clearly as the only hope all the western Germans would have for generations of having a decent life.
With all of Germany's brainpower and manpower hitched to the Soviet albatross, would the ecobonic collapse of 1989 (Thanks to Reagan!) have been prevented? Would the Soviet Empire still be facing us even today?
Would all these post-G.H.W. Bush elections have been held against the backdrop of an ongoing Soviet nuclear missile and land-army threat?
Would the Dems have then nominated a celebrity novice without the merest regard for American security anyway, no matter what, just to lock in an election?
With all of Germany's brainpower and manpower hitched to the Soviet albatross, would the ecobonic collapse of 1989 (Thanks to Reagan!) have been prevented? Would the Soviet Empire still be facing us even today?
Would all these post-G.H.W. Bush elections have been held against the backdrop of an ongoing Soviet nuclear missile and land-army threat?
Would the Dems have then nominated a celebrity novice without the merest regard for American security anyway, no matter what, just to lock in an election?
I disagree with Cohen here, but also with almost all the comments that oppose his column. There is zero danger of a Cuban-missile-type crisis. Whatever Putin may be, he is not about to start a nuclear war over the Ukraine. But that does not mean that the "risks" Cohen tries to reassure us about are not substantial. If we send the Ukrainians boatloads of arms, Putin will send in Russian divisions, who will make short shrift of the Ukrainian army, and he will have a handy justification: protecting the Russian ethnic element in the south and east. At that point, NATO could do nothing. It has no troops available to counter a major Russian land attack and would not use them if it did. Putin knows this, and that is why he is not backing down. Of course, the Russians would never try to hold on to the whole of the Ukraine. They would pull back, annexing perhaps 30% of the country and insisting that the rest remain neutral. The end result would be a considerable loss in Western credibility throughout Eastern Europe.
The West has few cards to play in this round, so it's difficult to give the experts any unasked-for advice. So-called realists like Mearshimer speak as if the wishes of the Ukrainians themselves counted for little, but they do count. The Ukraine should be neutralized and demilitarized for a fixed period, but in the long run its people have a right to decide where their economic future lies. Splitting off those provinces that want Russian rule is no tragedy.
The West has few cards to play in this round, so it's difficult to give the experts any unasked-for advice. So-called realists like Mearshimer speak as if the wishes of the Ukrainians themselves counted for little, but they do count. The Ukraine should be neutralized and demilitarized for a fixed period, but in the long run its people have a right to decide where their economic future lies. Splitting off those provinces that want Russian rule is no tragedy.
2
The quandary is, how can we negotiate a rational solution with an irrational Putin? We can't! Only an irrational, off the wall approach has a chance to reach him. We need to send someone as loony as he is to represent us. How about Ted Cruz or Louie Gohmert?
We in the U.S. need to understand how we helped make things bad in Ukraine, and how arming Ukraine could make things much worse.
John Mearsheimer of U. Chicago has laid out the case for realism and negotiation rather than ratcheting up the hostilities. We need to take heed:
"Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault" (Sept/Oct 2014):
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the...
"Don't Arm Ukraine" 8 February 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html?_r=0
John Mearsheimer of U. Chicago has laid out the case for realism and negotiation rather than ratcheting up the hostilities. We need to take heed:
"Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault" (Sept/Oct 2014):
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the...
"Don't Arm Ukraine" 8 February 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html?_r=0
4
Everything you attribute to Vlad Putin could be said of Dick Cheney - the lies, duplicity, the fantasies of righteous indignation. Putin's boastful and self-serving provocations are no more or less dangerous and futile than Cheney's, and they both need the Other in order to mobilize their base.
3
Is it possible to a have discussion of current events without the left evoking past outrages? Focus on current events and try to let go of Bush/Cheney, the Crusades, and the Inquisition.
Is it possible to a have discussion of current events without the left evoking past outrages? Focus on current events and try to let go of Bush/Cheney, the Crusades, and the Inquisition.
Neo-facism is what keeps Putin in power. He needs to demonstrate Russia's dominance in Ukraine to harness Russian nationalism, and keep his grip on the Kremlin. With oil prices down and his country near financial ruin, he has no other move. But the battle is worth more than the victory to Putin, and he'll keep this conflict going as long as he can. Ukraine is an economic disaster, and if he takes it, he'll have the pleasure of owning a region that is 20 years away from being able to pay its own bills, much less create economic value for its master. At least Hitler had the sense to ravage productive lands. The best you can say about Putin is he's no Hitler.
4
Antitank missiles purchased by American taxpayers…. Why needs that? Ukrainians are forced to kill each other by American War machine.
1
I think all Russians should work to counter the plutocracy and kleptocracy that runs Russia today just as the great Russian liberals (like Vladimir Nabokov's father) did against the absolutism of the Czar. But this does not mean we as Americans should go to war or support a war against rebels on Russia's border against the interests of the Russian gov't. If we were the master of war as we were for that brief moment before Stalin had thermonuclear weapons, well maybe we could threaten Russia into neutrality as Kiev beat the rebels in their civil war, but we are not the master of war now no matter if we spend 2 billion a
day on defense (or borrow much of it to spend). So we must live with Russia's interest in Ukraine. Our sanctions will mean little to the gov't compared to their need to assert what they see as a kind of Monroe Doctrine around their traditional severe of infuence. As for what others have said abt Nato being unimportant now that the cold war is over... well, good luck with that, Nato is important but only as far as the defense of its members is concerned. Some in Kiev may want Ukraine has part of Nato, but it is not part of Nato and should not be defended by Nato.
day on defense (or borrow much of it to spend). So we must live with Russia's interest in Ukraine. Our sanctions will mean little to the gov't compared to their need to assert what they see as a kind of Monroe Doctrine around their traditional severe of infuence. As for what others have said abt Nato being unimportant now that the cold war is over... well, good luck with that, Nato is important but only as far as the defense of its members is concerned. Some in Kiev may want Ukraine has part of Nato, but it is not part of Nato and should not be defended by Nato.
It may be an easier course for Russia, in the medium run, to simply invade Ukraine, occupy it and re-absorb it back into Russia, a part of which Ukraine was for 300 years. Deal with all the sanctions and blow back at once.
How many Americans will be willing to step up at that point and rattle nuclear sabers?
It could come to that, since Ukraisne is at least a vital an interest to Russia as, say, Saudi Arabia or Israel are to the United States. Russia will go to war to prevent Ukraine from becoming a member of NATO, as the U.S. would've gone to war to prevent Mexico from joining the Warsaw Pact.
As Clint Eastwood would say, "Feeling lucky today, punk?"
How many Americans will be willing to step up at that point and rattle nuclear sabers?
It could come to that, since Ukraisne is at least a vital an interest to Russia as, say, Saudi Arabia or Israel are to the United States. Russia will go to war to prevent Ukraine from becoming a member of NATO, as the U.S. would've gone to war to prevent Mexico from joining the Warsaw Pact.
As Clint Eastwood would say, "Feeling lucky today, punk?"
4
In what way is Ukraine for like Saudia Arabia is for the U.S.? Is Ukraine a major supplier of fuel? Is the U.S. at war with Saudia Arabia to keep it from having an independent leadership? No. Where are the similarities that you mention.
As for Ukraine being a part of Russia for 300 year - again what do you base that on? Are you counting the tine Western Ukraine was part of the Polish and Lithuanian empires, and when Crimea was ruled by the Turks?
Such reasonung makes no sense. Moscow used to be ruled by the Mongolian Horde. Does anyone claim Mongolia has historic rights to take it back?
As for Ukraine being a part of Russia for 300 year - again what do you base that on? Are you counting the tine Western Ukraine was part of the Polish and Lithuanian empires, and when Crimea was ruled by the Turks?
Such reasonung makes no sense. Moscow used to be ruled by the Mongolian Horde. Does anyone claim Mongolia has historic rights to take it back?
1
You are calling for Russia to "re-absorb" Ukraine, and conveniently leave out the fact that Russia can only accomplish this by slaughtering and subjugating hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian citizens?
1
The problem is Putin may not want to stop with the eastern Ukraine. He may keep picking off other countries or regions. Someone is going to have to draw some red lines. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama is not good at that.
3
The reality is Russia is too big to fight, just as when the United States invaded Iraq, the countries that opposed it had no recourse. Unfortunately, there is no effective counter action to Russia's farce in Ukraine, just as there was none when they annexed Georgia and when MH17 was shot killing 298 souls, one of whom was the grandmother of Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak. Malaysia, a tiny country in comparison, couldn't even protest.
As strong and big as our military and intelligence services are, we are not invincible, and we cannot conquer any problems that arise. We did not end the Cold War, Soviet Union did. Vietnam war ended when we stopped. For the sake of not kowtowing to bully, we should keep trying; but lets not pretend there is a solution, let alone an easy one, such as "send them more weapons."
As strong and big as our military and intelligence services are, we are not invincible, and we cannot conquer any problems that arise. We did not end the Cold War, Soviet Union did. Vietnam war ended when we stopped. For the sake of not kowtowing to bully, we should keep trying; but lets not pretend there is a solution, let alone an easy one, such as "send them more weapons."
3
Popular uprising? Is that a joke? There can be no "popular uprising" in a democratic country, which Ukraine clearly was until that coup, with just a year to go until the next elections no less. Popular uprisings do not result in gangs of armed nazis occupying government building by force. It was a coup. And it was that coup, and not Putin, which destroyed Ukraine.
4
@David
The joke is your response. You can have protests in a democratic country that can turn into a popular uprising when the government resorts to oppressive measure such as initiated the use of deadly force against the Maidan. The overthrow of Yanukovich was in the teeth of that uprising and his own choice to flee, with only a year to go until the next elections no less, after the Berkut deserted him followed by his political allies.
As to "armed nazis", I would point out that Svoboda/Right Sektor, which I assume you are referring to, are not in the government at this point and only are a splinter faction in the Rada.
" occupying government building by force."
So every revolution (which by its nature involves a forcible overthrow) is a coup? Your "definition" of a coup is so broad as to be meaningless.
The joke is your response. You can have protests in a democratic country that can turn into a popular uprising when the government resorts to oppressive measure such as initiated the use of deadly force against the Maidan. The overthrow of Yanukovich was in the teeth of that uprising and his own choice to flee, with only a year to go until the next elections no less, after the Berkut deserted him followed by his political allies.
As to "armed nazis", I would point out that Svoboda/Right Sektor, which I assume you are referring to, are not in the government at this point and only are a splinter faction in the Rada.
" occupying government building by force."
So every revolution (which by its nature involves a forcible overthrow) is a coup? Your "definition" of a coup is so broad as to be meaningless.
2
Popular uprisings in Donetsk and Luhansk? Is that a joke? There were no "popular uprisings" in the so-called "Donestsk People's Republic" and "Luhansk People's Republic" until Igor "Strelkov" and other officers in Russia’s intelligence apparatus, backed with local thugs and mercenaries, stormed peaceful Ukrainian cities like Slovyansk last winter.
Popular uprisings do not result in gangs of thugs brutalizing local citizens, occupying government buildings by force, and filling fetid basements with the tortured victims of the new regime. Strelkov and his followers were co-ordinating one putsch after another in Eastern Ukraine. These putsches have led to the destruction of the Donbas.
And, in case you don’t read the articles that you comment on, here’s a link to Andrew Higgins’ account of the joy and relief that the citizens of Slovyansk felt last August, after being liberated from “pro-Russian rebels” by the Ukrainian army:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/02/world/europe/a-test-for-ukraine-in-slo...
Popular uprisings do not result in gangs of thugs brutalizing local citizens, occupying government buildings by force, and filling fetid basements with the tortured victims of the new regime. Strelkov and his followers were co-ordinating one putsch after another in Eastern Ukraine. These putsches have led to the destruction of the Donbas.
And, in case you don’t read the articles that you comment on, here’s a link to Andrew Higgins’ account of the joy and relief that the citizens of Slovyansk felt last August, after being liberated from “pro-Russian rebels” by the Ukrainian army:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/02/world/europe/a-test-for-ukraine-in-slo...
2
Ukraine is not a territory seized by the Soviet Union after the Second World War. Ukraine has been a part of Russia for several hundred years. Millions of Russian soldiers died defending it from the Germans and then retaking it. If there is a valid historical comparison it is with the secession of the southern states of the United States in 1860. If Russia had a Lincoln instead of a Putin they would probably have it back by now. Russia has a valid claim to Ukraine and we would do well to stay out of it altogether.
4
Ukraine became "part of Russia" by conquest. The separate identity of the Ukrainian people were implicit in the establishment of a Ukrainian SSR within the USSR just as were the separate identities of the peoples of the other 15 ethnically distinct SSRs in the USSR. The establishment of those ethnically distinct SSRs within the USSR was largely for the purpose of conning the indigenes into accepting reoccupation after the collapse of the Russian empire during WW1 had, briefly, restored their independence. The ploy was successful and far cheaper than the centuries of conquest required during Tsarist times.
Initially, Ukrainians welcomed the German invaders of WW2 as liberators, only to find that they intended conquest and oppression perhaps even worse than that of Russia within the USSR. The Russian speakers of the eastern part of Ukraine did not arrive there by magic. Most of their Great Russian ancestors were colonized upon Ukraine with assistance of the NKVD and its successors during the time of Stalin and some of his successors.
If Russia has a valid claim to Ukraine, the validity of that claim is not generally recognized by ethnic Ukrainians. The situation is more analogous to Palestine now than it is to 1861-1865 USA.
Initially, Ukrainians welcomed the German invaders of WW2 as liberators, only to find that they intended conquest and oppression perhaps even worse than that of Russia within the USSR. The Russian speakers of the eastern part of Ukraine did not arrive there by magic. Most of their Great Russian ancestors were colonized upon Ukraine with assistance of the NKVD and its successors during the time of Stalin and some of his successors.
If Russia has a valid claim to Ukraine, the validity of that claim is not generally recognized by ethnic Ukrainians. The situation is more analogous to Palestine now than it is to 1861-1865 USA.
2
In Vietnam the strategy was called "graduated pressure." Every time we escalated the North Vietnamese followed suit by raising the ante.
How did that come out?
How did that come out?
5
There's only one way to stop Putin and we haven't seen through that kind of effort in seventy years.
It is perhaps instructive to reread William L. Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" at this point in time. I distinctly recall his analysis that, if Germany did not begin World War II by 1943, its weapons would be obsolete and its economy would collapse. That's the position Putin is in now, with his economy collapsing and his weapons systems aging.
1
Add to this the certainty that Russia as it now exists cannot be sustained for another generation without major changes, both economically and socially. Russia is our equivalent of the ancient Judean state looking at Babylon/Assyria growing menacingly to its east.
Putin remembers Neville Chamberlain and appeasement as well as we. If Putin were to let his country become encircled by NATO and an anti ballistic missile installation on his boarder, there is nothing which we would not try next. Or so the argument might go.
You need to understand the Russian state of mind which has been molded by repeated invasions--something we have not experienced here in the U.S.A..
I know that it is said that the anti ballistic missiles are to protect us from missiles coming from Iran. Okay. This sounds like the claim that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine.
Ultimately, the question is Ukraine's membership in NATO. If Ukraine wants to become a member of NATO, then should it? Not according to the laws which govern admission to NATO. First, a nation must be invited into the organization by unanimous vote of current members. Second, the addition of the new member must enhance the safety of current NATO countries. Ukraine's presence in NATO would set off a firestorm.
I ask you, why are we so hellbent on destruction?
You need to understand the Russian state of mind which has been molded by repeated invasions--something we have not experienced here in the U.S.A..
I know that it is said that the anti ballistic missiles are to protect us from missiles coming from Iran. Okay. This sounds like the claim that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine.
Ultimately, the question is Ukraine's membership in NATO. If Ukraine wants to become a member of NATO, then should it? Not according to the laws which govern admission to NATO. First, a nation must be invited into the organization by unanimous vote of current members. Second, the addition of the new member must enhance the safety of current NATO countries. Ukraine's presence in NATO would set off a firestorm.
I ask you, why are we so hellbent on destruction?
5
It is difficult to realize the hypocrisy that exists.
And then we wonder why people roll their eyes when we say we are 'American' anywhere internationally!
What we do if if Russia supported a 'friendly gov't' in Canada or Mexico? Would be as open minded as we publicly state for the Ukraine, and secretly love sticking it to them? Heck No.
Then how the heck can this self-righteousness go beyond more paragraphs.
We invaded countries that we need not invade. We meddle all over the world, spanning an empire of 100s of military bases around the globe, and offer superiority militarily, technically and financially. We opt out of things like the Global Court (Hague)- where we show do as we say not as we do. We loudly state 'The same laws do not apply to us as does to you.'
It is a preposterous argument and one that any rhetoric Mr Cohen can try and state here, is difficult for other nations to square. The true topic Mr. Cohen should be 'Might is Right' - we have the power and yeah, we do want to poke and prick at the big Bear, and anyone else we choose. And that's fine. That's the reality- let's at least be honest to ourselves and not believe our own PR.
...Just sayin... ;)
And then we wonder why people roll their eyes when we say we are 'American' anywhere internationally!
What we do if if Russia supported a 'friendly gov't' in Canada or Mexico? Would be as open minded as we publicly state for the Ukraine, and secretly love sticking it to them? Heck No.
Then how the heck can this self-righteousness go beyond more paragraphs.
We invaded countries that we need not invade. We meddle all over the world, spanning an empire of 100s of military bases around the globe, and offer superiority militarily, technically and financially. We opt out of things like the Global Court (Hague)- where we show do as we say not as we do. We loudly state 'The same laws do not apply to us as does to you.'
It is a preposterous argument and one that any rhetoric Mr Cohen can try and state here, is difficult for other nations to square. The true topic Mr. Cohen should be 'Might is Right' - we have the power and yeah, we do want to poke and prick at the big Bear, and anyone else we choose. And that's fine. That's the reality- let's at least be honest to ourselves and not believe our own PR.
...Just sayin... ;)
7
Welcome to you and the other Russian trolls chiming in. Your English is vastly better than my Russian, but your syntax still gives you away. Are you taking a day off from trolling The Guardian, or do you aspire to being permanent shills for Mr. Putin here?
3
Poland under Russian rule had a similar situation. What Poland had going for them was one a total unified population against Soviet domination. The next stroke of luck was the appearance of a charismatic leader in the form of Lech Walesa. Next the international community came in and literally threw money at them so they could transition peacefully. Thirty years out the country is still struggling with the average wage of 600 dollars a month. As well as it is almost impossible for a Polish person to get a visitors visa to the USA due to illegal immigration risks. Polish people are all over Europe looking for better economies. Poland is one of the few examples of a country successfully escaping totalitarianism without a war.
The Ukraine doesn't have a unified populace against Russia like Poland. As many are Russians themselves and unfortunately Russia might have a legitimate historical claim on the Crimea. The Russians possibly poisoned the charismatic leader Victor Yushenko. International support is minimal. Having observed the chaos during the transition of the old Soviet Block countries in eastern Europe during my young adulthood on the news. Serbia, Croatia, etc. I used to wonder why Clinton didn't send ground troops as it seemed so bleak. Now I understand that these scenarios could play out endlessly. The conditions are heartbreaking in the Ukraine but I don't know if there is much that can be done in face of such a powerful country like the Soviet Union.
The Ukraine doesn't have a unified populace against Russia like Poland. As many are Russians themselves and unfortunately Russia might have a legitimate historical claim on the Crimea. The Russians possibly poisoned the charismatic leader Victor Yushenko. International support is minimal. Having observed the chaos during the transition of the old Soviet Block countries in eastern Europe during my young adulthood on the news. Serbia, Croatia, etc. I used to wonder why Clinton didn't send ground troops as it seemed so bleak. Now I understand that these scenarios could play out endlessly. The conditions are heartbreaking in the Ukraine but I don't know if there is much that can be done in face of such a powerful country like the Soviet Union.
2
Mr Cohen,
Sadly, you are in need of lesson(s) on U.S. role in Ukraine's crisis and how that involvement led to overthrow of democratically elected, albeit corrupt, pro - Russian government - but only after Putin refused to go-along-with U.S Syrian policy; a strategy fueled by American energy policy.
Sadly, you are in need of lesson(s) on U.S. role in Ukraine's crisis and how that involvement led to overthrow of democratically elected, albeit corrupt, pro - Russian government - but only after Putin refused to go-along-with U.S Syrian policy; a strategy fueled by American energy policy.
6
Supplying weapons in this type of conflict doesn't have a good record of success. The endgame is not addressed here and blundering into another quagmire is just not smart.
2
A quagmire where far more civilians shall lose their lives.
Attaboy. Well articulated and to the point. Half-hearted sanctions will never work because the Russian people have never benefited from the sham "market economy" everyone thought was happening, while Putin's inner circle of kleptocrats is immune to the outside world as long as resources are diverted their way. This twilight war will go on as long as the Russian media can continue to pretend that it is about only a few "volunteers." Once Russian tanks and planes get blown up by the Ukrainian army, the world will know that Russia is involved and the pressure will mount for it to get out.
3
Let Putin take as much territory as he wishes. He will lose it back very soon - when Russia implodes like the Soviet Union did and when Eastern Ukrainians realize what a bad deal they got (like many Crimeans and Russians already begin to realize). The great absurdity is that the last thing Russia needs is more territory. What it needs urgently is a functioning economy.
Instead, the US and Europe should invest rapidly and heavily in Ukraine's economy and modernization.
Nevertheless, do send defensive weapons if that can keep the death toll in check, especially among civilians, most of whom care more about their survival and economic well-being then about the twisted logic of Putin's sick mind. Save lives, not positions, and do so unapologetically. Putin already has too many dead Syrians on his conscience and should not be allowed to continue on his killing spree - at any cost.
Instead, the US and Europe should invest rapidly and heavily in Ukraine's economy and modernization.
Nevertheless, do send defensive weapons if that can keep the death toll in check, especially among civilians, most of whom care more about their survival and economic well-being then about the twisted logic of Putin's sick mind. Save lives, not positions, and do so unapologetically. Putin already has too many dead Syrians on his conscience and should not be allowed to continue on his killing spree - at any cost.
4
An Ukrainian crisis involving Russian honor may be as useful a distraction from domestic problems for Mr. Putin as the Falklands crisis was for Mrs. Thatcher.
2
If only life was as simple as Roger Cohen would have us believe. Next thing you know Iraq will be a paradise. Afghanistan will be the world's garden spot and North Korea will be the envy of the world. All we need to do is confront the bad guys with more weaponry.
4
"There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. Bolster the Ukrainian Army with them and other arms. Change Putin’s cost-benefit analysis. There are risks but no policy is risk-free."
As you say, there are risks. What if one of the risks is WW III.
What if Russia reacts to the USA arming the Ukraine the way Kennedy did when Russia armed Cuba? What if Putin announces that Western arms in the Ukraine pose an imminent threat to Russian security and he uses this as an excuse for a full-scale invasion? What are we going to do then -- start sending in tanks and troops to fight the Russians on their doorstep?
When weighting risk/benefits, let's not forget that the Ukraine is a LOT closer to Russia, and it it has a LOT more historical ties with Russia than with the USA. Consequently, the benefit to Russia of keeping the Ukraine in their sphere (or at least out of the Western sphere) is a lot greater than the benefit we get from prying the Ukraine away from Russia.
Don't forget the huge humiliation Putin would have to accept if he pulled back after the USA sent in a few weapons. Trust me on this: Putin will not tuck his tail between his legs and whimper home.
As you say, there are risks. What if one of the risks is WW III.
What if Russia reacts to the USA arming the Ukraine the way Kennedy did when Russia armed Cuba? What if Putin announces that Western arms in the Ukraine pose an imminent threat to Russian security and he uses this as an excuse for a full-scale invasion? What are we going to do then -- start sending in tanks and troops to fight the Russians on their doorstep?
When weighting risk/benefits, let's not forget that the Ukraine is a LOT closer to Russia, and it it has a LOT more historical ties with Russia than with the USA. Consequently, the benefit to Russia of keeping the Ukraine in their sphere (or at least out of the Western sphere) is a lot greater than the benefit we get from prying the Ukraine away from Russia.
Don't forget the huge humiliation Putin would have to accept if he pulled back after the USA sent in a few weapons. Trust me on this: Putin will not tuck his tail between his legs and whimper home.
5
Mr. Cohen: Your analysis is based on history, but your conclusions and recommendations are based on what facts to support your position? We should listen to the Europeans for a change not war mongers like McCain/Graham.
5
Roger Cohen says arm Ukraine, and as you can see, he allows comments to be posted. He is open to criticism (or maybe he just knows that his point of view makes sense). At the same time and in the same newspaper John Mearsheimer says do not arm Ukraine, and that coward did not allow any comments. In the 1930s Hitler took part of Czechoslovakia, then all of Czechoslovakia, then Poland and France before he was stopped. Putin took part of Ukraine (Crimea) and now Russians are killing Ukrainians to take all of Ukraine. Next are Poland and Estonia. He must be stopped.
3
In this game Russian chess, there only seems to be a few possible outcomes.
1 – Putin slowly backs out, forcing the separatists to agree to some sort of semi-autonomous state for the Donetsk region. He of course would need some sort of cover so that he could claim that he really didn’t back down.
2 – He forces Kiev to agree to a fully autonomous state in the region which would then allow Russia to have at least an indirect and probably disruptive presence in the Ukrainian government. This would likely be his preferred goal as he believes over time could he undermine Kiev’s authority and in turn weaken the West’s influence there.
3 – Ukraine could negotiate an agreement to completely let the Donetsk region go. For too many people this would be unthinkable but perhaps would be exactly what Putin would not want as this would put an end to his current show of force and terminate his plan for disrupting the Ukrainian government. He of course could decide to make trouble somewhere else but this game would get harder and harder to defend, both internally and abroad.
4 –The fourth and final option of course is that NATO and/or the U.S. backs Ukraine to the bitter end and we get to see another game of Global chicken.
The Ukraine is just too close in too many ways for Putin and Russia to write off. It’s his line in the sand after losing so many neighboring states to NATO.
He has brought his Queen out into the middle of the board and cut off his avenues of retreat.
1 – Putin slowly backs out, forcing the separatists to agree to some sort of semi-autonomous state for the Donetsk region. He of course would need some sort of cover so that he could claim that he really didn’t back down.
2 – He forces Kiev to agree to a fully autonomous state in the region which would then allow Russia to have at least an indirect and probably disruptive presence in the Ukrainian government. This would likely be his preferred goal as he believes over time could he undermine Kiev’s authority and in turn weaken the West’s influence there.
3 – Ukraine could negotiate an agreement to completely let the Donetsk region go. For too many people this would be unthinkable but perhaps would be exactly what Putin would not want as this would put an end to his current show of force and terminate his plan for disrupting the Ukrainian government. He of course could decide to make trouble somewhere else but this game would get harder and harder to defend, both internally and abroad.
4 –The fourth and final option of course is that NATO and/or the U.S. backs Ukraine to the bitter end and we get to see another game of Global chicken.
The Ukraine is just too close in too many ways for Putin and Russia to write off. It’s his line in the sand after losing so many neighboring states to NATO.
He has brought his Queen out into the middle of the board and cut off his avenues of retreat.
2
Bravo, Roger. Wise words, indeed, on how to deal with Mssrs. Lavrov and Putin. But the Ukrainian conflict is as much a war of words as anything, and in addition to committing defensive weapon systems in an effort to aid Kiev, we much conjure up much more potent propaganda when it comes to counteracting Moscow.
4
This Cohen guy is really lost. In 1812 Napoleon invaded all the way to Moscow. In 1940 Hitler did the same thing, this time killing and massacring tens of millions of Russian. So you will have to be a little naive to fully trust Europeans. This time the US has built a strong NATO with all the nuclear rockets directed towards Moscow.
The US has to step back. to 1990. In turn there will not be Russian Nuclear aim to US. No NATO troops in eastern Europe. They are no there for defense, Russian Army will wipe them out. NATO forces are in an offensive position. Both big players have to back-out. Then trust can be build over the next decades. NATO has no reason for existence. If not look at the SINO- Russian border. Quiet for decades.
The US has nothing to do in Eastern Europe. Are we going to invade Russia, come on. Lets be realistic. And have the European resolve this.
The US has to step back. to 1990. In turn there will not be Russian Nuclear aim to US. No NATO troops in eastern Europe. They are no there for defense, Russian Army will wipe them out. NATO forces are in an offensive position. Both big players have to back-out. Then trust can be build over the next decades. NATO has no reason for existence. If not look at the SINO- Russian border. Quiet for decades.
The US has nothing to do in Eastern Europe. Are we going to invade Russia, come on. Lets be realistic. And have the European resolve this.
2
Cohen expresses the views of a reawakened Cold Warrior. Kiev was a Obama regime-fueled coup creating a rump state and a civil war, whose consequences the entire world is sadly experiencing. Who other than George Sorros wants to lose another $50B on a failed state and who, other than Cohen and the warmongers in Congress, want to arm it?
4
I have visions of a Neville Chamberlain-like "peace in our times" piece of paper being flashed by Merkel or Kerry or Hollande.. The geopolitical situation of 1938 is so close to today that it's scary. Germany wanted to annex the Sudetenland. Germany was far more powerful than the allies. We gave in. Then we fought the most damaging conflict in human history. Do we never learn?
1
Putin's objective is to wrap a protective barrier around Russia similar to what it had before all the satellites countries went their own way after WW2 - Of course he is deluded, and he is becoming more so - In fact he is beginning t sound more and more like his alter ego Slobo Milosevic who eventually lost touch with reality and sounded like a complete fool speaking to international commissions after the slaughter that he created. Why ? - he spoke to ultra partisan, adoring fans who were not very well informed - This is the path that Putin is on - Unfortunately he does have many nukes and sees himself as a grand Russian leader in the league of Peter the Great - HJs objectives go beyond this little mess in Ukraine - His probing of NATO airspace is proof, and quite scary - Each time they enter deeper I am sure they are gauging the amount of time it takes the west to repond - Then they can form a plan - And make no mistake, the lives of his countrymen are not important in the grand scheme - Sound a little crazy ? Maybe
1
The most valuable paragraph in the article is following.
"The United States was driven by an insatiable desire for global dominance and, in Ukraine, had orchestrated the “coup d’état” last year that led to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych. Europe post-1989 had turned its back on building “the common European house,” declining the prospect of a “free economic zone” from Lisbon to Vladivostok in favor of the expansion of NATO eastward to the doorstep of mother Russia."
Our best policy should have been to focus on our economic future and build economic alliances. Doubling down on wrong policy of militarism, as suggested in rest of the column is recipe for disaster. Unfortunately we are following same misguided policy towards China by encircling it by military alliances while China is interested only in economic interests and is not much interested in building military alliances.
"The United States was driven by an insatiable desire for global dominance and, in Ukraine, had orchestrated the “coup d’état” last year that led to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych. Europe post-1989 had turned its back on building “the common European house,” declining the prospect of a “free economic zone” from Lisbon to Vladivostok in favor of the expansion of NATO eastward to the doorstep of mother Russia."
Our best policy should have been to focus on our economic future and build economic alliances. Doubling down on wrong policy of militarism, as suggested in rest of the column is recipe for disaster. Unfortunately we are following same misguided policy towards China by encircling it by military alliances while China is interested only in economic interests and is not much interested in building military alliances.
3
The quote you mentioned is not in the article. There was no coup in Ukraine, that's a pretext made up by the Kremlin to annex Crimea and launch a cover war in the Donbass
1
"There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. Bolster the Ukrainian Army with them and other arms. Change Putin’s cost-benefit analysis. "
Putin will respond by extending the battlefield to Kiev. Medium range Iskandar missiles, Buk AAMs and the odd car bombs to bring the war home to the pro west Poroshenko crew.
You have to understand that if we the US openly supply weapons to the Kieve government, it actually makes it easier for Putin to frame it as a US-Russia battle. Think about the cover it gives him to push westward.
We always keep getting involved in civil wars we can't win. Vietnam, Iraq you name it. We are there on the wrong side and realize this after a trillion dollars or so.
Putin will respond by extending the battlefield to Kiev. Medium range Iskandar missiles, Buk AAMs and the odd car bombs to bring the war home to the pro west Poroshenko crew.
You have to understand that if we the US openly supply weapons to the Kieve government, it actually makes it easier for Putin to frame it as a US-Russia battle. Think about the cover it gives him to push westward.
We always keep getting involved in civil wars we can't win. Vietnam, Iraq you name it. We are there on the wrong side and realize this after a trillion dollars or so.
Mr. Cohen's thinking on this matter is wrong. There is a school of thought, maybe Roger belongs, that some leaders respect only force or its threat and, in this case, Mr. Putin is one of those leaders. So-called defensive weapons are likely to turn the tide, to make him think twice and back down. That's highly unlikely. Think it through. To make him anxious, the force needs to be an overwhelming one, leading him to change his plans. In that case, the US and NATO risk a war with Russia which then sees it's fears becoming real, those of an dangerous aggressive force at its borders. Having picked a fight, he will see it through, bobbing and weaving as he has to, but see it through. Policy makers who incorrectly analyze his personality are likely to make a grievous error in supplying arms and giving a reason for Putin to respond with escalating aggression.
3
The only reason the US wants to 'give' weapons to Ukraine, is to fatten the profits of our war machine making industries.
Why not just give Kiev a few billion in aid with no strings attached, and allow them to buy what they need including weapons on the open market. That way we would not be transferring lethal weapons.
Why not just give Kiev a few billion in aid with no strings attached, and allow them to buy what they need including weapons on the open market. That way we would not be transferring lethal weapons.
3
Send weapons and military!! Send Unmarked men to fight Russian sepratists. Use the Putin KGB strategy. Then keep denying that these are not UN troops. This should have been done from the beginning. Who's running UN. Looks like they skipped two many history classes in high school. Let's learn from the past here. Putin will continue to push through Ukraine until UN/World does something or until the Ukrainuan resistance declines and he takes over Ukraine.
1
Yes, we wish there weren't land grabs going on in the world. Yes, we wish that the leaders our government wishes for would win out in conflicts.
No, we don't want another cold war, we can't afford it in lives or in money. We simply can't have as our goal to control the world, Roger, no matter how the neocons or oligarchs lush after their desires. We're tapped out. And no, we're not giving up social security, Medicare, higher education, food and drug safety, or our electrical grid to spit in Russia's eye. Peddle it somewhere else.
No, we don't want another cold war, we can't afford it in lives or in money. We simply can't have as our goal to control the world, Roger, no matter how the neocons or oligarchs lush after their desires. We're tapped out. And no, we're not giving up social security, Medicare, higher education, food and drug safety, or our electrical grid to spit in Russia's eye. Peddle it somewhere else.
1
I don't know what the answer is to this, but the analysis of Russia's interests are right on the money. Therefore, whatever policy is carried out, it will have to take into account how Russia sees this situation.
Another thing that is maybe not so well known is that unemployment in some places there in the Ukraine is even worse than in some Arab countries. In reality, the long neglected Ukraine (in whatever it becomes) needs trade (business, jobs, production) even more than it needs guns to change the situation there.
Another thing that is maybe not so well known is that unemployment in some places there in the Ukraine is even worse than in some Arab countries. In reality, the long neglected Ukraine (in whatever it becomes) needs trade (business, jobs, production) even more than it needs guns to change the situation there.
Russia has few natural barriers to stop or slow up an invader; as a result it has been invaded seven times ij ts history - by the Mongols, by Sweden (twice) by the Poles, French and Germans. It was ONE of the reasons the Soviet Union was constructed - to provide a ring of friendly states around the motherland. Putin realizes that he cannot revive the Soviet Union and has shown no desire to do so. But he does want to reconstruct a ring of at least neutral - if not friendly - states around Mother Russia for its protection. NATO and the EU, backed by the United States need to back off and not press right up to his border. He won't allow it, and as many have observed, he has both tactical and strategic nuclear weapons with wbjch to resist.
This may well be right – but it's easy to make that call from a position of splendid isolation across the Atlantic.
1
David Stockman, who worked for Reagan recently claimed that in 1989 the US told Gorbachev that if he allowed the reunification of Germany it will not expand NATO by a single inch. NATO has added 14 new countries since the Cold War ended, coming all the way to the border of Russia.
The Europeans don't believe that Putin will back down and they don't want to risk escalating the conflict. There are already Russian troops on the ground in Ukraine according to the BBC. This conflict matters a lot to Putin and Russia. Nationalism plays well in Russia.
After US weapons are sent what happens next? What is the end game options for the US?
The Europeans don't believe that Putin will back down and they don't want to risk escalating the conflict. There are already Russian troops on the ground in Ukraine according to the BBC. This conflict matters a lot to Putin and Russia. Nationalism plays well in Russia.
After US weapons are sent what happens next? What is the end game options for the US?
1
Apparently Stockman's (a budget wonk) unsubstantiated claims of conversations of 25+ years ago take precedents in your mind over the UN Charter and the Budapest Memorandum.
In cases of contract dispute - signed documents always take precedence over vague recollections of conversations.
This would seem to be quite useful in international relations also.
Ukraine gave up the world's 3rd largest nuclear arsenal because Russia felt threatened by it. In return Ukraine got signed Russian guarantees of Ukraine's sovereignty.
Russia - as the successor state to the ussr - is also a signatory to the UN Charter.
I don't believe Mr. Stockman's budget background and vague memories trumps international law.
In cases of contract dispute - signed documents always take precedence over vague recollections of conversations.
This would seem to be quite useful in international relations also.
Ukraine gave up the world's 3rd largest nuclear arsenal because Russia felt threatened by it. In return Ukraine got signed Russian guarantees of Ukraine's sovereignty.
Russia - as the successor state to the ussr - is also a signatory to the UN Charter.
I don't believe Mr. Stockman's budget background and vague memories trumps international law.
Ukraine is not America's fight. It is Europe's fight. It should be waged as an economic fight with European leadership.
Putin and his acolytes are clearly delusional if they think their reversion to soviet era propaganda and lies have any credence outside of their tightly controlled media. But they still have the backing of the Russian military and so long as they do, they will continue their pressure on former soviet vassal states.
So the trick must be to exacerbate the internal fissures within Russia and in particular have the military to rethink their support of Putin.
Germany is the most powerful economic force on the European continent. The battle with Russia should be fought on economic terms since a military engagement between Europe and Russia would be devastating even if the war stayed below the nuclear threshold. If it went nuclear, several European nations have nukes in addition to the silos in the US that are probably on alert and are targeted on soviet / Russian targets even as we speak.
The Russians don't want a nuclear engagement, but would probably welcome a conventional clash before Germany ever lives up to its NATO defensive funding commitments.
So the best alternative is to keep this an economic war. Russia will lose this and at some point, the internal contradictions within Russia will result in Putin's ouster.
Putin and his acolytes are clearly delusional if they think their reversion to soviet era propaganda and lies have any credence outside of their tightly controlled media. But they still have the backing of the Russian military and so long as they do, they will continue their pressure on former soviet vassal states.
So the trick must be to exacerbate the internal fissures within Russia and in particular have the military to rethink their support of Putin.
Germany is the most powerful economic force on the European continent. The battle with Russia should be fought on economic terms since a military engagement between Europe and Russia would be devastating even if the war stayed below the nuclear threshold. If it went nuclear, several European nations have nukes in addition to the silos in the US that are probably on alert and are targeted on soviet / Russian targets even as we speak.
The Russians don't want a nuclear engagement, but would probably welcome a conventional clash before Germany ever lives up to its NATO defensive funding commitments.
So the best alternative is to keep this an economic war. Russia will lose this and at some point, the internal contradictions within Russia will result in Putin's ouster.
4
Does Friedman really want a war with Russia in Russia's own back yard. Are we not busy enough in the Middle East without another war--this time with nuclear weapon--on the periphery of a long-time antagonist?
1
I thought, wrongly, that only someone in early dementia stages like a certain GOP senator could concoct seriously the idea of sending arms to Ukraine to help them fight against Russia. The idea surely could have come - or being supported - from Fox News, but to read this utter rubbish in NYT is truly mind-boggling. Who in their right mind believe that more arms in the heart of Europe could help solve the problem, which indeed was started by USA egging the pro-western part of Ukraine against their neighbor? Now the pro-western coup in Kiev is conveniently branded as democratic revolution, while the independence pro-Russian fighters are separatists and terrorists. The people who push for arms deliveries maybe think that Mr. Putin has nothing but rusty tanks, AKs, and RPGs. That’s obviously not true. The moment American arms are delivered in Ukraine, Russia will bring the big bazooka, and the game will be over quickly, like in Georgia. The price will be another several thousand people dead, but that’s nothing having in mind that in Iraq several hundred thousand were killed…
1
"Western Illusions Over Ukraine"
------------------------------------
Mr. Cohen,
When Hannibal attacked Rome thru the Alps, Rome built a navy and sacked Carthage. End of story.
Russia is a huge, sparsely populated, rich resource territory. The West greed is driving Russia to China. Beware of the consenquences.
------------------------------------
Mr. Cohen,
When Hannibal attacked Rome thru the Alps, Rome built a navy and sacked Carthage. End of story.
Russia is a huge, sparsely populated, rich resource territory. The West greed is driving Russia to China. Beware of the consenquences.
Nice piece, Roger Cohen. Yes, the only things Putin will listen to are ant-tank missiles, artillery that has greater range than those which the rebels have, surface to air missiles, and radio jamming equipment similar to that the Russians have supplied the rebels. Aircraft isn't really needed, as long as there are enough Ukrainian soldiers who are trained to use Stinger -like missiles, the Russians can't afford to lose any jets in great number. The Europeans are still doing what they've been doing since last spring- talking , lame sanctions, and no meaningful results. Big money by the name of Profits, are calling the shots here, that along with their precious natural gas supplies coming from Russia. Freedom, liberty always take a back seat to profits, and Europe is showing its hand quite openly. I hope the rumors are true, that the Poles will provide meaningful arms to Ukraine, but please don't sit on your duff for too long, its almost too late, another month or two and Russia will be in Mauripol. Merkel and her French friends think that simple talk will stop Putin, no dearie - lots missiles and anti- tank weapons will.
3
What has any of this got to do with America in the first place apart from the fact that they caused the conflict by encouraging if not orchestrating the illegal violent coup that ousted a democratically elected president. This is a European conflict and Washington is four and a half thousand miles away on a different continent and should not be allowed to override Merkel and Hollande when they say "No" to arming Ukraine. Europe really needs now to make a united stance against America to stop this madness before it escalates into something that could kill everyone in Europe. Do we really want to have Russian nuclear missiles detonating over European cities and giving us all a sun tan. All of the gung Ho fools would soon be running to the hills wishing they had not got what they had called for
2
At some point you stand up to a bully.
2
Obama to Russia: We cannot allow you to re-draw European boundaries with the muzzle of a gun. We will arm Ukraine to protect its borders.
US to Israel: Feel free to establish borders wherever you want. Use whatever force is necessary.
And we wonder why ISIS is able to get recruits.
US to Israel: Feel free to establish borders wherever you want. Use whatever force is necessary.
And we wonder why ISIS is able to get recruits.
4
The Communists may not have learned much from history but that doesn't mean we in the West have to emulate them. Remember how good it felt to want to strike the Taliban, Iraq, Saddam Hussein? Remember how great it made us feel to think that we could just club and beat them into submission? And remember how it all ended up? If I remember correctly, you Sir were in favour of the Iraq war. Let us learn from history.
I can't help but wonder what will happen the next time America wants to take custody of some other nation's "weapons of mass destruction", like Ukraine's erstwhile nuclear arsenal?
1
I have not seen any argument that explains why diplomacy would cause Russia to stop pushing its way into Ukraine by the killing that has worked so far.
I have, however, seen arguments that the US would be warlike if Russia camped out in Canada. In other words, we'd be just as bad. Is that really an argument supporting Russia's invasion?
I have not seen any "diplomatic" means of ending the present invasion, just wishful thinking that it should be accomplished. We've heard that argument for over a year. What has been the result?
As Putin has seen, we (the West) will let Russia nibble away at Ukraine. Why wouldn't he take us at face value. We are apparently willing to let him eat Ukraine one piece at a time.
I have, however, seen arguments that the US would be warlike if Russia camped out in Canada. In other words, we'd be just as bad. Is that really an argument supporting Russia's invasion?
I have not seen any "diplomatic" means of ending the present invasion, just wishful thinking that it should be accomplished. We've heard that argument for over a year. What has been the result?
As Putin has seen, we (the West) will let Russia nibble away at Ukraine. Why wouldn't he take us at face value. We are apparently willing to let him eat Ukraine one piece at a time.
1
Your comment makes no mention of the wishes of the people who actually live in these places. The vast majority, 90% plus, of the people in Crimea, wanted to return to Russia. (Yes, *return*, since Crimea was part of Russia throughout most of its history.) Doubtless the majority people in Eastern Ukraine also want to be part of Russia, since they are ethnic Russians. Why do their wishes not matter? Why is this any of our business?
1
@Jonathan Revusky
In fact, we don't know what the Crimeans wanted because the "referendum" was done after a Russian seizure of the territory, the harassment of political opponents and without any credible international observation. The use of "return" could be used to justify all sorts of forced transfers of territories. How far back do you want to push the clock?
The majority of people in the Donbass are not ethnic Russians. Incidentally, the last independent poll before the war broke out was done by Pew which found a 58-27 split (rest not sure) among ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine in favor of staying in Ukraine.
In fact, we don't know what the Crimeans wanted because the "referendum" was done after a Russian seizure of the territory, the harassment of political opponents and without any credible international observation. The use of "return" could be used to justify all sorts of forced transfers of territories. How far back do you want to push the clock?
The majority of people in the Donbass are not ethnic Russians. Incidentally, the last independent poll before the war broke out was done by Pew which found a 58-27 split (rest not sure) among ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine in favor of staying in Ukraine.
OK, let us imagine... the West and Ukraine decide not to risk it anymore, decide that peace and people's life are worse giving Putin what he wants now: Donbass, DNR, LNR, Mariupol, you name it. My (rhetorical) question is: given what he has done in Chechnya, Aphasia and South Ossetia, Crimea, and now in Donbass, do you REALLY believe that Putin stops there?..
3
So Roger Cohen advocates arming the putschist regime in Kiev, which, he purports to believe, came to power in a popular revolution. Well, fine, for the sake of argument, let's suppose this really is a popular democratic government and that it represents sugar and spice and everything nice. And that Putin's Russia is pure evil. Let's assume this for the sake of argument.
Even if all that is the case, is it not immoral to arm the Ukrainian regime? They cannot possibly prevail militarily against Russia, can they? You are simply giving these people weapons to fight in a war in which they will be crushed anyway. Would a moral person advocate such a policy?
Even if all that is the case, is it not immoral to arm the Ukrainian regime? They cannot possibly prevail militarily against Russia, can they? You are simply giving these people weapons to fight in a war in which they will be crushed anyway. Would a moral person advocate such a policy?
1
Exactly same was said by America First of arming Britain in 1939-41.
1
Send money to Ukraine not arms because they are bankrupt.
1
"There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. Bolster the Ukrainian Army with them"....There are several things wrong with this argument. First, look at a map. Ukraine is in Europe. Ukraine is a European problem. If and only if Germany and France decide to provide lethal arms should we join them. Second, no matter how heavily we arm Ukraine, they cannot defeat Russia. So while you want Russia to pay a higher price, turn the equation around - do you want Ukraine to pay a higher price? Because that is what will happen. Finally, any one with an ounce of good sense will realize that the moment NATO starts helping Ukraine, Russia will use that as proof that they have been justified all along and will likely send in troops wearing marked uniforms. And don't give me this garbage that sanctions haven't worked, because they have - the Russian economy is in shambles and will remain that way until sanctions are lifted. If really want to send Russia a message, make their economy even worse; send them stiffer sanctions.
2
The only lesson the mis-rulers of the Kremlin ever understood is the parade of coffins coming back from the war zone. All the tools of war the West has don't count when politicized lethargy rules the West Wing.
"There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. Bolster the Ukrainian Army with them and other arms. Change Putin’s cost-benefit analysis. There are risks but no policy is risk-free...."
Good grief, what a frightening lack of concern for what war is all about. There is simply no reason to send weapons to Ukraine, no reason to take any risk of a conflict with Russia when Russia is only trying to protect core strategic interests along with Russian peoples who have been beset since the coup in Ukraine, a coup we supported.
I am not willing to take any risk of war with policy on Russia. No risk at all.
Good grief, what a frightening lack of concern for what war is all about. There is simply no reason to send weapons to Ukraine, no reason to take any risk of a conflict with Russia when Russia is only trying to protect core strategic interests along with Russian peoples who have been beset since the coup in Ukraine, a coup we supported.
I am not willing to take any risk of war with policy on Russia. No risk at all.
15
Russia is a military has-been, a nation that lost its mind and was placed in a kind of geopolitical "time out." By virtue of its natural resources, it has attained the means to institute a very primitive and corrupt kind of self governance. It should not, however, confuse this half-baked self governance with Superpower status. The plans the world has for Russia is a very limited one. An energy supplier and buyer of European goods. However, no first world nation intends to allow a corrupt, degenerate nation of alcoholics threaten the rest of the world with nuclear annihilation. There are simply too few checks and balances in place to prevent the acendancy of another Joseph Stalin.
The plan therefor, has been the encirclement of the Russian bear with a large number of ABM installations that will eventually render Russia's offensive nuclear arsenal useless. Just as we don't allow convicted felons to own guns, we will not allow the implied threat of Russia's strategic nuclear weapons. This has, I am sure, been the plan ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Empire.
The plan therefor, has been the encirclement of the Russian bear with a large number of ABM installations that will eventually render Russia's offensive nuclear arsenal useless. Just as we don't allow convicted felons to own guns, we will not allow the implied threat of Russia's strategic nuclear weapons. This has, I am sure, been the plan ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Empire.
Didn't Russia originate in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine? Seems they have a reasonable claim—a lot more reasonable than Israelis do.
16
In a word - no. Kievan Rus existed from 822 A.D. until 1240 A.D., at which time invading Mongols destroyed this tribal confederation. The unification of Russia into its present form began later and is inextricably linked to Moscow and its boyars and czars rather than to Kiev.
The Israeli claim to Jerusalem goes back to events occurring more than a millennium before that 822 date.
The Israeli claim to Jerusalem goes back to events occurring more than a millennium before that 822 date.
3
In short answer to your question: No, Russia didn't originate in Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine. Read up on the history of Kyivan-Rus, which Russians like to claim, falsely, as their own. The real question is: why are so many Russians unwilling to believe in the true history of their past, free of imperial bombast and half-truths?
While you're at it, why not read up on Ukrainian history, as written by modern historians, not Soviet hacks? Just as a primer, read the essay published today by Bernard Henri-Levy. Henri-Levy begins with two rhetorical questions: "[Wasn't] Ukraine. . .historically part of Russia? By occupying the Crimea and then Donbas, [isn't Putin,] the heir of Nicholas I and of Stalin is merely recovering what had been Russia’s? Beyond the fact that this argument is historically false and that the Russian nation state is no older than the Ukrainian, the argument, were we to accept it, could be applied tomorrow to various pieces of the Baltic states and to Poland. Inversely, it could even permit the Poles, who were in Moscow in the early seventeenth century, to stake a claim to the Russian capital."
While you're at it, why not read up on Ukrainian history, as written by modern historians, not Soviet hacks? Just as a primer, read the essay published today by Bernard Henri-Levy. Henri-Levy begins with two rhetorical questions: "[Wasn't] Ukraine. . .historically part of Russia? By occupying the Crimea and then Donbas, [isn't Putin,] the heir of Nicholas I and of Stalin is merely recovering what had been Russia’s? Beyond the fact that this argument is historically false and that the Russian nation state is no older than the Ukrainian, the argument, were we to accept it, could be applied tomorrow to various pieces of the Baltic states and to Poland. Inversely, it could even permit the Poles, who were in Moscow in the early seventeenth century, to stake a claim to the Russian capital."
3
Actually, NO. Israel's claim to its homeland is over 50 centuries long and extnds back to be for the Assyrian Empire. History can be pesky, no?
Sending weapons to Ukraine will possibly raise the cost in lost troops to Putin, but Putin does not care. All the new weapons will accomplish is escalation. It would help if our war mongering leaders would reflect, even briefly, on the fact that Russia is right next door to Ukraine, and oh, by the way, it has lots and lots of nuclear weapons.
23
Most of those nuclear weapons are in a questionable state of operational readiness. Russian strategic forces compared to modern US weaponry, are at roughly the same parity level as during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Russians backed down then, and will back down now.
I'm glad you aren't in charge. This is a recipe for escalation. Not a good plan if you are interested in a world without global war.
21
it has already escalated thanks to Putin's rebel friends.. haven't you been keeping up with the news? or is it coming from Moscow?
1
What clearer message does the West need? - Putin clearly says - don't mess around my back yard. Russia has actually been very quite all these years during Nato expansion. The West got carried away that Russia wouldn't mind, well turns out they do, as we all see.
What did US do with Bay of pigs and Cuba? They freaked out that Cuba got a communist government. How about the Cuban nuke crisis when the Russians backed away realizing they have gone too far and the consequences would be dire, it was not worth it to continue. Putin is not doing anything another power has not done before. How about if Canada had elections and ISIS won... Do you think US would say Canadians have the right of self determination? I am not sure.
Reality is: Ukraine will eventually be split east west in the proportion that Putin wants. It might take years but that will be the outcome.
What did US do with Bay of pigs and Cuba? They freaked out that Cuba got a communist government. How about the Cuban nuke crisis when the Russians backed away realizing they have gone too far and the consequences would be dire, it was not worth it to continue. Putin is not doing anything another power has not done before. How about if Canada had elections and ISIS won... Do you think US would say Canadians have the right of self determination? I am not sure.
Reality is: Ukraine will eventually be split east west in the proportion that Putin wants. It might take years but that will be the outcome.
18
Putin armed Assad in Syria, wants influence in the middle east!
Where have you been. Putin is beginning to act like Stalin and attempting to imperialise Russian power again. You don't appease dictators you stand up to them, history has taught us that lesson before/. Arm the Ukraine and let the people defend themselves from naked aggression
Where have you been. Putin is beginning to act like Stalin and attempting to imperialise Russian power again. You don't appease dictators you stand up to them, history has taught us that lesson before/. Arm the Ukraine and let the people defend themselves from naked aggression
2
Putin considers the ex Warsaw pact borders to be his backyard. Shall we let Putin drive his tanks to Berlin and let him claim Berlin for Russia too?
3
The Bay of Pigs occurred because the US put missiles in Turkey aimed at the USSR. When the USSR responded with missiles in Cuba, it was the US who blinked and withdrew its missiles from Turkey.
2
People like Cohen may have "guffawed" but Lavrov's statement that the
Soviets were the only ones opposed to Germany's partition is historically accurate. Hacks like the writer of this "op-ed" - which is more the sort of diatribe expected from a warmonger think-tank - seem to rely on people not being able to read history.
Soviets were the only ones opposed to Germany's partition is historically accurate. Hacks like the writer of this "op-ed" - which is more the sort of diatribe expected from a warmonger think-tank - seem to rely on people not being able to read history.
24
kindly support your claims with factual evidence.
I still feel that the Crimea is not enthusiastic about Russia but the Ukrainians are a mess. What happened to the Orange revolution hyped by the NYT. It evaporated like the EU illusion. The EU is not Germany, which is the economic power house and pays attention to the workers. That is why when the vote came up in an American auto plant weather to go union or go German management. you know who won. This whole mess may take another form if the bankers loose some of their power.
4
Russia is suffering from the economic sanctions, and Ukraine joining NATO probably looks to Putin like the missiles in Cuba looked to us. Remember NATO was created in part as an alliance against the USSR. Putin wants Ukraine and all the former Russian republics back but paranoia plays a big part, too, and paranoia informs Lavrov's view of the problem. Vast ambition, paranoia and nukes - a toxic mix! Merkel is from East Germany and knows the fate of the German Army that invaded Russia under Hitler. Her views should be carefully considered.
We need to look at the situation from both sides and make a deal to save an independent Ukraine that might not include having it join NATO. No, it's not obvious how that could work. But Russia's economic problems give us a lever.
We need to look at the situation from both sides and make a deal to save an independent Ukraine that might not include having it join NATO. No, it's not obvious how that could work. But Russia's economic problems give us a lever.
4
We have only ourselves to blame for the rise of this historical archetype called Vladimir Putin. Yeltsin and the true Russian liberals were begging for the west to help integrate Russia with the western economy. What was called for was something along the lines of the Marshall plan. Instead, the hawks, as hawks will always think, saw Russia's decrepitude at the end of the cold war as a golden opportunity to permanently demolish Russia's ability to threaten the west by grinding its economy into dust. A defeated opponent who instead of helping up, you kick in the teeth. Hmm, hasn't this happened before, to dire consequences for the whole world? Bill Clinton says his biggest mistake as president was not responding earlier and more urgently to the Rwandan genocide. I'd say his biggest mistake, from the point of view of attaining long-lasting geopolitical stability, was letting the hawks in his administration have their way with Yeltsin's Russia. That's how we ended up faced with Putin's Russia.
20
Yeltsin was not "begging" but stealing and bankrupting Russia blind- do some homework regarding that period.. Czar "Thief" was his name along with members of his family.
We didn't do this! This KGB Officer saw opportunity to become a dictator and actively went for it. He destroyed the opposition in Russia and use thugs to destroy the press and free speech!. This has nothing to do with the West!
2
"Yeltsin and the true Russian liberals were begging for the west to help integrate Russia with the western economy. "
Is a ;corrupt drunken man willing to let foreigners loot the country for petty cash', the new definition of 'liberal'?
Is a ;corrupt drunken man willing to let foreigners loot the country for petty cash', the new definition of 'liberal'?
There is a lot of excellent diagnosis in Cohen's analysis. But Cohen takes a wrong turn when he tries to wrap this into his neocon meme that Obama doesn't "understand" and that Putin only understands force represented by the delivery of lethal arms to the Ukraine.
The sanctions are imposing real costs on Russia and will continue to do so. The hole that Putin eventually will have to climb out of is getting deeper and deeper, not shallower.
Cohen should listen carefully to the Merkel-Obama press conference of February 9 and try to understand what was said and its import and consequences. Prudent firm western leadership is going to eventually carry the day.
The sanctions are imposing real costs on Russia and will continue to do so. The hole that Putin eventually will have to climb out of is getting deeper and deeper, not shallower.
Cohen should listen carefully to the Merkel-Obama press conference of February 9 and try to understand what was said and its import and consequences. Prudent firm western leadership is going to eventually carry the day.
10
Obama doesn't understand given his failure in foreign policy during the last 6 years- a total wimp..makes Jimmy Carter look like Sec. State George Marshall.
1
Putin has repeatedly been clear. Russia will act in the best interests of protecting its borders, and it will act in protecting Russian ethnics caught in other countries after the fall of the USSR from ethnic cleansing (which is, retaliation for the days of the USSR). Crimea is Russia's, by history, by population, by religion, by military occupation for over 200 years, by majority vote to self determination. Russia will never give up Crimea without a major fight. Russian people know economic hardships better than economic good times. That will not budge them off of these positions. If the US/EU want to isolate Russia, than that leaves the remainder of the world to do business with. Nothing complicated to Putin's position nor to solving the problems in the Ukraine with the separatists.
For the rebels in the east, they have not wanted the whole of Ukraine, only their own right to self determination and picking their own government. That is what the US/EU claim to believe in. All they have to do is put their money where their mouths are.
For the rebels in the east, they have not wanted the whole of Ukraine, only their own right to self determination and picking their own government. That is what the US/EU claim to believe in. All they have to do is put their money where their mouths are.
4
"Prudent firm western leadership is going to eventually carry the day."
Don't think so, Mr. Myers, but, I appreciate your recognition of a neocon agenda when you see it, and your honest, informed analysis. Interestingly, U.S. narrative seems as seductive as Fascism.
We better watch out...
Don't think so, Mr. Myers, but, I appreciate your recognition of a neocon agenda when you see it, and your honest, informed analysis. Interestingly, U.S. narrative seems as seductive as Fascism.
We better watch out...
It may be that Mr. Lavrov is delusional as Mr. Cohen suggests. However, when a pundit decides to write a column questioning the motives and the accuracy of an "enemy" leader, I cannot help but read a subtext: Our leaders are the honest ones. I cannot keep myself from having the thought, except that there are American sources enough outside of the main stream media to tell me otherwise. The end result for me is that Mr. Cohen, who ordinarily I admire for the circumspect quality of his thoughts when he writes about politics and political leaders, shows himself, perhaps unintentionally, hopefully so, as one of our propagandists.
17
I would believe the open press of USA over the propaganda emanating from Russia. Goebbels must be laughing in his grave at this one.! Seriously even the Germans laughed and they are not renown for their humour.
Arm the Ukraine allow them the right to defend themselves!
Arm the Ukraine allow them the right to defend themselves!
2
Utterly! To the point of irrelevance.
I am reminded of a dinner some years ago in Berlin, when I asked the question "why are West German trucks built with their chassis so high off the ground?" The industrialist smiled and said, "all trucks in Germany technically are military vehicles, next time we will not get stuck in the snow." NATO has become an instrument of Central European dominance, which Putin understands. Not to say NATO is the better option than mother Russia, it still is looking at not getting stuck in the snow.
6
To those commentators comparing Putin to Hitler. Do you remember what it took to defeat Hitler?
Let's see, USSR lost something like 25+ million ppl and most of the Western Europe was in ruins. From what I hear, Russians are prepared for to pay this price again, is the West?
Let's see, USSR lost something like 25+ million ppl and most of the Western Europe was in ruins. From what I hear, Russians are prepared for to pay this price again, is the West?
8
And Stalin declared war on Poland with his allie Hitler. This isn't about goose stepping across the Rhineland this is about naked aggression and invasion of a sovereign country. If Putin continues this way he will bring on a war despite what we want. Appeasement doesn't work, arm the Ukraine
1
what's the problem for us?
It appears Mr. Cohen has a short memory or knowledge of history. One wonders if he will abide by and later own his militaristic taunts regarding weapons proliferation as panacea if this foolishness comes to pass. Wrong on nearly every count in a realm of immense subjectivity; defining this region with any sense of present tense clarity is shear hubris which is the journalistic standby for not knowing whatever is promulgated. It is quite amusing when the left is confronted with itself, yet appears to not see its reflection and does a quick right turn, hiding behind the export of weapons and killing at a distance as solution.
6
So the Ukrainians should just bend over and surrender? Then with your reasoning the US would be justified in invading Mexico , Cuba, and Canada and expect them to surrender and offer no resistance.. What planet are you people from?
3
Excellent!
People keep making references to Russia's nuclear capabilities as if the West was conemplating arming Ukraine with ICBMs - that's nonsense. Russia is not facing invasion - Ukraine is. It's just an hysteric reference that is thrown out there to cloud the discussion here which is simply about providing Ukraine defensive technology to help that state gain leverage in peace negotiations. The West is not going to war against Russia, and Putin is not on the verge of unleashing the Apocalypse.
5
You are so right and if Putin is allowed to wave that stick now he will do it again. Appeasement doesn't work!
1
Ukraine was a spontaneous, popular uprising? Lavrov might well harbour his illusions, but Roger, so do you, unless you are being disingenous.
13
"There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. Bolster the Ukrainian Army with them and other arms. Change Putin’s cost-benefit analysis."
I still disagree. I think there is still much more that can be done with more sanctions and isolating Russia economically. We have got to find a way to provide Europe with energy so they can tell Putin what to do with his oil and gas.
I still disagree. I think there is still much more that can be done with more sanctions and isolating Russia economically. We have got to find a way to provide Europe with energy so they can tell Putin what to do with his oil and gas.
3
the French and Germans refuse to even increase sanctions, but instead want to talk- forever!!! Read the French President's comments from several weeks ago regarding Ukraine/Russia and sanctions , he's totally against even the current ones.
2
Well since 1994 Mr. Cohen, thanks to GW Bush lead and refined by Obama, we have set up the 'defense shield ' in Poland and Rumania with upgrades being done this year. We have also have Navy ships in the Black Sea which is tantamount to Russians patrolling the Gulf of Mexico; this has given Putin the perfect rationalization, as a strategic move, to take over the Crimea and to disregard any previous agreements.
12
Anyone who thinks they are going to push Putin around without some possibly serious repercussions needs their head examined, seriously! Brinksmanship is not a good foreign policy.
17
just what will he do? launch nuclear missiles? over Ukraine- he's just land grab hungry.. put enough weapons into Ukrainians hands he'll have another "Stalingrad" with him losing.
1
yes, launch nuclear weapons. I fear his grip on reality.
Article 2? When did the US ever feel constrained by the UN Charter, Article 2?
Vietnam? Guatemala? Iran? Nicaragua? Cuba? Grenada? Afghanistan? Iraq?
Where? When?
Vietnam? Guatemala? Iran? Nicaragua? Cuba? Grenada? Afghanistan? Iraq?
Where? When?
13
Cohen joins Kristoff and a host of other NYT venerated reporters assigned to do a piece on the Ukrainian crisis. These are areas outside of their expertise. I guess the thinking is that great writing will make up for an ignorance of the facts on the ground and a logical geopolitical analysis. Guess what NYT? It ain't working.
The gist of this article seems to be, that if we up the ante and provide weapons to the Kiev side, Putin will back down as far as Crimea and the Eastern Ukraine.
Dream on Roger. Or rather - what are you smoking?
Not to mention the fantasy of invading the entire Ukraine. Which if it was Russia's goal, what is to stop them right now from doing that? Since they haven't done it already and it would have been easy to achieve - Ipso facto - they don't want to do that and the Roger Cohen fantasy of Russian invasion wafts away like so much smoke.
The gist of this article seems to be, that if we up the ante and provide weapons to the Kiev side, Putin will back down as far as Crimea and the Eastern Ukraine.
Dream on Roger. Or rather - what are you smoking?
Not to mention the fantasy of invading the entire Ukraine. Which if it was Russia's goal, what is to stop them right now from doing that? Since they haven't done it already and it would have been easy to achieve - Ipso facto - they don't want to do that and the Roger Cohen fantasy of Russian invasion wafts away like so much smoke.
13
Sometimes truth is not what we want to hesr. Someone once said if you want peace you must be willing to go to war.?
If we are not, is the likelihood of war greater and more costly in the future? When you are in a serious chess match it is worth getting advice from a Grand Master.... http://lstrn.us/1qktT8p
If we are not, is the likelihood of war greater and more costly in the future? When you are in a serious chess match it is worth getting advice from a Grand Master.... http://lstrn.us/1qktT8p
1
Mr Cohen, I am definitely no fan of the Russian dictator or his methods in Ukraine, but you are undermine your argument for arms to Ukraine with your false historical assertion about Russia and German post-war. The Russians indeed wanted a unified Germany, not occupied by Russian troops, but not occupied by Western troops either: they wanted a neutrla Germany. I do NOT agree with their position, but, at least, state history correctly!
Then you go on to affirm with utmost certainty that the response to Russian aggression in Ukraine (yes, I agree, it is aggression) is to provide weapons to the Ukrainian government. Maybe, but it is more than probable that arms to the Ukrainian government will only lead to a new Iron Curtain set up right on Kiev's doorstep. So think about the logistics, the long Russian/Ukrainian borders and history before advocating a war that could turn out to be a human rights disaster.
In sum, I am not sure which way to go in this conflict, but I am very sure you, Mr Cohen, do not know what you are talking about. Ditto for the Israelo-Palestinian conflict where you unfairly label Israel's critics as anti-semites!
Then you go on to affirm with utmost certainty that the response to Russian aggression in Ukraine (yes, I agree, it is aggression) is to provide weapons to the Ukrainian government. Maybe, but it is more than probable that arms to the Ukrainian government will only lead to a new Iron Curtain set up right on Kiev's doorstep. So think about the logistics, the long Russian/Ukrainian borders and history before advocating a war that could turn out to be a human rights disaster.
In sum, I am not sure which way to go in this conflict, but I am very sure you, Mr Cohen, do not know what you are talking about. Ditto for the Israelo-Palestinian conflict where you unfairly label Israel's critics as anti-semites!
12
Anybody who disagrees with a Zionists is labelled 'anti-Semite". Labelling thus is the first thing they do to construct their version of your profile; and deconstruct your real/genuine/authentic/honest profile.
Any arms or money for arms to Ukraine will be stolen. I can't believe a NYT columnist is itresponsible advocating the advance of NATO into Russia's front yard. I'm fed up with America's provocations world wide.
1
I hear you, William, because I am very concerned about Mr Cohen's argumentation here. But let's also concede that Russia's border extend to nearly half the land mass of the planet's northern hemisphere, so it is hard to speak of Russia's front or back yard. Many countries bordering Russia are worried about its aggressive actions, past, present and future. And despite all the hue and cry about the villainous NATO, that defense pact never had anywhere near an offensive capacity to match that of the Warsaw Pact! Russia, like Israel, is using the crimes of the past to justify a super aggressive stance towards its neighbors. My heart is with the Ukrainian government and people, but I think Obama is correct to work hard for a negotiated settlement while building up NATO's support for the Baltic countries. However, no matter what we do, Russia could invade and swallow up Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania tomorrow. I am sure Putin has thought about it many a time.
Cohen should read Lawrence Wilkerson's article
http://www.vagazette.com/news/va-vg-edit-essay-wilkerson-0204-20150203,0...
in which he points out the errors Clinton, Bush2, and Obama made in dealing with Russia. Cohen needs to read more history from unbiased sources.
http://www.vagazette.com/news/va-vg-edit-essay-wilkerson-0204-20150203,0...
in which he points out the errors Clinton, Bush2, and Obama made in dealing with Russia. Cohen needs to read more history from unbiased sources.
7
A convincing case can be made that the whole Ukraine affair was engineered by the intelligence apparatus of Russia under the leadership of Putin. He had so little regard for the opinions of the people of Ukraine that at the moment when the expectations of the public to join the EU were at an all time high - even Yanukovych had campaign for EU association supported by parliament - the decision was forced to close off the path to Europe. Instead Yanukovych announced that he had chosen for Ukraine to move towards the Eurasian Union, to remain a corrupted appendage of Russia. This outraged the public with the largest demonstrations in Ukraine's history. But, what toppled Yanukovych was the provocations, particularly the sniper attacks killing both security forces and citizens. If Yanukovych were suddenly removed and the country with its corrupted army defenseless, the country was expected to descend into chaos. Russian troops were massed on the border ready to move and restore order in Kiev. But the formation of a government prevented the chaos. This is what Putinspeak refers to as the CIA inspired coup. Without general chaos there was plan B. Continue with provocations and send in Strelkov and his agents - first to Crimea to seize power there. That was easy. The next step create war wherever possible in Ukraine since the prize was Ukraine itself. Strelkov claims he started the war. But, Plan B has been more difficult. Ukrainians have proven to be tough.
5
Only 50% of the 40 million Ukrainians voted for Porochenko. The rest wanted Russia. So there are a lot of unhappy folks that could change things just as fast as they did last time.
Mr. Cohen conveniently fails to mention that Russia did respect Ukraine's sovereignty until we provoked a revolution with $5 billion funneled to opposition groups, including neo-Nazis, through the NED at the direction of neo-cons like Under Secretary of State Nuland. She and Senator McCain called for the overthrow of a corrupt but legally-elected government so as to advance the interests of big oil, big agriculture and the American munitions industry, all heavily invested in and counting on a pro-Western regime, compliant to their ambitions.
Cohen and the neo-cons also ignore our 1994 pledge not to extend NATO eastward. Now they've poked the Bear in the eye and call on us to pay the price in arms, aid, and possibly later, blood to support their needless conflict to advance the interests of multi-national corporations.
This is madness. Negotiate a settlement and get out. Leave Ukraine's massive debt in Putin's insolvet hands.
Cohen and the neo-cons also ignore our 1994 pledge not to extend NATO eastward. Now they've poked the Bear in the eye and call on us to pay the price in arms, aid, and possibly later, blood to support their needless conflict to advance the interests of multi-national corporations.
This is madness. Negotiate a settlement and get out. Leave Ukraine's massive debt in Putin's insolvet hands.
10
Mr. Cohen wrote: "Russia’s annexation of Crimea was, he insisted, a popular uprising, the people “invoking the right of self-determination” as per the United Nations Charter. Ukrainians were engaged in an orgy of “nationalistic violence” characterized by ethnic purges directed against Jews and Russians. The United States was driven by an insatiable desire for global dominance and, in Ukraine, had orchestrated the “coup d’état” last year. "
We are not supposed to believe this, I suppose, because some Russian
in the government, Mr. Lavrov, said this . Also it might make us wonder what we have been doing over there. We are, after all, supposed to be good patriots and dismiss things if true, just because we can 'get away with that. Has it not also been our own government that keeps dimissing statements by any foreign leaders, even up to and including abject pleas?
Such was the case with Col al Qaddafi, who was pleading for cease-fires, finally pleaded for cessation of the war waged upon Libya. Similarly Bashar al-Assad has claimed the so-called rebels there are actually terrorists. These terrorists were also under control in Iraq, until after trying to claim they had no WMB and were not a danger to the world (now imprisoned Tariq Aziz, former Vice President), claimed ... all such things were dismissed because the U.S. wanted a war.
So now the same bad thing happening to the people of Ukraine.
I could read no further such tripe.
We are not supposed to believe this, I suppose, because some Russian
in the government, Mr. Lavrov, said this . Also it might make us wonder what we have been doing over there. We are, after all, supposed to be good patriots and dismiss things if true, just because we can 'get away with that. Has it not also been our own government that keeps dimissing statements by any foreign leaders, even up to and including abject pleas?
Such was the case with Col al Qaddafi, who was pleading for cease-fires, finally pleaded for cessation of the war waged upon Libya. Similarly Bashar al-Assad has claimed the so-called rebels there are actually terrorists. These terrorists were also under control in Iraq, until after trying to claim they had no WMB and were not a danger to the world (now imprisoned Tariq Aziz, former Vice President), claimed ... all such things were dismissed because the U.S. wanted a war.
So now the same bad thing happening to the people of Ukraine.
I could read no further such tripe.
5
Ukraine is more than capable of defeating the invaders by herself given the means to do so. Arm Ukraine. All these ifs and buts mean nothing while her country is ravaged by Putin's proxies! .
5
Word of advice for Cohen. If you aim to subvert your enemy's position of disillusionment, do not do so by launching into a disillusioned rationale in order to do so.
In contradictory fashion, you seem to take Lavrov's position and just invert it in a way to favor US, NATO, EU interests. I don't know the right path forward in Ukraine, but it starts at the very least with the right analysis of events and interests in operation there. I am afraid you, Mr. Cohen, are not able to provide the proper context, so how can you be so quick to offer a solution, and a military one with high stakes at that.
Back to the drawing board.
In contradictory fashion, you seem to take Lavrov's position and just invert it in a way to favor US, NATO, EU interests. I don't know the right path forward in Ukraine, but it starts at the very least with the right analysis of events and interests in operation there. I am afraid you, Mr. Cohen, are not able to provide the proper context, so how can you be so quick to offer a solution, and a military one with high stakes at that.
Back to the drawing board.
16
Ryan, please read Alice in Wonderland. Right is Wrong and Wrong is Right; Black is White and White is Black. Mearsheimer is Wrong and Cohen is Right.
NATO invaders are liberators (by definition), locals living under occupation are terrorists (by definition). The banality of the peculiarity of the inhabitants of Wonderland.
NATO invaders are liberators (by definition), locals living under occupation are terrorists (by definition). The banality of the peculiarity of the inhabitants of Wonderland.
Putin is playing the same game that Western Colonialists played a few decades ago i.e. Divide and Rule. He is playing this game with the West to a 'T'. He is not blind to the emerging factions in the West. If Germany and France think that diplomacy should take precedence over weaponry, so be it. Let them try it and leave them to their own devices. Let us just be a bystander and do our bit - sanctions. Why should we put our citizens' lives and treasures for these smug Europeans. We have subsidized them enough!! While they were making their Mercs and BMWs and enjoying great cuisine and providing it's citizens with great social benefits, our citizens are being squeezed into poverty. We have kept our side of the promise for too long now. Enough!! Now's the time to think of us, US AMERICANS ONLY.
3
The Good Friday Agreement (1998) between Britain and Ireland and between the parties in Northern Ireland offer a pathway for peace in the Ukraine. Numerous provisions have direct relevance: a few examples have direct parallels
1. The right to be accepted as Irish or British, or both (as well as the right to hold either or both British and Irish citizenship) was recognised
2. ... rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos and aspirations of both communities
3......"the importance of respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity
Many other provisions might be integral.
On a supra-national level, the Austria State Treaty (1955) declared permanent neutrality, the Soviets withdrew and never breached any component of the treaty. Austria prospered without NATO.
It's simply delusional to think that the aspirations of a significant portion of the population of Ukraine can be suppressed by force.
Negotiations on the GFA and the Austria Treaty model may offer a pathway.
1. The right to be accepted as Irish or British, or both (as well as the right to hold either or both British and Irish citizenship) was recognised
2. ... rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos and aspirations of both communities
3......"the importance of respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity
Many other provisions might be integral.
On a supra-national level, the Austria State Treaty (1955) declared permanent neutrality, the Soviets withdrew and never breached any component of the treaty. Austria prospered without NATO.
It's simply delusional to think that the aspirations of a significant portion of the population of Ukraine can be suppressed by force.
Negotiations on the GFA and the Austria Treaty model may offer a pathway.
2
As much as I normally appreciate Mr. Cohen's columns, I think this is despicable hardline dribble. I am not particularly sympathetic to Mr. Putin, he has consistently expanded the authoritarian tendencies in Russia at the expense of an open democratic society. It is clear that Russia is directly supporting the Ukrainian rebels. Nonetheless, there are a few observations: Russia's sense of encirclement did not appear willynilly. The prospect that Ukraine might become a member of Nato, and Nato's refusal to rule out that prospect, are ample reason for concern. The annexation of the Crimean almost certainly reflected the popular will of the majority of its residents. The Crimean was handed to Ukraine by Chruschtschow a bit more than 50 years ago after for centuries belonging to Russia. Does anybody believe the US would handle an equivalent situation differently? And like it or not, eastern Ukraine has a large Russian speaking population, who might indeed prefer to throw their lot in with Russia. Lastly, the Europeans, who live next door, are most directly affected, and we should indeed defer to them in the best approach of dealing with Russia. As for Ukraine, it seems to me that the example of Finland, who lived as a peaceful, prosperous country in the shadow of the former Sowjet Union, politically, economically and culturally aligned with the west, but not part of either Nato or the European Union, is a viable model, rather than a negative example of appeasement.
11
H.G., you're actually wrong about Russia's claim to the Crimea. The native peoples are the Tatars, who have been there forever. After WWII Stalin shipped most of them off to the Gulag to die so that he could install sleeper cells of Russians, to create "facts on the ground," just as Netanyahu and his cronies have also done in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Crimea was a part of the Ottoman Empire, which was centered in Istanbul (then known as Constantinople), for 320 years from 1449 to 1779. In 1783 Catherine the Great finally succeeded in capturing Crimea for Russia, which controlled it for only 128 years until it became an autonomous republic of the USSR. In 1954 Nikita Khrushchev folded it into Ukraine, where it remained for 60 years until Vladimir Putin decided that Ukrainians were getting too uppity, so he took over and annexed the territory within only a couple of weeks after Yankovich ran away from the mostly peaceful protestors in Kiev. So you see, if anyone has a legitimate claim to Crimea, it’s Turkey!
1
Most informed and reasonable post yet. Bravo!
DAL, with all respect but it is not that black and white as many want to see it and we need to stop blaming Putin and Russian for every single problem. First, Stalin was Georgian (real name is "Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili" - not Russian - so it is hard to imagine why he would want to "install sleeper Russian cells". It is also hard to blame Russia for the genocide that he - and his buddy Beria (Lavrentiy Beria, also Georgian) - have committed to all people of the USSR without differentiation (Russian, Ukranians, Tatars, Georgians, Jews etc..). This little fact Georgian's do not really like to advertise when they claim that Russia "occupied" Georgia during Soviet times. Second, Kruschev - spending a significant part of his life in Donbas, Eastern Ukraine - decided in ad-hoc manner to give Crimea away to the Ukranian people to commemorate 300 years of friendship. At that time it really did not mean anything as it was the same country without any internal borders or animosity. "Friendship" does not even describe that relationship really well - more like a "family". As a matter of fact, Kiev was the first Russian capital - that is how close these nations are. Third, Turkish Ottoman Empire - and Tatars - also came to Crimea - that was not their land. At the time it was ruled by descendants of Mongols (came from Mongolia).
With all respect, we should stop demonizing Russians (or Ukranians, Georgians etc.. to the same extend) and pray for peace and mind our own business.
With all respect, we should stop demonizing Russians (or Ukranians, Georgians etc.. to the same extend) and pray for peace and mind our own business.
Our big mistake, back at the time of "Die Wende" was not to do with Russia what was done with Germany: Make the Russians write 10 million times on the blackboard "We will not ever be evil again." Instead, we tiptoed around Russia and as a result, we have an intellectual climate there quite like the Germany of the Weimar Republic - full of resentment, full of talk about a Sonderweg other than democracy, full of dreams of a new empire, and now under the thumb of a reactionary thug.
2
Good intelligence; poor strategic and tactical planning.
A better title "Cohen's illusions over Ukraine."
One can be realistic identifying a problem, but wrong in implementing solutions.
One must wonder if there are enough anti-tank missiles to stop Russian tanks?
Are drones effective in battle?
When destruction comes on the radar, no one would care ; not the West nor the East!!
A better title "Cohen's illusions over Ukraine."
One can be realistic identifying a problem, but wrong in implementing solutions.
One must wonder if there are enough anti-tank missiles to stop Russian tanks?
Are drones effective in battle?
When destruction comes on the radar, no one would care ; not the West nor the East!!
1
I agree with much of what the article says about the current situation in Ukraine, but a reasonable case can be made for the assertion that it really was the Soviet Union that was against splitting Germany after WWII. The model may well have been the successful reunification and neutralization of Austria, but the West seemed determined to make West Germany a strategic bulwark against the USSR and didn't even want to talk about it.
It's certainly controversial, but the case for this argument is thoroughly stated by Carolyn Woods Eisenberg in "Drawing the Line: The American Decision to Divide Germany, 1944-1949"
It's certainly controversial, but the case for this argument is thoroughly stated by Carolyn Woods Eisenberg in "Drawing the Line: The American Decision to Divide Germany, 1944-1949"
5
Russia's afraid we're going to invade them! What kind of fantasy is that? I don't believe Putin could possibly fear that.
Here is a much more relevant parallel. In 1938, Czechoslovakia, a country only around 20 years old, had a border region with Germany, inhabited by a bunch of German-speaking traitors. Hitler took advantage of this to invade, claiming the traitors were being mistreated. Chamberlain went to Munich and bought "peace in our time" by giving this Sudeten region to Germany. Next Hitler attacked the remains of Czechoslovakia,
However, there was a happy ending: when WW II finished, the Democratic (not Communist) government of Czechoslovakia promptly sent these traitors packing back to Germany, with just the clothes on their back. Germany wisely saw they'd never be allowed to return, and instead of putting them in refugee camps settled them across the country--an example that should have been emulated outside Europe also.
But, history doesn't repeat itself. Make a deal, give Putin E. Ukraine (whether Poroshenko likes it or not) in return for letting W. Ukraine become a member of the EU and NATO.
We've had lots of experience giving weapons to people. It's stupid, it never works. It will not win against Russia.
Russia, under Putin is our enemy and Germany's partner. Do everything possible to weaken them--but not on the battlefield.
Here is a much more relevant parallel. In 1938, Czechoslovakia, a country only around 20 years old, had a border region with Germany, inhabited by a bunch of German-speaking traitors. Hitler took advantage of this to invade, claiming the traitors were being mistreated. Chamberlain went to Munich and bought "peace in our time" by giving this Sudeten region to Germany. Next Hitler attacked the remains of Czechoslovakia,
However, there was a happy ending: when WW II finished, the Democratic (not Communist) government of Czechoslovakia promptly sent these traitors packing back to Germany, with just the clothes on their back. Germany wisely saw they'd never be allowed to return, and instead of putting them in refugee camps settled them across the country--an example that should have been emulated outside Europe also.
But, history doesn't repeat itself. Make a deal, give Putin E. Ukraine (whether Poroshenko likes it or not) in return for letting W. Ukraine become a member of the EU and NATO.
We've had lots of experience giving weapons to people. It's stupid, it never works. It will not win against Russia.
Russia, under Putin is our enemy and Germany's partner. Do everything possible to weaken them--but not on the battlefield.
2
Adolph Hitler tried to create the Third Reich and we had to stop him in the WWII.
Has everything afterwards been an inertia and a repetitive use of same explanation?
We had to stop the Warsaw Pact from conquering the world and spreading the communism across the globe. The question is since the Russians obviously oppressed all of them, from East Germany and Poland over Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia to Ukraine, was there any real chance that Moscow could ever conquer all those small countries and the US, Britain, Germany and France? Were the Russians such a danger if they never throughout history could accomplish anything remotely similar?
We had to stop Saddam Hussein from conquering the entire Middle East. Only later we learned that Saddam actually was preventing the Iranian influence from spreading across the Gulf and already had a tough job oppressing the majority of Iraqis (the Shiites and the Kurds).
We had to stop the Al Qaeda from conquering the world in the name of radical Islam. That could only be accomplished by limiting our civil liberties and spying on the fellow citizens. That’s the problem with those Arabs, when they are peaceful, they are extremely incompetent and incapable of normal democracy, and the White House had to deal with the kings and princes for decades. The Arabs can’t free themselves but can conquer us!
Most recently, we had to stop Putin in Ukraine from rebuilding the USSR and spreading his authoritarian regime all over the Europe...
Has everything afterwards been an inertia and a repetitive use of same explanation?
We had to stop the Warsaw Pact from conquering the world and spreading the communism across the globe. The question is since the Russians obviously oppressed all of them, from East Germany and Poland over Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia to Ukraine, was there any real chance that Moscow could ever conquer all those small countries and the US, Britain, Germany and France? Were the Russians such a danger if they never throughout history could accomplish anything remotely similar?
We had to stop Saddam Hussein from conquering the entire Middle East. Only later we learned that Saddam actually was preventing the Iranian influence from spreading across the Gulf and already had a tough job oppressing the majority of Iraqis (the Shiites and the Kurds).
We had to stop the Al Qaeda from conquering the world in the name of radical Islam. That could only be accomplished by limiting our civil liberties and spying on the fellow citizens. That’s the problem with those Arabs, when they are peaceful, they are extremely incompetent and incapable of normal democracy, and the White House had to deal with the kings and princes for decades. The Arabs can’t free themselves but can conquer us!
Most recently, we had to stop Putin in Ukraine from rebuilding the USSR and spreading his authoritarian regime all over the Europe...
2
"It’s time to get real over Putin. He has not poured tanks and multiple-launch rocket systems over the Ukrainian border because he is about to settle for anything less than a weak Ukraine ... ." Spot on, Mr. Cohen. Thank you. Facts on the ground are the only "diplomacy" the tyrant Putin will respond to. Stop his tanks. Destroy his rocket emplacements. Then he'll talk. Otherwise, iPutin will respond the same way Stalin responded when asked if the Pope's moral condemnation bothered him. Stalin replied: "How many divisions does the Pope have?"
1
Mr. Cohen pretends these issues exist in and of themselves, as though we didn't push NATO east into Poland, Lithuania, & the Czech Republic after the collapse of the Soviet Union. No one ever explained to us why this was necessary. Who was the enemy? Answer: There was none, so the arms industry created one in Russia and began selling wares to the new NATO members. Russians responded by electing a vicious dictator who they felt could protect them.
7
No one is a saint in this game. The whole world knows US wants to act like sole global police. Yes US won cold war but for past 25 years NATO expansion had shown "I won - I dictate attitude". I some times wonder why this is not discussed at length in these intellectuals articles except quoting it as Putin's blame game. Dark age or digital age borders and power houses can never be the same. What ever we say about Putin I wonder if west can match his moves, so it is better for US not aggravate this crisis any further. Some questioned if west would dare a nuclear war with Russia if it provokes similar escalation in Latvia / Estonia .... even that is a big question for which real answer is an imaginary one... After all there will be systemic break down in EU which could be worse than Russia's recession problem, that is what even EU leaders are afraid of ..realizing that all are pushing for truce now... US should also contribute to the same rather than talking about lethal aid etc...
6
There is an unusual diversity of opinion about how to address the Russia/Ukraine crisis among intelligent and experienced Putin pundits such as yourself. While I generally admire your perspectives, those holding opposite and well-defended positions leave me without a meaningful POV, even or especially after reading others' comments. Time to pray, perhaps?
What do the people of Eastern Ukraine want? I don't know, and no one has truly tried to find out.
National boundaries should not be changed flippantly, but they are also not sacred. So why not propose an internationally supervised election in Eastern Ukraine. an let the people decide whether they want to remain a part of Ukraine, join Russia, or independence from both.
We should respect their vote, just as Putin pledged to respect the vote in Crimea. The Crimeans would have voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia even without Russian presence.
I can envision no other way to end this conflict.
National boundaries should not be changed flippantly, but they are also not sacred. So why not propose an internationally supervised election in Eastern Ukraine. an let the people decide whether they want to remain a part of Ukraine, join Russia, or independence from both.
We should respect their vote, just as Putin pledged to respect the vote in Crimea. The Crimeans would have voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia even without Russian presence.
I can envision no other way to end this conflict.
7
Hooray, for sensibility!
Sure, just like the Sudeten Germans. That worked out well.
This is a very complicated issue whereby the government in Kiev may today be comprised of 30% of Nazis in the current Ukraine parliament and they have the best propaganda machinery from the West. While Russia does not want a NAZI as a neighbour and memories of the second world war.
2
Mr. Cohen:
Freace makes some very fine anti-tank weapons. Germany has state of the art tanks. Sweden has been a leader in anti-aircraft weapons systems. I thnk you get the point. It's long past time for Europe to step up on this and other issues. This includes the much saner response of sanctions.
Freace makes some very fine anti-tank weapons. Germany has state of the art tanks. Sweden has been a leader in anti-aircraft weapons systems. I thnk you get the point. It's long past time for Europe to step up on this and other issues. This includes the much saner response of sanctions.
2
Twenty years ago the Ukraine had something the US wanted - a nuclear arsenal. In return for surrendering it and unilaterally disarming, we promised to protect their territorially sovereignty. They lived up to their side. So how come all of a sudden this is France and Germany and Sweden and everyone else's problem when we are the one's who owe a debt?
2
February 9, 2015
Nice way to start my day with a nice meal -and in one gulp Germans -and say non Russian Ukraine's are consumed for the love of infinity, eternity - that by the by is much easier to do that discourse and learn from each other and how to live nice as good neighbors....
More people have been killed by illusions than the wrong wife or something as such - in every language on earth....
The language of heaven is truly easier for the educated and that is the goal for ...us....
jja Manhattan, N. Y.
Nice way to start my day with a nice meal -and in one gulp Germans -and say non Russian Ukraine's are consumed for the love of infinity, eternity - that by the by is much easier to do that discourse and learn from each other and how to live nice as good neighbors....
More people have been killed by illusions than the wrong wife or something as such - in every language on earth....
The language of heaven is truly easier for the educated and that is the goal for ...us....
jja Manhattan, N. Y.
2
Thanks for your thought provoking post, JJ.
Yet a different, but important reference point on the stakes in our decisions.
Yet a different, but important reference point on the stakes in our decisions.
1
From an American perspective, Roger Cohen is perhaps correct when he approaches the Ukrainian war from an economic perspective. "The only way to change Putin's cost-benefit analysis is to help arm Ukraine." Right!
The plan is flawless. US weapon makers supply Kiev with advanced materiel paid by American or EU taxpayers. Europe takes care of bailing out Ukraine's economy while paying costs associated with trade and business deal losses incurred with Russia.
At this juncture, Mrs. Merkel and associates do seem enthusiastic about Washington diplomatic approach to "solve" the conflict. Two major world wars in European soil still lingers in the collective memory of the political leadership.
The plan is flawless. US weapon makers supply Kiev with advanced materiel paid by American or EU taxpayers. Europe takes care of bailing out Ukraine's economy while paying costs associated with trade and business deal losses incurred with Russia.
At this juncture, Mrs. Merkel and associates do seem enthusiastic about Washington diplomatic approach to "solve" the conflict. Two major world wars in European soil still lingers in the collective memory of the political leadership.
2
Bravo! Bravo! . . . Now, where did I put that manual on how to build a nuclear shelter . . . .
6
Mr. Cohen completely avoids mention of any way the United States will benefit by getting involved in yet another conflict, yet feels completely comfortable making the case for another war of opportunity. We have seen far too many pro-war arguments in the past two decades, with no benefit to anybody other than the criminal war profiteers Eisenhower warned us about.
If Mr. Cohen wants to send his family to fight in Ukraine, he should put on his boots and go. We need to fix what is broken right here in the United States before engaging in yet another war of opportunity.
If Mr. Cohen wants to send his family to fight in Ukraine, he should put on his boots and go. We need to fix what is broken right here in the United States before engaging in yet another war of opportunity.
10
You make total sense!
That doesn't pay the bills in the Halls of Congress…
Let
Let's keep trying, though, and even we can outlast the neocons :-)
That doesn't pay the bills in the Halls of Congress…
Let
Let's keep trying, though, and even we can outlast the neocons :-)
No U.S. weapons to the Ukraine, please. Recall how and by whom democracy was imported into Irak, Libya, Syria, etc. Who paid for it? Millions of displaced or killed people. Who are flooding Western Europe. An unexpected ugly face of Roger Cohen turning up.
9
Here's my two cents on this issue: I am FOR a sovereign, unmitigated, unexpurgated, and undivided Ukraine.
I am AGAINST the blatant invasion of Ukraine and the trampling on by Russia of Ukrainian sovereignty, on these thin and flimsy pretexts that Putin has cooked up.
Putin is a bully - and I think that's actually a mild way to describe him. In actuality, the tactics he is using on Ukraine and on the West to deflect their criticism, are all Hitlerian. And to obtain the support of the people, who apparently are overwhelmingly supportive of what he is doing in Ukraine, he has used propaganda tactics that are to, use another word, Goebbelsian.
I recently saw a picture of him as a young man, and, although I would be the first to admit that looks can be deceiving, he looks different from the other young men in the picture. He looks cold - even in his comparative youth in that picture, he looks like a thug.
BUT - right or wrong, when your country has a history of being in a war where 30 million of your own people died - a figure inconceivable to Americans - I think it puts a scar in the collective psyche. And Ukraine, in WWII, initially WELCOMED the Nazis, because they hated Stalin and his oppression so.
I that, even now, Russia remembers that - and methinks there is some of this in the collective animus there that has a part in why this is happening.
I am AGAINST the blatant invasion of Ukraine and the trampling on by Russia of Ukrainian sovereignty, on these thin and flimsy pretexts that Putin has cooked up.
Putin is a bully - and I think that's actually a mild way to describe him. In actuality, the tactics he is using on Ukraine and on the West to deflect their criticism, are all Hitlerian. And to obtain the support of the people, who apparently are overwhelmingly supportive of what he is doing in Ukraine, he has used propaganda tactics that are to, use another word, Goebbelsian.
I recently saw a picture of him as a young man, and, although I would be the first to admit that looks can be deceiving, he looks different from the other young men in the picture. He looks cold - even in his comparative youth in that picture, he looks like a thug.
BUT - right or wrong, when your country has a history of being in a war where 30 million of your own people died - a figure inconceivable to Americans - I think it puts a scar in the collective psyche. And Ukraine, in WWII, initially WELCOMED the Nazis, because they hated Stalin and his oppression so.
I that, even now, Russia remembers that - and methinks there is some of this in the collective animus there that has a part in why this is happening.
5
Russia says it is not sending arms and troops into Ukraine. Well, the West can do the same, send them in but deny having done so. I see nothing wrong with such a strategy at this point.
5
Discretion being the bettor part of valor, perhaps Ukraine might be (subject to Ukrainian popular vote), divided along the Dnieper/Dnipro River for now.
In the future, if they choose to reunite as per Germany & Vietnam, so be it.
National boundaries have changed many times throughout history as socio/political/economic winds shift direction.
In the future, if they choose to reunite as per Germany & Vietnam, so be it.
National boundaries have changed many times throughout history as socio/political/economic winds shift direction.
6
..."the idiom fascism knows best is untruth so grotesque it begets unreason" sound like our Republicans. Nice article.
1
Thank you, Mr. Cohen. Your position on this issue is unexpected but welcome.
2
For whatever it is worth, on this one we are in agreement.
I like your strong and resolute statement on this issue.
I like your strong and resolute statement on this issue.
3
Roger Cohen writes about Putin with almost breathtaking lucidity.
"He will not let Ukraine go," says Cohen. No, he won't, and that is something that Merkel and Obama and others cannot bring themselves to understand. However, unless they make Putin let go, the Baltic states, where there are huge numbers of Russians presumably in need of "protection," are next.
Merkel, according to The New York Times, has famously said that Putin is "living in another world," but right now you have to wonder what world Merkel and Obama are living in.
"He will not let Ukraine go," says Cohen. No, he won't, and that is something that Merkel and Obama and others cannot bring themselves to understand. However, unless they make Putin let go, the Baltic states, where there are huge numbers of Russians presumably in need of "protection," are next.
Merkel, according to The New York Times, has famously said that Putin is "living in another world," but right now you have to wonder what world Merkel and Obama are living in.
4
I was an enthusiastic supporter of President Obama in each election year. I am disillusioned and I expect that I share that disappointment with many other Americans, We have a president who dilly-dallys around and seems incapable of a forceful decision.
It seems it is time to put a stop to Putin's aggression. Diplomacy and Putin's broken promises are unsatisfactory.
Give Ukraine the ability to protect itself from the invasion by Russia.
It seems it is time to put a stop to Putin's aggression. Diplomacy and Putin's broken promises are unsatisfactory.
Give Ukraine the ability to protect itself from the invasion by Russia.
3
"Recall that Ukraine gave up more than 1,800 nuclear warheads in exchange for that bogus commitment from Russia back in 1994 to respect its sovereignty and borders. "
It's probably already too late to put the horse back in the barn. Ukraine will be the last country to give up it's nukes for the promise of security provided by others.
What country will give up it's nukes after seeing the Ukrainian example?
Recently, America has been working towards the reduction of nuclear arms; by not supporting the defense of Ukraine, we have undercut our position on nuclear disarmament.
It's probably already too late to put the horse back in the barn. Ukraine will be the last country to give up it's nukes for the promise of security provided by others.
What country will give up it's nukes after seeing the Ukrainian example?
Recently, America has been working towards the reduction of nuclear arms; by not supporting the defense of Ukraine, we have undercut our position on nuclear disarmament.
6
The Putin lapdogs are barking and whining in full force,let them howl, we will back the Ukraine, it is the right, and moral thing to do.
5
Ouster under machine gun fire of Ukraine's elected President wasn't a coup? The neo-lib militarism is "long on illusion and short on realism" as well as historical context. Suggested reading: John Mearsheimer, Stephen Cohen, Dimitri Simes, Henry Kissinger & George Keenan.
Diplomat-historian George F. Kennan perhaps said it most clearly (in LA Times July 7, 1997) : "Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the post cold-war era. Such a decision may be expected . . . to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking."
Diplomat-historian George F. Kennan perhaps said it most clearly (in LA Times July 7, 1997) : "Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the post cold-war era. Such a decision may be expected . . . to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking."
8
"Ouster under machine gun fire of Ukraine's elected President wasn't a coup?"
Such a thing didn't happen. It was that same elected President who gave the orders to fire the machine guns. It was when the Parliament objected and moved to impeach - a legally allowable, Constitutional action - that he fled.
Such a thing didn't happen. It was that same elected President who gave the orders to fire the machine guns. It was when the Parliament objected and moved to impeach - a legally allowable, Constitutional action - that he fled.
1
An excellent column. It's frightening knowing that there are politicians on both sides of the Atlantic who actually believe that "there is no military solution to the Ukraine." That is exactly what Putin wants to hear from the West. Wait until sanctions take their toll? Ukraine will have been annexed by "Mother Russia" long before that. And if the Ukraine falls to Russia, the rest of eastern Europe will know exactly where it stands. That departments of state in the West don't understand Putin is incomprehensible. But then again, they "hoped for the best" too in 1938.
5
I am surprised by people's lack of imagination and respect for modern technology in the hands of ruthless-minded special forces. People, we don't need to send an army to bloody Putin's nose! We need a battlelion of rangers and special forces coupled with a conscious effort to arm and train the Ukrainian volunteers on how to use the weapons and tactics we will provide. Putin's military tactics are an anachronism. We slaughtered Iraqi quickly in 1991. They don't stand a chance, if we have the will. Merkel and Hollande are only worried they might lose their oil and bank deals.
2
Hey Mr Cohen, imagine if the Russians were funding the leaders of a coup in Mexico with arms and tanks, and then go back and rewrite your atrocious column. You don't have to be a fan of Putin to see that the West has pushed NATO hard to the East. We promised Gorbachev we would not. Putin has shown remarkable restraint if you ask me.
The reality is that our neoliberal economic elite are interested in imposing austerity on Ukraine, and are happy to use neo-nazi Svoboda party death squads for that purpose.
You also supported the illegal invasion of Iraq, so I really have no interest in your hypocritical point of view.
The reality is that our neoliberal economic elite are interested in imposing austerity on Ukraine, and are happy to use neo-nazi Svoboda party death squads for that purpose.
You also supported the illegal invasion of Iraq, so I really have no interest in your hypocritical point of view.
7
"You don't have to be a fan of Putin to see that the West has pushed NATO hard to the East."
Actually, you do. NATO has repeatedly rebuffed Ukraine on this front and shown great good faith to the Russians when they objected to the idea back when.
"Hey Mr Cohen, imagine if the Russians were funding the leaders of a coup in Mexico with arms and tanks..."
Actually, to make your analogy work, we should imagine that we invaded Mexico, unilaterally declaring 11% of the country to be "New USA" and then sending in troops and arms to destabilize another big chunk. Now imagine that we had specifically promised just a few years before to never do such a thing if the Mexicans unilaterally disarmed and they had. And also that the Russians likewise promised Mexico that they would help protect it if it disarmed.
I can't speak for Cohen, but under such circumstances, I think I would support the Russian's sending the Mexicans guns.
Actually, you do. NATO has repeatedly rebuffed Ukraine on this front and shown great good faith to the Russians when they objected to the idea back when.
"Hey Mr Cohen, imagine if the Russians were funding the leaders of a coup in Mexico with arms and tanks..."
Actually, to make your analogy work, we should imagine that we invaded Mexico, unilaterally declaring 11% of the country to be "New USA" and then sending in troops and arms to destabilize another big chunk. Now imagine that we had specifically promised just a few years before to never do such a thing if the Mexicans unilaterally disarmed and they had. And also that the Russians likewise promised Mexico that they would help protect it if it disarmed.
I can't speak for Cohen, but under such circumstances, I think I would support the Russian's sending the Mexicans guns.
1
i wonder how many of your ancestors were decimated by Ukranian pogroms and are turning in their graves knowing that their posterity would publicly praise the Ukraine. Roger over and out.
3
Cohen is deliberately wrong on his history. In fact, Russia did propose a unified Germany after WW2. They wanted a demilitarized, de-Nazified Germany. The US rejected that, which lead to the ultimate division of the country, the setting up of NATO, with Germany occupied by US troops. It was only subsequent to these developments that Russia established the Warsaw Pact group of nations. NATO created the unnecessary military division of Europe & they now seem intent on re-establishing the Cold War once more.
13
I rarely feel the need to disagree so strongly with a NYT opinion writer.
Why the heck should we help militarize an already fragile state on Russia's border? If the Europeans want to do that, let them. We don't need ANOTHER war. And we don't need another cheerleader (did you hear that, W and the neocons?) to take us to war - with RUSSIA!!??
Please put down the war drums. The lying repubs have caused enough damage with war in the past ten years. To our country's shame.
Why the heck should we help militarize an already fragile state on Russia's border? If the Europeans want to do that, let them. We don't need ANOTHER war. And we don't need another cheerleader (did you hear that, W and the neocons?) to take us to war - with RUSSIA!!??
Please put down the war drums. The lying repubs have caused enough damage with war in the past ten years. To our country's shame.
12
"Why the heck should we help militarize an already fragile state on Russia's border?"
1. Because this is the FOURTH time Putin has done this to a neighboring state in the last 20 years or so. We already tried staying out and it just makes him more brazen. It logically follows that staying out again will simply mean facing him in Latvia next. (What will YOU say then?)
2. Because we made a commitment in the 1994 Budapest Agreement to protect Ukraine's borders. If we betray it, we will have a lot of trouble convincing other nations or rebel groups to trust us - thereby increasing the likelihood of war in the future.
This is a straight case of pay some now or pay more later. Every dollar, soldier, and unit of political capital Putin spends in Ukraine is one he can't spend in the next planned conquest.
1. Because this is the FOURTH time Putin has done this to a neighboring state in the last 20 years or so. We already tried staying out and it just makes him more brazen. It logically follows that staying out again will simply mean facing him in Latvia next. (What will YOU say then?)
2. Because we made a commitment in the 1994 Budapest Agreement to protect Ukraine's borders. If we betray it, we will have a lot of trouble convincing other nations or rebel groups to trust us - thereby increasing the likelihood of war in the future.
This is a straight case of pay some now or pay more later. Every dollar, soldier, and unit of political capital Putin spends in Ukraine is one he can't spend in the next planned conquest.
2
Maybe Mr. Lavrov's perspective has been leavened by the fact that 20 millions of Russians lost their lives in the most recent war with a Roman number. That fact does not mean that he and Mr. Putin are more right or just as right as Ms. Merkel or Mr. Obama. No argument that Putin uses brass knuckles, but his paranoia about the West in general or Deutschland in particular doesn't come from nowhere.
4
Bravo, and on-point Mr. Cohen; And I see that you are filing your story from Munich. As a long-time resident of (West) Berlin, I must add that you did not mention the general German Press reaction to all that is currently taking place in Ukraine, which I have found a bit distressing since the so called "left- of-center" media is not only sounding more in support of Russia these days, but is also quick to vilify and demonize the U.S and the West for all of the problems in that region...and for everywhere else on the entire planet, for that matter.
Of course, Germany had at first, no desire to get caught up in this conflict because of its numerous diplomatic, and lucrative business ventures.
However in the interim, Angela Merkel has recognized that Russia's land-grabbing exercises could potentially cause a significant threat and instability to the entire Pan-European region, including those countries that border Germany.
Having lived in Berlin when "The Wall" divided the city into the Allied and Soviet sectors, I can recall the stories of those who lived through the Russian Occupation during, and in the following days after the second World War, and
their memories were by and large, most unpleasant ones -- Which is precisely why I wonder how the events of the not-so-distant past can be so thoroughly underplayed, and overlooked. History has a way of repeating itself... And so, it shall.
Of course, Germany had at first, no desire to get caught up in this conflict because of its numerous diplomatic, and lucrative business ventures.
However in the interim, Angela Merkel has recognized that Russia's land-grabbing exercises could potentially cause a significant threat and instability to the entire Pan-European region, including those countries that border Germany.
Having lived in Berlin when "The Wall" divided the city into the Allied and Soviet sectors, I can recall the stories of those who lived through the Russian Occupation during, and in the following days after the second World War, and
their memories were by and large, most unpleasant ones -- Which is precisely why I wonder how the events of the not-so-distant past can be so thoroughly underplayed, and overlooked. History has a way of repeating itself... And so, it shall.
4
"Ukrainians are not nuts. They find the allure of Warsaw or Berlin greater than that of sunny Minsk."
Hahaha! Dear Mr. Cohen - Minsk is not Russia, it is a capital of Belarus :)
Hahaha! Dear Mr. Cohen - Minsk is not Russia, it is a capital of Belarus :)
5
That is his point. Belarus has become the exact kind of puppet state that Putin envisions for Ukraine.
2
When Robert Gates was asked what he saw when he looked into Putin's eyes, he said "An ice-cold killer". He got it right as opposed to W. who could never make sense of reality no matter how hard he tried. In my opinion, Czar Putin/President Polonium is on the cusp of crazy dangerous with his retrograde nationalist zeal. So confrontation needs to be measured because it is possible this nut might push the red button and go down with the rest of the world to cement his place in history - or what's left of it. So I propose as the next step that all residential property owned by Russian citizens in the U.S be confiscated and the owners kicked out of the country and their visas revoked. Let them decide what they want to do with Putin when they get back home as he asks them to share in his celebration of the annexation of Crimea for the greater glory of Russia. Putin would of course be welcome to return the favor - except for one citizen - Snowden. He should be required to stay and ponder the real meaning of moral courage in standing up to his oppressors in his new homeland.
2
I would point out that it was about 6 months after the final shipment of enriched weapons grade Uranium was shipped to Russia that Russia attacked.
Russia respects might, not right.
Let this be a lesson to other weaker states: don't give up your nukes. If you don't have them get them.
And the US deceived Ukraine into stripping away it's only real protection by also signing the agreement.
Second lesson to weaker states: don't trust the US.
Russia respects might, not right.
Let this be a lesson to other weaker states: don't give up your nukes. If you don't have them get them.
And the US deceived Ukraine into stripping away it's only real protection by also signing the agreement.
Second lesson to weaker states: don't trust the US.
3
Rootin Tootin Putin. Delusions of Grandeur. A legend in his own mind. What does that tell you? He is nuts and unpredictable, but that should not deter the use of major sanctions and of arming Ukraine.
1
Dream on, Roger Cohen ! Your article is like little puppy barking at the elephant! We live in internet world, not only USA newspaper propaganda!
2
Kudos for telling it like it is! I am in Munich at the moment and see idiotic signs that blame Nato for the violence! This is from Die Linke...or Commies. Anyone who does not want to support Ukraine freedom and thinks Putin will stop at the eastern areas is living is a fool's paradise.
How dare Merkel compare East Germany with the situation in Ukraine. She said she had to wait 28 years for freedom. Why should she condemn Ukrainians to the same fate? Who is she to play God? Forget about my president, Hollande...total fool and apologist on so many levels. He is an embarrassment to France.
We either arm Ukraine and up the sanctions, or we negotiate immediate Ukraine membership into Nato and the EU and let those eastern areas become banana republics controlled by Moscow. Then in 28 years, Merkel can reflect on the situation.
How dare Merkel compare East Germany with the situation in Ukraine. She said she had to wait 28 years for freedom. Why should she condemn Ukrainians to the same fate? Who is she to play God? Forget about my president, Hollande...total fool and apologist on so many levels. He is an embarrassment to France.
We either arm Ukraine and up the sanctions, or we negotiate immediate Ukraine membership into Nato and the EU and let those eastern areas become banana republics controlled by Moscow. Then in 28 years, Merkel can reflect on the situation.
5
Any sound minded, informed person will wholeheartedly agree with this critique of Russia's policies and involvement in Eastern Ukraine, but the "therefore we should" conclusion reached causes me much worry. Certainly the overwhelming majority of people walking around nor I have the expertise and wisdom to know how this conflict is best managed. But, let's face it, challenging an assertive major nuclear power in their own back yard is brinkmanship. Many of our allies in the region are advising caution, because they will be the first to suffer should we blunder, and a mistake here may be of historic proportion.
Of course we should show resolve and stand up to Putin, his gang of criminals and their ever bolder moves. But to do this right, our NATO allies should increase their military spending to upgrade their capability and preparedness so we are not pushed into the position of a Lone Ranger.
Of course we should show resolve and stand up to Putin, his gang of criminals and their ever bolder moves. But to do this right, our NATO allies should increase their military spending to upgrade their capability and preparedness so we are not pushed into the position of a Lone Ranger.
3
There is one interesting fact about the government of Ukraine which I see has been overlooked. They have a very different way of forming their government.
While Poroshenko won the Presidential elections, he failed in the Rada election to gain enough members who would support him in choosing ministers. So while he is President he was unable to choose the PM or the Security Minister. I have read that he had hoped to gain the votes to oust the current PM and Min. of Internal Affairs (both of these two minister belong to a different party than Poroshenko) and appoint more moderate people.
Both Yatsenyuk and Avakov along with Tymoshenko are the biggest advocates for war and have imposed policies denying pensions to people, insisting that anyone who votes against war measure be jailed, blocked aid from reaching the Donbas, and support ultra-nationalist fighter battalions like Azov and Aidar (both accused of Torture and Human rights violations).
If Poroshenko had been in a position to replace Yatsenyuk and Avakov with more moderate voices this situation in the East would have been settled without this protracted civil war which both the PM and Min of Interior are insisting go forwards. They have also diverted money from the economy to build tanks and other weapons in factories in Kharkov and also W. Ukraine.
While Poroshenko won the Presidential elections, he failed in the Rada election to gain enough members who would support him in choosing ministers. So while he is President he was unable to choose the PM or the Security Minister. I have read that he had hoped to gain the votes to oust the current PM and Min. of Internal Affairs (both of these two minister belong to a different party than Poroshenko) and appoint more moderate people.
Both Yatsenyuk and Avakov along with Tymoshenko are the biggest advocates for war and have imposed policies denying pensions to people, insisting that anyone who votes against war measure be jailed, blocked aid from reaching the Donbas, and support ultra-nationalist fighter battalions like Azov and Aidar (both accused of Torture and Human rights violations).
If Poroshenko had been in a position to replace Yatsenyuk and Avakov with more moderate voices this situation in the East would have been settled without this protracted civil war which both the PM and Min of Interior are insisting go forwards. They have also diverted money from the economy to build tanks and other weapons in factories in Kharkov and also W. Ukraine.
3
We are dealing with a nuclear power. That demands cautious calculation of who's power. So look at it as a whole. Crimea has Russia's only warm-water ports and a mostly Russian-speaking population. Of course, Putin violated international law and the U.S and Europe are trying to make him pay with the sanctions, and the drop in the price of oil was punishing too.
Again, Eastern Ukraine is mostly Russian speaking, and Russians now look on Krushev's giving of Crimea in 1954 to Ukraine as having been a mistake. Though no one in the world at the time could have anticipated the break-up the USSR in the 90s and the independence of Ukraine.
So, there is a whole lot going on psychologically. The situation is already rife with high emotion. And there are those nukes.
In a way, albeit remotely, it's like Iraq in 2003. Sure they were targeting U.S. planes on their 'no fly zone' patrolling, but Iraq was essentially an occupied country. The inspectors could go anywhere and inspect anything. The Iraqis would balk but then relent. So it was stable to a certain degree.
Now we have Russia and the sanctions. Arming Ukraine significantly in a way that is clear to Russian sight is not a good idea. The situation in East Ukraine is tense and violent and there are reportedly out-of-uniform Russian troops and tanks there.
In a situation so intense, it's too easy to error and start a full-scale war. It is probably at about the most war-like level that it can be without all-out war.
Again, Eastern Ukraine is mostly Russian speaking, and Russians now look on Krushev's giving of Crimea in 1954 to Ukraine as having been a mistake. Though no one in the world at the time could have anticipated the break-up the USSR in the 90s and the independence of Ukraine.
So, there is a whole lot going on psychologically. The situation is already rife with high emotion. And there are those nukes.
In a way, albeit remotely, it's like Iraq in 2003. Sure they were targeting U.S. planes on their 'no fly zone' patrolling, but Iraq was essentially an occupied country. The inspectors could go anywhere and inspect anything. The Iraqis would balk but then relent. So it was stable to a certain degree.
Now we have Russia and the sanctions. Arming Ukraine significantly in a way that is clear to Russian sight is not a good idea. The situation in East Ukraine is tense and violent and there are reportedly out-of-uniform Russian troops and tanks there.
In a situation so intense, it's too easy to error and start a full-scale war. It is probably at about the most war-like level that it can be without all-out war.
7
Don't fool yourself. It is already a war, but one between unequals. The "separatists" are armed and trained by Russians. Russian military are in their midst as "advisors" and more. The Ukraine military is outspent, underarmed, and being slaughtered, as are civilians in the area if they don't freeze or starve to death first. Russia thumbed its nose at the first ceasefire (no surprise), and so now Germany, France, and U.S. seek another. The definition of insanity is repeating the same act hoping for different results. The blood of literally thousands of Ukranians is on their hands.
4
"Again, Eastern Ukraine is mostly Russian speaking"
It isn't. The majority of people in the disputed Donbas region speak Ukrainian. Or at least they did before much of the population fled the violence of the mass-murdering, rapist culture of the "separatist" regimes.
Why does that matter anyway? Are the Swiss who speak Italian less Swiss then the ones who speak Romansh?
It isn't. The majority of people in the disputed Donbas region speak Ukrainian. Or at least they did before much of the population fled the violence of the mass-murdering, rapist culture of the "separatist" regimes.
Why does that matter anyway? Are the Swiss who speak Italian less Swiss then the ones who speak Romansh?
1
Neutral observers--thousands of them--on the Ukraine Russian border would resolve nearly all the issues. The truth would become clear.
If Russia truly is not supplying the rebels then Russia should welcome a force of observers.
If Russia truly is not supplying the rebels then Russia should welcome a force of observers.
1
@Richard Navas
True. Unfortunately Russian forces won't allow OSCE monitors to the border to document Russian tanks, arms and munitions coming over the border.
That being said, there is still plenty of material showing up that can only have come from Russia, like T-73B3, electronic equipment from the Russian-Thales deal, BMP-2AM, munitions for Grad rocket launchers or the various ID's taken off of Russian military crews killed in Ukraine.
True. Unfortunately Russian forces won't allow OSCE monitors to the border to document Russian tanks, arms and munitions coming over the border.
That being said, there is still plenty of material showing up that can only have come from Russia, like T-73B3, electronic equipment from the Russian-Thales deal, BMP-2AM, munitions for Grad rocket launchers or the various ID's taken off of Russian military crews killed in Ukraine.
2
There isn't really any debate or doubt about what is happening. Everything in the world is not a football game. No reasonably intelligent, intellectually honest person believes there is any truth at all to the nonsense the Kremlin spouts on this. Not even the Russians saying it believe it.
2
Coercive authority is always more expensive than moral authority.
In the face of low energy prices, this is what brought down the Soviet Union as it burned rubbles in Afghanistan.
I say be patient and give the economic approach time to work. If we don't confront Russian nationalist pride, then it can be satiated. Once that happens, and then they look around and see that there's no food in any of the stores, jobs are gone and another winter is setting in, Putin's goose will be cooked. At that point, if he wants to stay in power he'll have to launch nukes on himself.
My father used to say, give a person enough rope and they will hang themselves.
In the face of low energy prices, this is what brought down the Soviet Union as it burned rubbles in Afghanistan.
I say be patient and give the economic approach time to work. If we don't confront Russian nationalist pride, then it can be satiated. Once that happens, and then they look around and see that there's no food in any of the stores, jobs are gone and another winter is setting in, Putin's goose will be cooked. At that point, if he wants to stay in power he'll have to launch nukes on himself.
My father used to say, give a person enough rope and they will hang themselves.
6
This is precisely on point.
The only thing I might add is that we should think about how to provide America's economy with a manufacturing and job creation boost by increasing hydrocarbon production here, and disrupting Russian energy contracts with the Europeans by offering cheap North American substitutes.
The only thing I might add is that we should think about how to provide America's economy with a manufacturing and job creation boost by increasing hydrocarbon production here, and disrupting Russian energy contracts with the Europeans by offering cheap North American substitutes.
1
It should be crystal clear by now that, since he came to power, Putin's overarching goal has been to recreate the Soviet Union as a post-communist imperial power by re-establishing Russian sovereignty over the 15 former Soviet republics that opted for independence in the early 1990s. If allowed to succeed, this would create a transcontinental nation-state of 270 million people - almost double the size of Russia today and almost the size of the USA.
It would have been accomplished by using military force to seize the vast economic assets - especially natural resources - of major nations in their own right : Kazakhstan (huge oil and gas reserves), Ukraine (huge grain producing potential). it would have been done by suppressing the expressed democratic wishes and rights of 130 million non-Russians.
Most of all, it would have ushered in a new era across the world in which territorial gain by military force is justified and permitted. As such it would constitute the most major challenge to the globalized world order that the USA helped create after the fall of the USSR.
As Anders Aslund has pointed out, the West - notably the USA - erred in not providing similar strong support to Russia in the 1990s as was given to Japan and Germany after World War II.Collapse of Russia's economy fueled ultra-nationalism and Putin as its leader.
As George Kennan said in 1947, a firm patient containment strategy is needed - both military and economic. Germany needs to understand this.
It would have been accomplished by using military force to seize the vast economic assets - especially natural resources - of major nations in their own right : Kazakhstan (huge oil and gas reserves), Ukraine (huge grain producing potential). it would have been done by suppressing the expressed democratic wishes and rights of 130 million non-Russians.
Most of all, it would have ushered in a new era across the world in which territorial gain by military force is justified and permitted. As such it would constitute the most major challenge to the globalized world order that the USA helped create after the fall of the USSR.
As Anders Aslund has pointed out, the West - notably the USA - erred in not providing similar strong support to Russia in the 1990s as was given to Japan and Germany after World War II.Collapse of Russia's economy fueled ultra-nationalism and Putin as its leader.
As George Kennan said in 1947, a firm patient containment strategy is needed - both military and economic. Germany needs to understand this.
2
"As Anders Aslund has pointed out, the West - notably the USA - erred in not providing similar strong support to Russia in the 1990s as was given to Japan and Germany after World War II."
Germany and Japan were both defeated, occupied, and in the case of the former, divided. The Soviet Union collapsed under it's own weight. The more apt comparison is to Imperial Germany after World War I.
Germany and Japan were both defeated, occupied, and in the case of the former, divided. The Soviet Union collapsed under it's own weight. The more apt comparison is to Imperial Germany after World War I.
This is an ethnocentric fight that is deeply rooted. "Change Putin’s cost-benefit analysis."? At the cost of more Ukrainian blood? Arm Ukraine then kiss it goodbye. Remember, the CIA Director was flown in after the Coup, not aid to bolster a "developing democracy." George Soros has given more than the US gov't. Cohen reminds me of Kanye at the Grammy Awards.
4
If you back a badger into a corner, you better be prepared for the results
1
This is what pundits do. They pontificate about global relations from their comfortable seats, without any real care or concern for the people on the ground who will suffer and die if their advice is followed. They pontificate with misinformation and hyperbole and generalizations that demonstrate their willful ignorance. All too many thoughtful readers/commenters have already pointed out that Mearsheimer has demolished Cohen's arguments, that no powerful nation would ever tolerate a military alliance on their borders, that the US has unilaterally and provocatively violated assurances (never a treaty, never a formal agreement, but certainly an understanding) given by the Bush administration to the Russians about NATO non-advancement. Cohen's dismissal of the immediate post-war division of Germany, actually initiated by the US, is further proof that history is a Manichean drama instead of a complex gray process.
11
Mr. Cohen may be partly wrong about Russian intentions for Germany after the war. Initially Russia was very interested in participating in quadraprtite government of a united Germany. There was a robust communist party in France and Italy.Britain also had a new labor government. Russia may have been comfortable with a united germany because they thought they had a good chance of converting all of Germany to the communist party as well as France and Italy. For some reason France was a major obstacle to quadrapartite government. See Jean Edward Smiths biography of Gen. Lucius D. Clay for a first hand account.
7
I do not have a problem with a NATO initiative to send defensive weaponry to Kiev. I don't often agree with Senator McCain (actually I never have) but he is correct in stating that negotiations without the threat of consequences is useless. However the US should act in concert with our European allies and not assume the initiative. NATO mandates that the members spend a minimum of 2%of their GDP on defense. Most European members are below this amount while we are at 4.2%. If the Europeans are not going to make the necessary sacrifices to ensure their security and that of the newest members then the U.S. should not initiate and potentially escalate the conflict by arming Kiev unilaterally.
4
Roger, as usual, it is your view from within the walled castle of D.C. which is full of unbacked assertions, or if backed, backed mainly by the outright lies, twisted truths, and half-truths of the Western mainstream media. I should know: I am a captive of MSM propaganda, unless I spend energy and time getting other perspectives.
Do you REALLY know nothing about Victoria Nuland's famous "Fu*! the EU," recording, in which she bragged about spending $5 billion to overthrow the elected gov't of Ukraine? Really? No, we are pretty certain you have heard this recording on Youtube like the rest of us, so you are a liar.
"Popular" uprising???
The Ukraine gov't was overthrown violently, even though the president at the time had agreed to elections come spring. We (I am ashamed to say as a US citizen) funded this violent illegal coup. This is a fact. And why? Because Ukraine, a sovereign state, had made a decision vis a vis economic cooperation with Russia that we did not like.
You can quote Orwell all you wish, but you are the one who is disrespecting Orwell's quest for truth.
As far as this statement goes, you are a ghoul: "There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. "
You are just another sick armchair warrior willing to send kids to their deaths.
Oh yeah: the Kien junta uses cluster munitions and white phosphorous against civilians. You forgot to mention that in your rhetoric about fascism.
Do you REALLY know nothing about Victoria Nuland's famous "Fu*! the EU," recording, in which she bragged about spending $5 billion to overthrow the elected gov't of Ukraine? Really? No, we are pretty certain you have heard this recording on Youtube like the rest of us, so you are a liar.
"Popular" uprising???
The Ukraine gov't was overthrown violently, even though the president at the time had agreed to elections come spring. We (I am ashamed to say as a US citizen) funded this violent illegal coup. This is a fact. And why? Because Ukraine, a sovereign state, had made a decision vis a vis economic cooperation with Russia that we did not like.
You can quote Orwell all you wish, but you are the one who is disrespecting Orwell's quest for truth.
As far as this statement goes, you are a ghoul: "There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. "
You are just another sick armchair warrior willing to send kids to their deaths.
Oh yeah: the Kien junta uses cluster munitions and white phosphorous against civilians. You forgot to mention that in your rhetoric about fascism.
14
The people of Donetsk have made it abundantly clear that they are willing to put their lives at risk, rather than continue being citizens of the Ukraine.
This fact should have at least been mentioned in this column.
This fact should have at least been mentioned in this column.
9
It's not in the article because it is not in the slightest bit clear ...
Its simple, either the West stops Russian aggression or they don't. There is no in-between, period. Sanctions alone won't stop Putin. Russian are used to live in hard economic conditions and any sanctions, including SWIFT shutoff will not stop the military conflict.
Putin is still upset that USSR lost the Cold War, but more importantly, he has about 10 years left in his rule - he wants to make history for him self unlike any other.
Putin has learned a very important West rule - as long as he never confirms that Russians are part of the conflict, they are not part of the conflict.
Putin is still upset that USSR lost the Cold War, but more importantly, he has about 10 years left in his rule - he wants to make history for him self unlike any other.
Putin has learned a very important West rule - as long as he never confirms that Russians are part of the conflict, they are not part of the conflict.
3
I strongly suggest Ukraine agrees to allow the two "rebellious" regions go and immediately join EU and NATO. Easy breezy. Tragedy for those in those two regions who want freedom from Russia but you can't let that minority hold the rest of the nation hostage from a better future. Let those regions go. Call Russia's bluff.
4
What is the true preference of Ukraine's ethnic Russians? If there could somehow actually be an integral/honest/fair/practical vote, then (perhaps) a UN well-supervised referendum should be held.
2
Are you suggesting UN well-supervised as a universal principle? Or are there different standards for different peoples?
Putin does not want war - he wants a land path to the Crimea. But only the section of that land path near Donetsk wants Putin. In addition, Putin wants a weakened and divided Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO.
I say, Ukraine should give him that section near Donetsk. Cede it to Russia. This will stop the Ukraine from being a weakened and divided nation based on ethinicity. This will make the Rusian intentions real by manifesting them politically and geographically. A majority in the disputed region want to be part of Russia, hence the 'Novaya Rossiya' designation. Give it to them. Cut out the cancer.
Require, as part of the transfer, that all who want to remain Ukrainians be given safe passage to what remains of the Ukraine. Have the West provide sufficient money to manage the resettlement. Make it marshall Plan-like. Let the Russophiles and ethnic Russians glory in their return to the mercies of the Russian governmental methodology, something the people of the Crimea are now 'enjoying'.
Then have the newly united Ukraine immediately join NATO with the threat of Article 5 if Russia makes any further move. This will prevent the Russians from further militarily supported 'agent provocateur' activity on the 'land path to the Crimea'.
And, who knows, Russia may tip its had so far as to refuse this offer. That would, in many ways, settle the issue of the Donetsk region.
An old chess and Go player dreams on.
I say, Ukraine should give him that section near Donetsk. Cede it to Russia. This will stop the Ukraine from being a weakened and divided nation based on ethinicity. This will make the Rusian intentions real by manifesting them politically and geographically. A majority in the disputed region want to be part of Russia, hence the 'Novaya Rossiya' designation. Give it to them. Cut out the cancer.
Require, as part of the transfer, that all who want to remain Ukrainians be given safe passage to what remains of the Ukraine. Have the West provide sufficient money to manage the resettlement. Make it marshall Plan-like. Let the Russophiles and ethnic Russians glory in their return to the mercies of the Russian governmental methodology, something the people of the Crimea are now 'enjoying'.
Then have the newly united Ukraine immediately join NATO with the threat of Article 5 if Russia makes any further move. This will prevent the Russians from further militarily supported 'agent provocateur' activity on the 'land path to the Crimea'.
And, who knows, Russia may tip its had so far as to refuse this offer. That would, in many ways, settle the issue of the Donetsk region.
An old chess and Go player dreams on.
2
Obviously Ukraine is less Europe than Europe so Putin is taking it.
Russian politicians usually lie in such a blatant and absurd way, that is hard to imagine, let alone to understand, for people of the West. In such moments the civilization gap seems much wider than it normally appears.
3
Those who can remember the Cuban Missile Crisis will immediately see the that the abridgement by George W Bush of the ABM treaty with the intent to deploy NATO Missiles on Russia's Border was an analogous event. Russia could never tolerate this threat to her security, but she never went so far as John F Kennedy did in enforcing the terms of the Monroe Doctrine against Russia's attempt to do the same in the "American Caribbean."
JFK took us to the brink of nuclear conflagration. Russia merely protested loudly the American deployment of ABM's on her border.
Clinton of course got the trek to a new Cold War with Russia going by expanding NATO, and bombing Belgrade, in order to show the Russians that they no longer had a sphere of influence. There was going to be no Monroe Doctrine for Russia.
A coup may be in the eyes of the beholder, but when a legally constituted government is overthrown, at the monetary encouragement of a foreign power, in this case the US State Department, at the direction of Under Secretary Victoria Nuland, the word Coup is probably accurately applied to the recent regime change in Kiev.
That Ms. Nuland is a member of the Kagan/Podhoretz/Cristol Cabal of neocon adventurers, if one considers that these same people fabricated the pretexts which caused the US to destroy Iraq, probably went a long way toward cementing the idea in the mind of Putin that the intent was to make the Black Sea a NATO Lake. Putin was left with no choice but to defend his turf.
JFK took us to the brink of nuclear conflagration. Russia merely protested loudly the American deployment of ABM's on her border.
Clinton of course got the trek to a new Cold War with Russia going by expanding NATO, and bombing Belgrade, in order to show the Russians that they no longer had a sphere of influence. There was going to be no Monroe Doctrine for Russia.
A coup may be in the eyes of the beholder, but when a legally constituted government is overthrown, at the monetary encouragement of a foreign power, in this case the US State Department, at the direction of Under Secretary Victoria Nuland, the word Coup is probably accurately applied to the recent regime change in Kiev.
That Ms. Nuland is a member of the Kagan/Podhoretz/Cristol Cabal of neocon adventurers, if one considers that these same people fabricated the pretexts which caused the US to destroy Iraq, probably went a long way toward cementing the idea in the mind of Putin that the intent was to make the Black Sea a NATO Lake. Putin was left with no choice but to defend his turf.
5
The word coup is not properly applies. Edward Luttwak, in his classic book on the coup, described it as "A coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder." In this case, the overthrow was a popular uprising. The Rada followed suit, it didn't lead and while the security forces deserted Yanukovich, no army or paramilitary forces seized power. The "monetary encouragement" was money spent over 23 years to a plethora of NGOs.
1
Military escalation/proliferation will endure whether or not Ukraine is armed to the full extent of Western technology. Putin will not stop until Russia’s techno-weapon-driven westward expansion prowls to the door of Old East Germany after “preemptively” bopping Kiev and Warsaw with nukes: Russia has shown it will tolerate “Chernobyls” “within its borders.” Old Young Pioneer Angela Merkel’s Edenic cant is to follow Old East German Charge d’Affaire Putin’s weltanschauung lead like a sado-masochistic apache tango. The CIA needs to infiltrate Tatarstan and Crimea to stir up civil unrest with the descendants of Genghis Khan. Remember who these people were.
After the Soviet Union lost 27.5 million dead during World War II to the Nazi German invasion and occupation anything that the nation decided to do with Germany would have been morally and legally justified. When given a choice during World War II America and it's European allies chose Stalin and his Bolsheviks over Hitler and his Nazis.
The long enduring ethnic sectarian cultural linguistic historical socioeconomic political educational geographic ties between Russians and Ukrainians are a reality. Along with the European German, French and British socioeconomic political geographic proximity to both Ukraine and Russia which exposes them to the consequences of any military action.
Corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarchs in Kiev, Moscow, Paris, Berlin, Rome and Washington D.C. should be able to resolve this dispute through diplomacy. When only .75% of Americans are willing to put on a military uniform and Europeans want to shelter under the American military-industrial complex shield anyone proposing a military solution to this political socioeconomic problem is in delusional denial.
The long enduring ethnic sectarian cultural linguistic historical socioeconomic political educational geographic ties between Russians and Ukrainians are a reality. Along with the European German, French and British socioeconomic political geographic proximity to both Ukraine and Russia which exposes them to the consequences of any military action.
Corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarchs in Kiev, Moscow, Paris, Berlin, Rome and Washington D.C. should be able to resolve this dispute through diplomacy. When only .75% of Americans are willing to put on a military uniform and Europeans want to shelter under the American military-industrial complex shield anyone proposing a military solution to this political socioeconomic problem is in delusional denial.
2
"After the Soviet Union lost 27.5 million dead during World War II to the Nazi German invasion and occupation anything that the nation decided to do with Germany would have been morally and legally justified."
You might want to point out, for the sake of fairness, that the USSR was aligned by treaty to Nazi Germany from August 1939 through June 1941. They seemed quite happy to be allied with the Nazis when it came time to divide and enslave E. Europe, Finland and the Baltics between them ... oh, until the Nazis attacked the USSR. What a shock ... that's what megalomaniacs do to each other.
So, spare me the "let's feel sorry for the USSR/Russia for what it lost in WWII" garbage. I always feel sorry for individuals caught up in war - the average person unfairly pays the ultimate price for dictator's crimes - but the Soviet gov't/nation reaped what it had sowed.
I love how people leave this part of history out.
You might want to point out, for the sake of fairness, that the USSR was aligned by treaty to Nazi Germany from August 1939 through June 1941. They seemed quite happy to be allied with the Nazis when it came time to divide and enslave E. Europe, Finland and the Baltics between them ... oh, until the Nazis attacked the USSR. What a shock ... that's what megalomaniacs do to each other.
So, spare me the "let's feel sorry for the USSR/Russia for what it lost in WWII" garbage. I always feel sorry for individuals caught up in war - the average person unfairly pays the ultimate price for dictator's crimes - but the Soviet gov't/nation reaped what it had sowed.
I love how people leave this part of history out.
1
The Soviet Union allied with Nazi Germany and took part in the invasion of Poland. Stalin massacred thousands of Polish officers in the Katyn Forest and for decades tried to blame the Nazis. Hitler secured his Eastern Front and Stalin took himself and his nation out of the line of fire.
After Hitler ejected the Western allies from Europe ,Hitler turned on the Soviets with a vengeance. And they bore the weight of Nazi Germany alone for years. Had Hitler focused on the Ukrainian breadbasket and Caucus oil fields instead of Stalingrad and Leningrad and winter things might have been different.
After the war America seemed quite happy to ally itself with the Soviet hegemony and European imperial colonialism and right wing fascist dictators. America has supported theocratic secular military royal Muslim Arab tyrant autocrats.
America has slew hundreds of thousands of innocents in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. America has 25% of the world prison population with 5% of the Earth's people. China, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and North Korea execute more of their citizens than America.
The immoral amoral white supremacist Christian American view of the world is protected by a very thin line of the .75 % of Americans who put on a military uniform. Bathing the planet in bloody cynical cowardly hypocrisy and perfidy.
The megalomaniacs included Mussolini, FDR, Churchill, DeGaulle, Hirohito, Tojo, Zedong, Kaishek
I am my brother's keeper and I hear they bell of misery tolling for me.
After Hitler ejected the Western allies from Europe ,Hitler turned on the Soviets with a vengeance. And they bore the weight of Nazi Germany alone for years. Had Hitler focused on the Ukrainian breadbasket and Caucus oil fields instead of Stalingrad and Leningrad and winter things might have been different.
After the war America seemed quite happy to ally itself with the Soviet hegemony and European imperial colonialism and right wing fascist dictators. America has supported theocratic secular military royal Muslim Arab tyrant autocrats.
America has slew hundreds of thousands of innocents in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. America has 25% of the world prison population with 5% of the Earth's people. China, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and North Korea execute more of their citizens than America.
The immoral amoral white supremacist Christian American view of the world is protected by a very thin line of the .75 % of Americans who put on a military uniform. Bathing the planet in bloody cynical cowardly hypocrisy and perfidy.
The megalomaniacs included Mussolini, FDR, Churchill, DeGaulle, Hirohito, Tojo, Zedong, Kaishek
I am my brother's keeper and I hear they bell of misery tolling for me.
Omg Putin recently flew a nuclear armed bomber near British airspace - this proves he will destroy the world if we don't give him whatever he wants. He's a bare-chested fighter who knows martial arts for gosh sakes!
1
The title of the op-ed only reinforces the reasons not to arm Ukraine. Even if after arming Ukraine and having Ukraine take back all of eastern Ukraine and possibly Crimea, it won't solve the underlying problems. A large portion of Ukrainians don't want the revolution that occurred last year and you'll have endless unrest from this.
If the West wanted to be helpful they'd be pushing Ukraine for a realistic neutralization, by arming Ukraine they're just encouraging the radical elements in the country that won't result in a long lasting solution. I see two possibilities, either Ukraine splits into the pro-Europe and pro-Russian halves or the country comes together and accepts neutrality. Either side winning out right will just bring more problems.
If the West wanted to be helpful they'd be pushing Ukraine for a realistic neutralization, by arming Ukraine they're just encouraging the radical elements in the country that won't result in a long lasting solution. I see two possibilities, either Ukraine splits into the pro-Europe and pro-Russian halves or the country comes together and accepts neutrality. Either side winning out right will just bring more problems.
7
The part of Ukraine under control by Russian militants comprises less than 1/2 of the 2 oblasts of Donetsk & Luhansk and those 2 oblasts makeup around 5% of Ukraine overall - claims about a pro-European & pro-Russian half to Ukraine are nonsense.
2
We could learn a new language, too. EMPs and cyberattacks.
And Europe could find itself in a real Cold War when the gas gets shut off.
Ukraine is none of our business.
And Europe could find itself in a real Cold War when the gas gets shut off.
Ukraine is none of our business.
3
It is a good thing that the New York Times also published John Mearsheimer's column today. Roger Cohen has a recipe for starting WWIII. Steve Cohen of The Nation has aptly deconstructed this dangerous rhetoric (watch his talk on Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/2015/2/3/is_ukraine_a_proxy_western_russia
I remember the last time America had found its "monster to destroy" : Saddam Hussein of Iraq who was called a new Hitler like Putin and the possessor of weapons of mass destruction. Hussein was indeed a despot and a thug but the demonization of the Iraqi leader only served the war party.
Bear-baiting is a dangerous activity for the baiters too. Putin is not a nice guy (though he came to America's help in 2001, remember?) the West should work with Putin, stop baiting the bear and engineer a compromise in Ukraine.The Iraq war was a disaster for Iraq, the US & the world (even if Hussein was got rid of). Can we stop and learn our lessons here? NATO should not expand to Ukraine and Putin for all his defects could be made to save face and accept a compromise. Just read Mearsheimer the answers are there. If war in Ukraine spread to Europe the US would not be protected. Roger Cohen on this point what you need are day-vision goggles.
I remember the last time America had found its "monster to destroy" : Saddam Hussein of Iraq who was called a new Hitler like Putin and the possessor of weapons of mass destruction. Hussein was indeed a despot and a thug but the demonization of the Iraqi leader only served the war party.
Bear-baiting is a dangerous activity for the baiters too. Putin is not a nice guy (though he came to America's help in 2001, remember?) the West should work with Putin, stop baiting the bear and engineer a compromise in Ukraine.The Iraq war was a disaster for Iraq, the US & the world (even if Hussein was got rid of). Can we stop and learn our lessons here? NATO should not expand to Ukraine and Putin for all his defects could be made to save face and accept a compromise. Just read Mearsheimer the answers are there. If war in Ukraine spread to Europe the US would not be protected. Roger Cohen on this point what you need are day-vision goggles.
67
Totally agree with your opinion and the reference to Iraq. Let me remind you of two more: Korea, still North/South, and Vietnam, still North/South. Will we ever learn?
2
WW!!! will start anyway if Putin wants it! But appeasement doesn't work with dictators. Arm the Ukraine and stop this monster now!
Putin is a gangster and a liar. He and his friends have systematically built a form of administration that exists to extract resource rents for their sole benefit. Check out Karen Dawisha's book Putin's Kleptocacy.
There is no trusting Putin. He does not live up to his commitments.
There is no trusting Putin. He does not live up to his commitments.
This op-ed hits the nail on the head. Please keep pounding the drum so that both Western leaders and the public understand what Moscow's game is, and the frightening stakes that Europe and the US face in this confrontation.
22
This confuses me. Exactly what are the frightening stakes that Europe and the US face in this confrontation? I see this thing developing into a negotiation for a federal state with a capital in Kiev. Violence is part of the equation but should and can be minimized. I agree with one of the commenters who doesn't think it's preposterous for Russia to feel encircled by the US military. Basing maps are pretty clear on this. The Russians are going to bite back if they feel threatened. This isn't just a "crazy" president. This is their history.
Mearsheimer's piece is trash. I agree with Roger. Zbig was saying, you know, what if, in a day, Russians plant themselves in Riga? In Tallinn? The response will be "well, that sucks, but they have atomic weapons." That myth-minded nostalgic revanchists in the Kremlin have nukes at their disposal is disturbing. But does that therefore mean that they can rearrange the map of Eastern Europe at will? And Stephen Cohen is more absurd than Mearsheimer: Putin didn't create the kleptocracy, true -- he just helped perfect it. Putin isn't responsible for Russian fossil fuel-dependency, true -- he just did nothing to help diversify the economy and make it dynamic; in fact, he did the reverse. And Putin is not better (whatever that means) than the autocrats of Russian history. You can't pluck people out of their specific circumstances, nor judge the past by the morality of the present. Even so, Alexander II was a superior human being.
I recently listened to Alexandr Dugin and Francis Fukuyama discuss democracy, and Mr. Dugin seems to think there are "multiple" human natures and that Russians are somehow different (in cherishing the collective above the individual) than westerners, not just in terms of culture, but in terms, apparently, of biology. There's precedent for this in Russian history (see esp. Walicki's "A History of Russian Thought"), but not the anthropological twist. This is not a national "security" venture; this is a quasi-theological quest to fulfill Russian destiny.
I recently listened to Alexandr Dugin and Francis Fukuyama discuss democracy, and Mr. Dugin seems to think there are "multiple" human natures and that Russians are somehow different (in cherishing the collective above the individual) than westerners, not just in terms of culture, but in terms, apparently, of biology. There's precedent for this in Russian history (see esp. Walicki's "A History of Russian Thought"), but not the anthropological twist. This is not a national "security" venture; this is a quasi-theological quest to fulfill Russian destiny.
5
Before we use arms against Putin, why not first freeze Russia out of SWIFT, the system for international bank transfers? One Russian official has publicly stated that this would be regarded as an act of war, so it sounds like a pretty good idea to me. It would not be all-or-nothing. We could turn the dual up or down at will. Oil prices would rise to whatever level we wish, because we would decide how much Russian oil makes it to the market. The only people who have publicly opposed this besides Russia are the Belgians. What's up with them?
There was a Coup promoted, financed and engineered by the USA - Victoria Nuland famously made multiple points publically: $5 Billion spent/ Yats is our boy / XXX the EU - meaning this is a USA show and are in control from day one.
That being said this whole situation could be solved easily if the USA wasn't present. The Europeans suffered tremendously and the US "never" in multiple wars on their "own" territories. They know aggression when they see it. Russia is not the problem. Its objective is to protect itself from past aggressive attacks by the west - Hitler/ Napoleon. The Kiev Fascists are promoted into their position by the USA desire for a nuclear encirclement of Russia in pursuit of the $100 Trillion in undeveloped resources in 9 time zones in Russia and global hegemony. Nothing less is going on. The Russians have always used Ukraine as a neutral zone. The word Ukraine means - border area.
This is about the Russian equivalent of the Monroe Doctrine which the USA has used for 200 years for its own interpretation in central and south America - both covertly and overt military actions.
The Kiev Fascists need to pull back to the north and west - the rest of the country will exist in a loose federation without Oligarchs as Governors and the land and industry belongs to the people to do as they please.
There is no win for Europe continuing this farce and much risk. There is no risk for McCain et al. and that is the whole story - risk!
That being said this whole situation could be solved easily if the USA wasn't present. The Europeans suffered tremendously and the US "never" in multiple wars on their "own" territories. They know aggression when they see it. Russia is not the problem. Its objective is to protect itself from past aggressive attacks by the west - Hitler/ Napoleon. The Kiev Fascists are promoted into their position by the USA desire for a nuclear encirclement of Russia in pursuit of the $100 Trillion in undeveloped resources in 9 time zones in Russia and global hegemony. Nothing less is going on. The Russians have always used Ukraine as a neutral zone. The word Ukraine means - border area.
This is about the Russian equivalent of the Monroe Doctrine which the USA has used for 200 years for its own interpretation in central and south America - both covertly and overt military actions.
The Kiev Fascists need to pull back to the north and west - the rest of the country will exist in a loose federation without Oligarchs as Governors and the land and industry belongs to the people to do as they please.
There is no win for Europe continuing this farce and much risk. There is no risk for McCain et al. and that is the whole story - risk!
8
The time to play “Cuban Missile Crisis, Part Deux” was in 2008, when Putin invaded Georgia and grabbed Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Back then; President Bush was still seeing some vestiges of a soul in Putin’s eyes, so he chose to do nothing.
Since then, Putin has recognized that the Great Recession has left EU economies weak and the United States war weary because of its extended commitments in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is in this larger context that Putin has gambled on the west not getting militarily involved in the Ukraine. If the man can shoot down a civilian airliner without compunction, he has already proven he will stop at nothing to achieve his “near abroad” objectives.
The only language that Russia understands is the one that worked during the Cold War – containment. The only way to “change Putin’s cost-benefit analysis,” is further tighten the screws on sanctions and squeeze Putin’s friends, the oligarchs, even harder. Providing the Ukrainian Army with “antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones” is a risky gambit, which even if it did produce the desired results, would come at a huge cost of human life and destruction of infrastructure. Syria is a close example – and we have not even armed rebel groups there as yet!
Since then, Putin has recognized that the Great Recession has left EU economies weak and the United States war weary because of its extended commitments in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is in this larger context that Putin has gambled on the west not getting militarily involved in the Ukraine. If the man can shoot down a civilian airliner without compunction, he has already proven he will stop at nothing to achieve his “near abroad” objectives.
The only language that Russia understands is the one that worked during the Cold War – containment. The only way to “change Putin’s cost-benefit analysis,” is further tighten the screws on sanctions and squeeze Putin’s friends, the oligarchs, even harder. Providing the Ukrainian Army with “antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones” is a risky gambit, which even if it did produce the desired results, would come at a huge cost of human life and destruction of infrastructure. Syria is a close example – and we have not even armed rebel groups there as yet!
1
Mr. Lavrov's recollection of post World War II may be embellished but no more than Roger Cohen's retelling of the far more recent break-up of Ukraine. While there may be much to criticize in Russia's support of Ukrainian separatists (and let us remember they are Ukrainian) there is plenty to criticize about the role NATO and the EU and the US played in the collapse of the government in Kiev.
Yanukovych was elected and could have been rejected peacefully in the next election had the not-so-peaceful demonstrators in Kiev waited a few months. NATO, a post World War II alliance designed to contain the Soviet Union (no longer in existence) did not have to march relentlessly eastward toward Russian borders. The EU did not have to force Ukraine into choosing between east and west. And the US did not have to allow its Ambassador to Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, and Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, to join the demonstrators in Independence Square to show support.
Mr. Cohen will have to get over Crimea, it will remain Russian for some time. And eastern Ukraine will gain some form of autonomy if not complete independence. The civil war in Ukraine was not initiated by a nefarious Putin. The West shares heavily in the responsibility for that tragedy.
Yanukovych was elected and could have been rejected peacefully in the next election had the not-so-peaceful demonstrators in Kiev waited a few months. NATO, a post World War II alliance designed to contain the Soviet Union (no longer in existence) did not have to march relentlessly eastward toward Russian borders. The EU did not have to force Ukraine into choosing between east and west. And the US did not have to allow its Ambassador to Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, and Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, to join the demonstrators in Independence Square to show support.
Mr. Cohen will have to get over Crimea, it will remain Russian for some time. And eastern Ukraine will gain some form of autonomy if not complete independence. The civil war in Ukraine was not initiated by a nefarious Putin. The West shares heavily in the responsibility for that tragedy.
3
The demonstrators were "not-so-peaceful" in self-defense. The idea of a peaceful end to Yanukovich's term was foreclosed by his actions and the actions of his political and security force allies who decided that backing him was no longer worth it. As to the civil war, the initial protests in Donbass were reinforced by Russian citizens while the armed uprising had, initially, Russian leaders.
1
The German question was settled after WW2 by mass relocations of populations. In the interest of world peace, how about a fair and just resettlement program for unhappy minority populations? Russians in the Baltics, Ukraine.
1
The most despiriting thing about watching the entire Ukraine crisis unfold is that it is clear the US is the bad-guy in this case. Effectively we are using the Iraq and Israel playbooks- state lies often enough as facts, and folks start to believe them. Against all assurances of territorial integrity from Reagan to Clinton, the US expanded NATO and encroached on Russian territory, as well as unilaterally scrapping the SALT treaty under W. This is a continuation.
But these are facts:
- There was a western sponsored coup in Kiev by fascist thugs.
- A western, in fact Obama stated something along the lines of US selected junta was installed. It is as if Colonel R. E. Lee had captured Washington, declared the constitution void, and the world condemned Lincoln, and the North for trying to recover the United States as terrorists.
- Kiev backed forces are indiscriminately wreaking havoc and destruction throughout Eastern Ukraine.
- The West is lying about the depth of Russian direct involvement in Ukraine. Think about the vivid detailed satellite images of Boko Haram sites in Africa, where are the satellite images of the Russian tanks and armor?
Why is the NYTimes coverage of the Ukraine on par with the coverage of Iraq circa 2002-2003? Get marching orders from the State Department?
By the way, Cohen should stick to his hand-wringing apologetics for Israel.
But these are facts:
- There was a western sponsored coup in Kiev by fascist thugs.
- A western, in fact Obama stated something along the lines of US selected junta was installed. It is as if Colonel R. E. Lee had captured Washington, declared the constitution void, and the world condemned Lincoln, and the North for trying to recover the United States as terrorists.
- Kiev backed forces are indiscriminately wreaking havoc and destruction throughout Eastern Ukraine.
- The West is lying about the depth of Russian direct involvement in Ukraine. Think about the vivid detailed satellite images of Boko Haram sites in Africa, where are the satellite images of the Russian tanks and armor?
Why is the NYTimes coverage of the Ukraine on par with the coverage of Iraq circa 2002-2003? Get marching orders from the State Department?
By the way, Cohen should stick to his hand-wringing apologetics for Israel.
4
All of your 'facts' are easily disproven with multiple sources.
2
Western media has been demonizing President Putin, yet it has been the US and EU who have directly created this conflict in the Ukraine through negation of agreements and 5th column activities. A short search across the internet confirms this.
So now we send weapons to the region to create more death and destruction for the people of the region and call it "freedom." One day, all of this is going to blow back on us - and I wonder where Mr. Cohen will be then.
So now we send weapons to the region to create more death and destruction for the people of the region and call it "freedom." One day, all of this is going to blow back on us - and I wonder where Mr. Cohen will be then.
3
The reality is this is a war the Russians are not going to allow themselves to lose, either on the battlefield or at the negotiation table. It seems Putin is willing to suffer the consequences of sanctions far longer than Western leaders thought possible. And it also seems some European leaders are unwilling to take draconian economic measures to try to really hurt Russia and Putin. So what is left to do when nobody wants a new cold war?
4
Anyone who wishes to hear an alternative interpretation of events in the Ukraine over the last few years- one that doesn't rely upon old stereotypes of the Soviet Union and actually presents evidence to support its assertions- can feel free to check out Patrick Smith's long series of articles on the subject at Salon.com. Here are a few of the more useful ones:
http://www.salon.com/2014/05/15/theyre_lying_about_ukraine_again_primiti...
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/09/a_steady_flow_of_stupidity_reality_in_uk...
http://www.salon.com/2014/12/04/new_york_times_propagandists_exposed_fin...
http://www.salon.com/2014/05/15/theyre_lying_about_ukraine_again_primiti...
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/09/a_steady_flow_of_stupidity_reality_in_uk...
http://www.salon.com/2014/12/04/new_york_times_propagandists_exposed_fin...
4
Patrick Smith's articles are rubbish and present the usual cliches, not evidence. His description of the overthrow of Yanukovich as a coup and his reliance on the tired old Nuland canard are perfect examples of such. His "analysis" in one of the articles also included (in September) a prediction that the cease-fire would hold.
1
What's your endgame here, Roger? Going it alone as we did in Iraq, no French, German (European ) cooperation? What arms can we give that will do anything more than ensure an even more savage response from Putin, with a far greater loss of life of the people we want to save? Look no further than Chechnya and Afghanistan for further proof of Russia's unbridled response to uprisings in what they consider their sphere of influence. And as a special bonus, ding, ding, ding--the Russian people will unite and close ranks behind Putin.
Your solution has the perverse result of achieving the opposite of its goal. And more unintended consequences for Syria, Iran and Europe.
We ought to double down on Russian sanctions, lift the sanctions on Iran, calling their bluff on whether or not they are serious about a nuclear deal. If they fold, we enlist their help on Syria, broker a nuclear-free zone in the middle east with Saudi Arabia et al. And keep the oil pumping and the price plummeting - Saudis can Absorb the losses for years and lifting sanctions on Iran will make up their losses as well.
Only the idiotic Democrat and Republican Senators and Congressmen in AIPACs pockets are in favor of what you suggest. Thank heavens Obama has a two- year window to keep this fire from the gasoline you are so eager to pour on it.
Your solution has the perverse result of achieving the opposite of its goal. And more unintended consequences for Syria, Iran and Europe.
We ought to double down on Russian sanctions, lift the sanctions on Iran, calling their bluff on whether or not they are serious about a nuclear deal. If they fold, we enlist their help on Syria, broker a nuclear-free zone in the middle east with Saudi Arabia et al. And keep the oil pumping and the price plummeting - Saudis can Absorb the losses for years and lifting sanctions on Iran will make up their losses as well.
Only the idiotic Democrat and Republican Senators and Congressmen in AIPACs pockets are in favor of what you suggest. Thank heavens Obama has a two- year window to keep this fire from the gasoline you are so eager to pour on it.
8
Ha, that's the exact same argument Khrushchev must have been using when they decided to place Nukes in Cuba. How did that work for him?
It is said that 90% of conflicts are civil wars. The NY Times reported on the strong likelihood that West Ukraine would go to war with East Ukraine way back in 1994--the same time the New York Times reported about how Crimea held a vote to rejoin Russia. This conflict doesn't need Putin to continue, policy makers and pundits know this but continue to 'not notice' how their opinions make it so there is no path Putin can take to reduce the actions of the West against Russia's economy and long term interests. Since the conflict can continue without Russia's involvement, it will and as such, there is no way Putin can demonstrate that he no longer providing any support for the civilians of E. Ukraine against the ultra nationalist paramilitary groups, the use of air power, cluster bombs, collective punishment that the new government in W. Ukraine deployed. NATO and the West can still announce there are Russian supplies and troops coming over--the burden of proof for them so far has been really low. That means to stop the fighting Russia would have to be much more involved than signs show they are--which is what they are being punished for in the first place. The US press has been serving the needs of US foreign policy strategy. We the people need you to refocus on pointing out contradictions, logic loops, etc.
It is said that 90% of conflicts are civil wars. The NY Times reported on the strong likelihood that West Ukraine would go to war with East Ukraine way back in 1994--the same time the New York Times reported about how Crimea held a vote to rejoin Russia. This conflict doesn't need Putin to continue, policy makers and pundits know this but continue to 'not notice' how their opinions make it so there is no path Putin can take to reduce the actions of the West against Russia's economy and long term interests. Since the conflict can continue without Russia's involvement, it will and as such, there is no way Putin can demonstrate that he no longer providing any support for the civilians of E. Ukraine against the ultra nationalist paramilitary groups, the use of air power, cluster bombs, collective punishment that the new government in W. Ukraine deployed. NATO and the West can still announce there are Russian supplies and troops coming over--the burden of proof for them so far has been really low. That means to stop the fighting Russia would have to be much more involved than signs show they are--which is what they are being punished for in the first place. The US press has been serving the needs of US foreign policy strategy. We the people need you to refocus on pointing out contradictions, logic loops, etc.
3
Let's review the situation: An "empire" in decline or seeking a "place in the sun", feeling surrounded by its enemies, is determined for reasons of "face", if nothing else, to punish what it deems a rogue state which is oppressing its fellow countrymen.
Sound familiar? Remember 1914 (Serbia) and 1938 (Czechoslovakia). But the answer is not clear. Standing aside in 1914 would have averted World War I; standing aside in 1938 made World War II inevitable. There is no clear answer, but going "half-in" as Roger suggests, is simply the worst of both alternatives.
Sound familiar? Remember 1914 (Serbia) and 1938 (Czechoslovakia). But the answer is not clear. Standing aside in 1914 would have averted World War I; standing aside in 1938 made World War II inevitable. There is no clear answer, but going "half-in" as Roger suggests, is simply the worst of both alternatives.
3
You are very right Mr. Cohen. Mr. Putin must be stopped and stopped by the only thing he understands, military power. Arm the Ukrainians. Ms Merkel and the French president are naive to think they can get an honest agreement that will keep form Mr. Putin. If they do, they should be worried about it becoming a Neville Chamberlain moment, saying they had achieved piece in our time. We all know what happened after Mr. Chamberlain left Hitler with that piece of paper. He invaded Czechoslovakia.
3
The comments reveal the reality: no good solutions here for the US.
25
What is driving the conflict is Russia's fear that Ukraine will integrate with the West, thereby consigning it permanently to the status of middling regional power, while also moving NATO's strategic frontier hundreds of miles eastward and cutting Russia off from the Black Sea. Ukraine's successful integration into the West would require a commitment from the NATO powers to defend it if attacked. Since no NATO country is willing to do that now, it should be apparent that Ukraine will not integrate into the West against Russia's will anyway. Russia is willing to fight to prevent that, and while we may feel Ukraine has the absolute right to do so, we are not willing to fight to give it that opportunity. So who do you think is likely to come out on top here?
Frankly, Ukraine is more useful to us as a non-aligned buffer state than as a full fledged member of the West anyway.
What we should do is offer Putin a deal. Should he cease his aggression (for real, not just faking it like he has been and lying about it), we will guarantee that Ukraine will not be admitted to NATO or the EU. Should he continue his aggression, we will arm Ukraine. Should that trigger heightened Russian aggression or invasion, just as Putin is willing to fight to stop Ukraine from moving westward, we will fight to preserve its neutral status. But that, should he force us into that situation, we would not guarantee not to accept it into the alliance.
But barring such conversation, we should not escalate.
Frankly, Ukraine is more useful to us as a non-aligned buffer state than as a full fledged member of the West anyway.
What we should do is offer Putin a deal. Should he cease his aggression (for real, not just faking it like he has been and lying about it), we will guarantee that Ukraine will not be admitted to NATO or the EU. Should he continue his aggression, we will arm Ukraine. Should that trigger heightened Russian aggression or invasion, just as Putin is willing to fight to stop Ukraine from moving westward, we will fight to preserve its neutral status. But that, should he force us into that situation, we would not guarantee not to accept it into the alliance.
But barring such conversation, we should not escalate.
3
Talk about living in an alternate universe. Your understanding of post WW2 history is poor. Your understanding of the coup in Ukraine in Feb. 2014 is woefully off the mark. This conflict in eastern Ukraine is coming from the west. Crimea has a complicated history since the Ottoman empire but one thing is wasn't was part of is Ukraine. This is another in a long of efforts by pundits to make Putin responsible for all the problems in Ukraine. That he is bent on aggression and the like. What we have a wild overreach by NATO to expand.
17
I am going to repeat what I wrote, when there were calls for the U.S. to provide arms to the "good" Syrian rebels. I was just old enough to be aware of the Korean War, I vividly remember the hot moments of the Cold War: the Berlin Wall and the Cuban Missile Crisis. I was in the United States Navy, for part of the Vietnam War and clearly remember how divisive and corrosive to our society that war was. In the last 25 years, we have had perhaps seven years of peace: Panama, Grenada, Lebanon, years and a trillion dollars sucked up in Iraq and in Afghanistan.
I can see no reason to risk our tranquility for a country, to which we have no treaty obligations. As in Syria, we can take the lead in humanitarian aid.
Like Chancellor Merkel, I can wait for diplomacy, sanctions and isolation to have an effect. As far as I can judge, the Germans may have borne more of the cost of sanctions than the United States, so Germany have the right to call the tune.
I can see no reason to risk our tranquility for a country, to which we have no treaty obligations. As in Syria, we can take the lead in humanitarian aid.
Like Chancellor Merkel, I can wait for diplomacy, sanctions and isolation to have an effect. As far as I can judge, the Germans may have borne more of the cost of sanctions than the United States, so Germany have the right to call the tune.
15
Excellent analysis. Putin wants to punish Ukraine for throwing the Yanukovich kleptocrats out of power, and make an example for his own people so they don't dare to throw him out too.
10
finally a reasonable voice. Who is advising Obama, does he not understand history. Putins actions are no different than Hitler. Imagine if Obama had been president in 1941.. we would all be dead or Nazis.
There is a time when " diplomacy " does not work, and is simply viewed as weakness. Now is that time.. with Russia , with iran, and with radical islamists. Someone needs to educate the President and quickly.
There is a time when " diplomacy " does not work, and is simply viewed as weakness. Now is that time.. with Russia , with iran, and with radical islamists. Someone needs to educate the President and quickly.
2
The Europeans know what a war with Russia means. 70 years ago Germany was finished off by Russia with 6 Millions + dead. The French lost their Russian war 200 years ago, of 1,000,000 soldiers invading Russia. 20,000 made it back home.
The US is the 800 pound Gorilla, it does what it wants but the Europeans are not on board. After the US loosing the last 2 wars there are still many deluded Imperialists who are itching to show how mighty the US is. But nobody in the leadership of the US will ride in front of the cavalry attack, they are all talk like Cohen, they want to send our volunteers, made up of the lower and lower middle class, devoid of participation by the upper class do the dying and the fighting.
Go ahead. Send your troops to the place were millions upon millions perished. Let the nightmare of peace and prosperity be over.
The US is the 800 pound Gorilla, it does what it wants but the Europeans are not on board. After the US loosing the last 2 wars there are still many deluded Imperialists who are itching to show how mighty the US is. But nobody in the leadership of the US will ride in front of the cavalry attack, they are all talk like Cohen, they want to send our volunteers, made up of the lower and lower middle class, devoid of participation by the upper class do the dying and the fighting.
Go ahead. Send your troops to the place were millions upon millions perished. Let the nightmare of peace and prosperity be over.
15
Lavrov and Cohen both show selective recall.
1. No mention of the US sponsored coup d'état - this is the 3rd coup the Obama administration has connived in, colluded with, or instigated (the other Honduras, Egypt). Astonishing our reluctance to call a coup d'état for what it is. Iraq should have cautioned us that overthrowing governments is risky.
2. Sorry but there is a considerable section of the population in parts of Western Ukraine that are vocal fascists and parade in thousands with a swastika-like emblem and sentiments to match.
3. There have been assualts on the cultural rights of Russian speaking Ukrainians.
4. NATO membership may be off limits but it is clear that the objective of US hawks and some European states to have Ukraine a de facto NATO member.
5. Poland is particularly unhelpful and provocative. WWII seems to be strangely forgotten there, all that's recalled is the Soviets in Poland post WWII. Komorowski, the Polish president, at the 70th Anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp could not even acknowledge the Red Army instead attributing the liberation to Ukrainians divisions.
I think what might be worthwhile exploring is something similar to the Austria STate Treaty of 1955 which guaranteed permanent Austrian neutrality. Opinion is too extreme within Ukraine at this time so something along the lines of the Good Friday Northern Ireland Treaty might be explored so that all sides participate.
1. No mention of the US sponsored coup d'état - this is the 3rd coup the Obama administration has connived in, colluded with, or instigated (the other Honduras, Egypt). Astonishing our reluctance to call a coup d'état for what it is. Iraq should have cautioned us that overthrowing governments is risky.
2. Sorry but there is a considerable section of the population in parts of Western Ukraine that are vocal fascists and parade in thousands with a swastika-like emblem and sentiments to match.
3. There have been assualts on the cultural rights of Russian speaking Ukrainians.
4. NATO membership may be off limits but it is clear that the objective of US hawks and some European states to have Ukraine a de facto NATO member.
5. Poland is particularly unhelpful and provocative. WWII seems to be strangely forgotten there, all that's recalled is the Soviets in Poland post WWII. Komorowski, the Polish president, at the 70th Anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp could not even acknowledge the Red Army instead attributing the liberation to Ukrainians divisions.
I think what might be worthwhile exploring is something similar to the Austria STate Treaty of 1955 which guaranteed permanent Austrian neutrality. Opinion is too extreme within Ukraine at this time so something along the lines of the Good Friday Northern Ireland Treaty might be explored so that all sides participate.
15
I understand the narrative, but what does Roger Cohen suggest that President Obama do? Escalate military support to Ukraine? Further economic sanctions? Air strikes? It is easy to say the US should "do more," but much more difficult when those actions can lead to horrible consequences (reference: Viet Nam, Iraq, etc). I believe President Obama has few options, and he has to be realistic about US interests in this region. II don't know enough to suggest alternate strategies, but I support President Obama for the decisions he has made.
5
I just don't want any young man on either side giving up the only life he has to live. Both sides need to stop now, and consider the moment --- and deal in truth. And, if they need extra help, ask a mother, there probably isn't a one alive who wouldn't give up everything she has in order to save her young son or daughter.
4
I think everyone recognizes from the outset that there is no good answer for the Ukraine. In a separate column on this page, Mr. Mearsheimer spends an entire column arguing for doing nothing. Sanctions have failed for 50 years with Cuba, with North Korea since the Korean War, as far as we can tell, with Iran, and certainly not to date with Russia. All of these countries suffered due to sanctions, but none have changed their fundamental course. On the other hand, Mr. Putin has no problems sending troops and arms into the Ukraine, expecting the Western countries to do nothing more than talk. So we find ourselves stuck in-between two successive U.S. administrations, one, under President Bush, all too willing to use American force, and one under President Obama tilted too much towards the safety of inaction. Given all of this, I would lean towards Mr. Cohen's view, and provide arms to the Ukrainian troops. Will that action accomplish what we want? Probably not, but doing nothing will definitely not.
1
Cohen is spot on. Ukraine, indeed the whole world, has always desired to be part of the liberty and glory of United States of America. The exportation of U.S. arms has been and will always be a key part of the world's liberation. History is over, Russia and China. Love America! Resistance is futile.
4
"President Vladimir Putin’s Russia would be quite happy to absorb all of Ukraine,"
But there is no evidence of this. And note that it is Putin who has suggested the federalization of a united Ukraine and it is Poroshenko who opposes it.
Putin does not want to absorb all of Ukraine - he just does not want NATO at his doorstep and he wants the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine to be respected. It is not too much to ask and could be achieved except that Poroshenko opposes it and since he is "our guy" we encourage him in his foolishness. Merkel sees this. It is a pity that Kerry and Biden do not see it.
But there is no evidence of this. And note that it is Putin who has suggested the federalization of a united Ukraine and it is Poroshenko who opposes it.
Putin does not want to absorb all of Ukraine - he just does not want NATO at his doorstep and he wants the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine to be respected. It is not too much to ask and could be achieved except that Poroshenko opposes it and since he is "our guy" we encourage him in his foolishness. Merkel sees this. It is a pity that Kerry and Biden do not see it.
13
Have we thought this through? Ukraine has already lost Crimea. If the West provides weapons to Kiev, Russia will provide more to the Donbass separatists. The conflict will escalate. It may end up with Russia intervening directly and taking Kiev. If that happens, Ukraine will lose all territories south and east of the Dnieper, and will even be lucky if they keep Odessa and an opening to the Black Sea. And there won’t be a thing the West will be able to do about it. The option still exists now for Ukraine to grant what, it seems, Russia asks for: A bi-lingual federation with a large degree of autonomy given to the provinces, and Kiev only retaining the regal powers: Foreign affairs, defense, currency.
10
It's clear that there are now two Ukraines, with one belonging to the East and the other to the West. Instead of looking at this as a defeat for the U.S. and its allies we should take note of the fact that up until a year ago the whole country more or less belonged to Commissar Putin. The western half of the country is lost to him forever now: if he dared to attack Kiev the citizens of western Ukraine would do to the Russian army what the mujhadin in Afghanistan did to their predecessors. Let Putin have Donetsk and Luhansk so long as he's willing to spend millions of rubles that he doesn't have supplying those folks with free petrol and food. And can the media please shut down the tag team of McCain and Graham- Lords of War? Even their GOP brethren are now opposed to seeing the U.S. take the lead in resolving every one of the world's conflicts by sending arms or troops to the scene of hostilities.
10
Stu, although you packaged your response as an apparent compromise to avoid further escalation , you clearly seem to believe NATO's claims that Russia caused the current mess, and that Putin needs to be put on a short leash.
We're all entitled to our own views, and I'm not trying to dispute your right to your views, some of which I tend to disagree with. Now If I were a policy maker and my choice was narrowed down to escalating the Cold War or avoiding it I would certainly consider your compromise.
We're all entitled to our own views, and I'm not trying to dispute your right to your views, some of which I tend to disagree with. Now If I were a policy maker and my choice was narrowed down to escalating the Cold War or avoiding it I would certainly consider your compromise.
Western and Eastern Ukraine are the latest proxies in a struggle that has moved eastward, ever closer to the Russian border. As indicated by multiple commentators here, this struggle is one where Russia has far more to lose, so they will not stop. The West knows this, but wants to keep pushing on.
And perhaps it should, but probably not through military means.
First, increasing the military conflict will only increase nationalism in Russia, which is the only thing Putin has going for him with the economy in shambles.
Second, the Russian engagement in the Ukraine is for the foreseeable future at a scale that uses existing, otherwise idle Russian forces and equipment, so there is little economic pain to be extracted militarily.
Third, while elevation of the conflict may or may not hurt the Russians enough to change their thinking, it will definitely kill and maim more Ukrainians since the conflict is on their soil. Is that morally acceptable? Are we really trying to help them?
If we sit tight, Russia can probably keep their economy afloat for maybe 2 more years. Let's wait them out with the help of our Saudi friends... after all it was the economy that led to the collapse of the Soviet empire.
And perhaps it should, but probably not through military means.
First, increasing the military conflict will only increase nationalism in Russia, which is the only thing Putin has going for him with the economy in shambles.
Second, the Russian engagement in the Ukraine is for the foreseeable future at a scale that uses existing, otherwise idle Russian forces and equipment, so there is little economic pain to be extracted militarily.
Third, while elevation of the conflict may or may not hurt the Russians enough to change their thinking, it will definitely kill and maim more Ukrainians since the conflict is on their soil. Is that morally acceptable? Are we really trying to help them?
If we sit tight, Russia can probably keep their economy afloat for maybe 2 more years. Let's wait them out with the help of our Saudi friends... after all it was the economy that led to the collapse of the Soviet empire.
2
Merkel forgets what held Russia back from taking all of Berlin or expanding the Soviet empire even further. It wasn't a political negotiations and it wasn't diplomacy. It was unbending support for Berliners and Germans from NATO that stood in the way of Russian expansion which allowed for diplomatic negotiations to take place.
I am not saying NATO should deploy national forces to Ukraine to create a border that Russia will not cross, but we should be providing Ukraine with the military tools to defend their country from Russia.
If Russia gets the idea that the West is weak and won't do anything when Russia's military is attacking and taking Ukrainian territory, who is to say Putin won't challenge European resolve to defend (as an example) Romania, Lithuania or Estonia?
Negotiations and diplomacy will be the cure for this conflict, but not from a position of weakness or while Russia is allowed to pretend it is not in Ukraine. Russian forces have been continuing to expand their holdings of Ukrainian territory while negotiations take place showing us that Russia has no intention of stopping until stopped.
Europe and the U.S. need to unify a position of both political and diplomatic negotiation while strengthening Ukraine's ability to defend themselves and raise the human cost on Russia for Putin's war on Ukraine or we will never see a fruitful negotiation with Russia over Ukraine.
I am not saying NATO should deploy national forces to Ukraine to create a border that Russia will not cross, but we should be providing Ukraine with the military tools to defend their country from Russia.
If Russia gets the idea that the West is weak and won't do anything when Russia's military is attacking and taking Ukrainian territory, who is to say Putin won't challenge European resolve to defend (as an example) Romania, Lithuania or Estonia?
Negotiations and diplomacy will be the cure for this conflict, but not from a position of weakness or while Russia is allowed to pretend it is not in Ukraine. Russian forces have been continuing to expand their holdings of Ukrainian territory while negotiations take place showing us that Russia has no intention of stopping until stopped.
Europe and the U.S. need to unify a position of both political and diplomatic negotiation while strengthening Ukraine's ability to defend themselves and raise the human cost on Russia for Putin's war on Ukraine or we will never see a fruitful negotiation with Russia over Ukraine.
3
You have a history problem. The Red Army could have taken all of Berlin had it wanted. A deal was made with Eisenhower to divide Berlin in half. Berlin at the end of WW2 was isolated and surrounded by the Red Army. Berlin was a divided city - Soviets in one half, Allies in the other half.
@Luvtennis0
Ukrainian's want to fight to defend their own country and are seeking weapons to counter the more advanced Russian weapons.
No nation, and nor did I, suggest committing of soldiers to the conflict but rather help Ukraine defend itself from Russian aggression by giving them the weapons to do it.
Ukrainian's want to fight to defend their own country and are seeking weapons to counter the more advanced Russian weapons.
No nation, and nor did I, suggest committing of soldiers to the conflict but rather help Ukraine defend itself from Russian aggression by giving them the weapons to do it.
1
I strongly dislike when the people foolishly declare the private businesses smarter than the governments.
They seems to be of equal abilities.
The private owners of NBA teams selected Sam Bowie and Darko Milicic in lieu of Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Anthony Carmelo, Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade.
Our government chose Israel and Ukraine as the key recruits in lieu of the entire Muslim world and Russia.
Who has made worse mistake?
They seems to be of equal abilities.
The private owners of NBA teams selected Sam Bowie and Darko Milicic in lieu of Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Anthony Carmelo, Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade.
Our government chose Israel and Ukraine as the key recruits in lieu of the entire Muslim world and Russia.
Who has made worse mistake?
2
Thank you, Mr. Cohen, for writing the truth about Putin and Ukraine.
4
Roger Cohen is one of my favorite columnists at the NYT and his views on the Middle East, Iran, France Israel, not to mention his own family's traverse through history are most often compelling and an excellent read. But here his geopolitical compass is way off. The Mearsheimer piece in today's paper is totally on the mark: we don't want to further feed the passions of Russia's aggrieved nationalists. It's very unlikely that Putin will back down in Ukraine. Let's work to shore up governance there, and put NATO membership off the table. Russia's problems will erode its power over time; sanctions are appropriate. There is no need to be reckless.
7
• The United States was driven by an insatiable desire for global dominance and, in Ukraine, had orchestrated the “coup d’état” last year that led to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych.
Well, this much is true, through its proxy NATO.
So is this:
• Russia’s annexation of Crimea was, he insisted, a popular uprising, the people “invoking the right of self-determination”.
Unless my memory fails me, there was a referendum (imputed, of course, by the United States) with something like 90% voter participation in which some 85% of the electorate voted for secession and REunification with Russia. The demonstrations cum revolt that started in Euromaidan cum coup was indeed instigated, aided and abetted by the United States thru the intervention of Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the United States Department of State.
This is a stretch:
• Ukraine gave up more than 1,800 nuclear warheads....
No, these were always Russian nuclear warheads posted there under the former Soviet Union and Russia took them back.
"One and the same thing can at the same time be good, bad, and indifferent, e.g., music is good to the melancholy, bad to those who mourn, and neither good nor bad to the deaf." ~ BARUCH SPINOZA
Well, this much is true, through its proxy NATO.
So is this:
• Russia’s annexation of Crimea was, he insisted, a popular uprising, the people “invoking the right of self-determination”.
Unless my memory fails me, there was a referendum (imputed, of course, by the United States) with something like 90% voter participation in which some 85% of the electorate voted for secession and REunification with Russia. The demonstrations cum revolt that started in Euromaidan cum coup was indeed instigated, aided and abetted by the United States thru the intervention of Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the United States Department of State.
This is a stretch:
• Ukraine gave up more than 1,800 nuclear warheads....
No, these were always Russian nuclear warheads posted there under the former Soviet Union and Russia took them back.
"One and the same thing can at the same time be good, bad, and indifferent, e.g., music is good to the melancholy, bad to those who mourn, and neither good nor bad to the deaf." ~ BARUCH SPINOZA
12
I am personally disappointed in this propagandistic diatribe, Mr. Cohen. I am normally an admirer and have often praised your forthrightness and courage in writing honestly about Israeli abuses and American blunders in Iraq, e.g.:
"“What is unbearable, in fact, is the feeling, 13 years after 9/11, that America has been chasing its tail; that, in some whack-a-mole horror show, the quashing of a jihadi enclave here only spurs the sprouting of another there; that the ideology of Al Qaeda is still reverberating through a blocked Arab world whose Sunni-Shia balance (insofar as that went) was upended by the American invasion of Iraq. And more: that the loss of 4,500 American combat troops in Iraq and more than 100,000 Iraqi lives produced no victory or clarity, but only a broken society and country.”
THAT takes guts ... and great humanity. THIS is unadulterated incitement and bluster not worthy of you.
I would rather have sent this via personal e-mail except The New York Times has recently opted not to publish regular op-ed contributors' e-mail addresses.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." ~ JOHN ADAMS
"“What is unbearable, in fact, is the feeling, 13 years after 9/11, that America has been chasing its tail; that, in some whack-a-mole horror show, the quashing of a jihadi enclave here only spurs the sprouting of another there; that the ideology of Al Qaeda is still reverberating through a blocked Arab world whose Sunni-Shia balance (insofar as that went) was upended by the American invasion of Iraq. And more: that the loss of 4,500 American combat troops in Iraq and more than 100,000 Iraqi lives produced no victory or clarity, but only a broken society and country.”
THAT takes guts ... and great humanity. THIS is unadulterated incitement and bluster not worthy of you.
I would rather have sent this via personal e-mail except The New York Times has recently opted not to publish regular op-ed contributors' e-mail addresses.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." ~ JOHN ADAMS
1
@Robert Coane
The overthrow of Yanukovich wasn't a coup. The "referendum" in Crimea took place after Russian forces broke out of their bases and seized the territory. The Nuland phone call on which the propagators of the coup argument stake so much was nothing more than the normal diplomatic business of the discussion of opposition leaders. No, they were Soviet warheads and Russia had no more claim to them than Ukraine.
The overthrow of Yanukovich wasn't a coup. The "referendum" in Crimea took place after Russian forces broke out of their bases and seized the territory. The Nuland phone call on which the propagators of the coup argument stake so much was nothing more than the normal diplomatic business of the discussion of opposition leaders. No, they were Soviet warheads and Russia had no more claim to them than Ukraine.
1
If we could break up Yugoslavia and later destroy Serbia - we should not see any problem with breaking up Ukraine to put an end to the civil war. We must realize that after all the blood has been shed there never can be a unitary state again -
I see no difference in breaking up Serbia and Yugoslavia to breaking up Ukraine.
Peace in the region is more important than borders -- we must give over our fixation that borders cannot be changed unless the US changes them.
I see no difference in breaking up Serbia and Yugoslavia to breaking up Ukraine.
Peace in the region is more important than borders -- we must give over our fixation that borders cannot be changed unless the US changes them.
8
@JudyW
"I see no difference in breaking up Serbia and Yugoslavia to breaking up Ukraine."
Then you're being willfully obtuse, since it has been explained to you. Serbia engaged in a series of wars of ethnic cleansing (the World Court acquitted Serbia of genocide only) and intervening against it was necessary to stop that. Ukraine has committed nothing like that.
"I see no difference in breaking up Serbia and Yugoslavia to breaking up Ukraine."
Then you're being willfully obtuse, since it has been explained to you. Serbia engaged in a series of wars of ethnic cleansing (the World Court acquitted Serbia of genocide only) and intervening against it was necessary to stop that. Ukraine has committed nothing like that.
1
World seems dumber these days... Some people seem to have forgotten that in geopolitics the results usually justify the meanings. The article says with all the letters that Russian consider Ukraine part of their motherland. Without jugding whether the Russies are right or wrong, how do you think they will react when the West stars opening arming the Ukranian army?
4
"It's time to get real over Putin." So send defensive weapons to Ukraine now. And, what do we send after Putin escalates? Laser-guided bombs and F-16s? Don't you understand that this road leads to a very dangerous place for both the United States and Russia? Is NATO prepared to engage in an European conflict? Before beating the drums of war, Mr. Cohen, try to think what the end-game here could be. Your blithe dismissal of the risks involved in arming Ukraine is quite preposterous. And Lavrov is not simply dreaming. NATO does want to expand to Russia's borders. Whatever it is, there is no reason for us to corner the bear in his own backyard. The more the United States gets involved, the worse the situation will become. We should let the Europeans handle it. After all, they are the ones who suffered the devastation of two world wars.
13
If we used the NBA terminology, it seems to me that regarding the war in Ukraine our White House tried to recruit Sam Bowie and Darko Milicic in lieu of Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade...
That’s why we tried to recruit Ukraine in lieu of Russia into the NATO membership...
That’s such a catastrophic lack of strategic leadership it’s hard to believe it could happen in any truly democratic country.
See, even our kindergarteners should know that the most serious economic challenge to America will come from China with 1.3 billion people and the booming economy. The key battle will be for the remaining energetic and mineral resources of the world.
Unfortunately, my vocabulary is not deep enough to find a proper word for the national strategy consisting of courting Ukraine and pushing Russia into China’s orbit...
That’s why we tried to recruit Ukraine in lieu of Russia into the NATO membership...
That’s such a catastrophic lack of strategic leadership it’s hard to believe it could happen in any truly democratic country.
See, even our kindergarteners should know that the most serious economic challenge to America will come from China with 1.3 billion people and the booming economy. The key battle will be for the remaining energetic and mineral resources of the world.
Unfortunately, my vocabulary is not deep enough to find a proper word for the national strategy consisting of courting Ukraine and pushing Russia into China’s orbit...
6
Another tough call. Should the Ukrainian soldier be given a fair chance to defend himself? Forget the government, it is the soldier on the front line. If the West is going to impose sanctions, etc., what are they waiting for?
1
There was no ethnic violence in this part of the world before Putin summoned it. Like a fanged rabbit yanked out of a dusty hat most people had forgotten even existed, Putin made something appear that had no place in the region. Russia spun a new fairy tale about Crimea starkly reminiscent of the staged Gleiwicz "attack" on Germany by Poles, who were simply SS officers dressed as civilians broadcasting radio messages in Polish to give a bizarre, totally phony pretext to war.
Why Putin thinks he can turn the clock back to some phony 'Great Russia' time is the real mystery. Eventually, these parts of Ukraine will be expelled by Kyiv. A stronger, more governable Ukraine will emerge and Putin will have succeeded only in turning an entire neighboring country firmly against him. Like most aggressors - he will ultimately have defeated only himself.
Why Putin thinks he can turn the clock back to some phony 'Great Russia' time is the real mystery. Eventually, these parts of Ukraine will be expelled by Kyiv. A stronger, more governable Ukraine will emerge and Putin will have succeeded only in turning an entire neighboring country firmly against him. Like most aggressors - he will ultimately have defeated only himself.
4
Mr Cohen writes, I listened to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in full Soviet mode at the Munich Security Conference, suggesting that after World War II it was "the Soviet Union that was against splitting Germany."
People laughed; they guffawed.
I'm surprised at Cohen's ignorance of history on this point. It is a matter of record that, after World War II, Stalin did indeed propose that Germany be reunited as a neutral state — a buffer, like Austria, between East and West — with free, fair, and open elections, as well as freedom of the press, religion and assembly. The West rejected this idea and opted instead to rearm the three zones of Germany controlled by the allies.
Vis-a-vis Ukraine, the Russians are behaving horrifically, but that doesn't mean that everything that comes out of their mouths is untrue.
People laughed; they guffawed.
I'm surprised at Cohen's ignorance of history on this point. It is a matter of record that, after World War II, Stalin did indeed propose that Germany be reunited as a neutral state — a buffer, like Austria, between East and West — with free, fair, and open elections, as well as freedom of the press, religion and assembly. The West rejected this idea and opted instead to rearm the three zones of Germany controlled by the allies.
Vis-a-vis Ukraine, the Russians are behaving horrifically, but that doesn't mean that everything that comes out of their mouths is untrue.
3
Its interesting reading the comments from older readers who grew up during the height of the cold war. They seem to give Russia much more credit than is deserved and the idea of a nuclear holocaust is always mentioned, a threat that in the 21st century is largely exaggerated.
In regards to arming the Ukrainian government to fight in eastern Ukraine it would be folly to do without the support of Europeans behind it. It would only throw money at the situation and prolong a civil war without putting much pressure on Moscow. The lower oil prices and targeted sanctions are the best weapon to bring the Russians to the negotiating table. It will just take time......
In regards to arming the Ukrainian government to fight in eastern Ukraine it would be folly to do without the support of Europeans behind it. It would only throw money at the situation and prolong a civil war without putting much pressure on Moscow. The lower oil prices and targeted sanctions are the best weapon to bring the Russians to the negotiating table. It will just take time......
Sadly, despite the hopes and efforts of many, many people over many, many years, both in the east and the west, it seems the Cold War is not really over and that reversion to a robust containment policy is once again necessary for the western democracies to assure their security.
Certainly western diplomacy should continue to try to secure a reasonable long term settlement in Ukraine if it is possible to do so. But to achieve any lasting and positive negotiated settlement with the current Russian government, diplomatic efforts now need to be backed up by a parallel course of contingency plans and actions to make very clear to Putin that the western democracies will not be duped by more 'big lies' and more 'slow motion invasions' of neighbors.
This means that the western democracies not only need to continue and expand the existing Russia sanctions, but now must also provide Ukraine both the financial and military means to defend itself against repeat Russian led invasions while diplomacy continues.
Further, it also means that the US and its NATO allies now must very publicly consider and put in place comprehensive contingency plans to defend all eastern facing members of NATO against Russian encroachment and invasion. These plans should include re-deployment of the US military forces withdrawn from NATO bases over the last 25 years so the current Russian government must weigh actual counter measures, not mere warnings or proposals, in its future calculations.
Certainly western diplomacy should continue to try to secure a reasonable long term settlement in Ukraine if it is possible to do so. But to achieve any lasting and positive negotiated settlement with the current Russian government, diplomatic efforts now need to be backed up by a parallel course of contingency plans and actions to make very clear to Putin that the western democracies will not be duped by more 'big lies' and more 'slow motion invasions' of neighbors.
This means that the western democracies not only need to continue and expand the existing Russia sanctions, but now must also provide Ukraine both the financial and military means to defend itself against repeat Russian led invasions while diplomacy continues.
Further, it also means that the US and its NATO allies now must very publicly consider and put in place comprehensive contingency plans to defend all eastern facing members of NATO against Russian encroachment and invasion. These plans should include re-deployment of the US military forces withdrawn from NATO bases over the last 25 years so the current Russian government must weigh actual counter measures, not mere warnings or proposals, in its future calculations.
1
So the normally wise, thoughtful, and sensible Roger Cohen has joined the ranks of the McCains and the Grahams and other hawks. He says, "There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. Bolster the Ukrainian Army with them and other arms."
The proxy war with the old Soviet Union led to the debacle of Afghanistan. Promoting another such with Russia, as Cohen advocates, is equally foolhardy. More trillions of dollars wasted and probably American lives lost in another needless exercise of American power.
The proxy war with the old Soviet Union led to the debacle of Afghanistan. Promoting another such with Russia, as Cohen advocates, is equally foolhardy. More trillions of dollars wasted and probably American lives lost in another needless exercise of American power.
7
I sense a theme among many commenters here. Ukraine is right next-door to Russia, America is far away from the region, wars result in terrible tragedy for all sides, wars are too costly and require much sacrifice (if done properly), Ukraine was once part of Russia, Putin will stop at nothing to reclaim Russia status and honor, the West/NATO was threatening to Russia, etc. All those reasons may be true. They were also true about Germany in WWII, and of course, most Americans didn't want the US to get involved in that war either, for many similar reasons (until the Japanese showed up in Pearl Harbor and added some clarity to the situation). Just knowing history won't prevent it from repeating itself. As in 1914 and 1941, we are sleepwalking our way into war. We should wake up and open our eyes.
1
I thought that the "change their cost-benefit analysis" argument had been declared insolvent if not bankrupt after Vietnam. If the North Vietnamese had thought like rational economists, the war would have been over much earlier. But they didn't and it wasn't.
Not even a large male bear will take on a mother bear with cubs. He knows that she will not do a cost-benefit analysis; she will fight to the death. Caution seems in order.
Not even a large male bear will take on a mother bear with cubs. He knows that she will not do a cost-benefit analysis; she will fight to the death. Caution seems in order.
5
--There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones.
Is there any proof in that? Some history, at least one occasion or incident?
--There are risks but no policy is risk-free
Risk to inflame current conflict in bigger war? This is nothing! Let's go for it! :)
Is there any proof in that? Some history, at least one occasion or incident?
--There are risks but no policy is risk-free
Risk to inflame current conflict in bigger war? This is nothing! Let's go for it! :)
1
I couldn't agree with this editorial more. Putin is not going to use the threat of nuclear weapons to take control and win in Ukraine. He's not Kim Jong Un or even Stalin for that matter (and neither one of them every used the atom bomb). Nevertheless, there are risks we (the United States, and NATO, and the EU) we need to take. It's as simple and as difficult as that. The fact that Europe has no spine for more than just sanctions is partially understandable but morally incomprehensible. We cannot appease and aggressor. Two World Wars and a lengthy Cold War should have taught the West that much.
The analogy of a bully harassing and beating up on the kid next door is apropos. You know how you stop a bully in his tracks from beating you up in a sandbox? Not by going to the principal's office and getting the kid suspended. Not by expelling the kid, because he's still got the freedom to come back. Sure, the kid being bullied should have the support of his close group of friends...but in the end...there is only one sure way of stopping a bully. You have to stand up to him and, if necessary, give him a bloody nose.
Putin is the bully. Ukraine is the kid next door. The West are the kid's close friends. Ukraine doesn't have the ability to give Putin the proverbial bloody nose, but Ukraine's friends can give them the tools to give Putin the bloody nose that he needs to wake up. Sanctions are equivalent to going to the principal's office...nice gesture...but not what is needed here.
The analogy of a bully harassing and beating up on the kid next door is apropos. You know how you stop a bully in his tracks from beating you up in a sandbox? Not by going to the principal's office and getting the kid suspended. Not by expelling the kid, because he's still got the freedom to come back. Sure, the kid being bullied should have the support of his close group of friends...but in the end...there is only one sure way of stopping a bully. You have to stand up to him and, if necessary, give him a bloody nose.
Putin is the bully. Ukraine is the kid next door. The West are the kid's close friends. Ukraine doesn't have the ability to give Putin the proverbial bloody nose, but Ukraine's friends can give them the tools to give Putin the bloody nose that he needs to wake up. Sanctions are equivalent to going to the principal's office...nice gesture...but not what is needed here.
2
As Merkel recently pointed out, the erection of the Berlin Wall did not become a casus belli. Why should this incident? During the Cold War we recognized that there were legitimate spheres of influence that should not be violated because to do so would turn the "cold" war into a "hot" one. Now the American policy is one that assumes we can meddle in Russia's backyard and, when we get pushback, we should immediately threaten military intervention. The lessons of history are often complicated and contradictory, but one thing is clear about Russia and the Russian people--they are stubborn and strong in the face of the greatest adversity. Napoleon and Hitler found that out the hard way. So we should have a little pause for thought and do a little less saber rattling in dealing with them--unless, of course, we are prepared to plunge the world into another world war. I don't think the West and particularly America in its decadence and materialism is prepared for that.
8
Let us all remember that when Russia attacked Germany in World War I, they just advanced over the border between their country and East Prussia. Modern Poland did not exist, neither did the Ukraine or Belarus. The separate countries of the Soviet bloc were actually a fiction, created to get the bloc more votes in the UN. The collapse of the Soviet Union made that fiction "real" in one sense. Historically those countries had been variously independent, part of Russia, or part of one of the other "empires" whose demise was one of the major outcomes of the Great War.
From a Russian point of view, taking parts of the Ukraine is just a part of the dance that has been going on for centuries. The USA needs to heed that fact.
From a Russian point of view, taking parts of the Ukraine is just a part of the dance that has been going on for centuries. The USA needs to heed that fact.
2
Thanks a lot, Mr. Cohen! First time I read your opinion with the great interest and it was objective and very logical. You are absolutely correct. Creating mafia-like structure in his country, where are not law, independent court or press, but people with different opinions are placed in the prison, killed or beaten on the streets and so on, Putin uses the same mafia approach in international affairs. He needs respect, because he is a godfather. He has to be stopped. We have to respect Ukrainian people because their fight shows well who are in Kremlin. It was enough for us Georgia in 2008. We watched it. We got Ukraine...I watched on Youtube, when Putin announced of Crimea's annexation to the members of his Duma, I heard the people in Duma asked (I knew Russian) what would be next: Alaska....? Ms. Merkel is wrong. If not now, when? If now we, who? Thank you, Mr. Cohen, for the very interesting and right comments.
3
Ukraine provides an object lesson for Iran and North Korea. Don't give up your nukes or you will be subject to coercion and outright invasion by your neighbor.
1
I agree with Shaun Narine that it takes two to tango and that the US isn't as clean as it would like to present itself. That said, many in the rest of the world are still trying to move HERE and many Russians have emigrated. That can't all be because of US propaganda.
Speaking of propaganda, I'm alarmed at the vehemence of the loathing for the US expressed by many Russians (I know) through social media, including by some who left twenty years ago and live in democracies! They accept Russian propaganda 100%, see no fault on their own side and declare that we Americans are indeed the devil. Nothing but a huge sense of victimhood can explain this. The poor Russians, taken advantage of by everyone. They have to fight for everything they've got against the overwhelming power of the bad guys. I don't 'unfriend" these people because I think it's important to follow their opinions; I continue to be, however, totally blown away by their acceptance of wild untruth as self-evident fact.
Speaking of propaganda, I'm alarmed at the vehemence of the loathing for the US expressed by many Russians (I know) through social media, including by some who left twenty years ago and live in democracies! They accept Russian propaganda 100%, see no fault on their own side and declare that we Americans are indeed the devil. Nothing but a huge sense of victimhood can explain this. The poor Russians, taken advantage of by everyone. They have to fight for everything they've got against the overwhelming power of the bad guys. I don't 'unfriend" these people because I think it's important to follow their opinions; I continue to be, however, totally blown away by their acceptance of wild untruth as self-evident fact.
2
The last time world powers met in Munich, Neville Chamberlain negotiated a treaty with Adolph Hitler that sacrificed the Sudetenland to "save" german speaking Czechs and we all know how that turned out.
The Nato powers have already sacrificed the Crimea hoping to appease Mr. Putin and he still wants more of the Ukraine! After two broken ceasefires, why the insane policy of another "political" ceasefire expecting a different outcome, isn't that the definition of insanity?
Unless Putin is stopped now, every nation formerly occupied by the USSR is in jeopardy of attack by Putin's fervent ego to rebuild the old USSR as the new Russian empire.
Has the West learned nothing from Neville Chamberlain's diplomacy?
The Nato powers have already sacrificed the Crimea hoping to appease Mr. Putin and he still wants more of the Ukraine! After two broken ceasefires, why the insane policy of another "political" ceasefire expecting a different outcome, isn't that the definition of insanity?
Unless Putin is stopped now, every nation formerly occupied by the USSR is in jeopardy of attack by Putin's fervent ego to rebuild the old USSR as the new Russian empire.
Has the West learned nothing from Neville Chamberlain's diplomacy?
3
Russia belongs to a limited club of nations with fresh history of electing and supporting its autocrats as well as murdering millions of its countrymen. Defensive weaponry for Ukraine is not likely to change course of this huge tragic ship.
C'mon, cannot the West think of a more creative response than another war?
C'mon, cannot the West think of a more creative response than another war?
1
economic sanctions over the years would destroy russia if coupled with huge oil production.This would fix russia,saudi arabia,iran and all other rogue nations combined in middle-east as well.That is the way to go here..Offer humanitarian aid to ukraine and settle ukranian refugees in other european nations.Ukraine without ukranians would be of no value to putin and he is not going to live for ever.
1
Cohen's words are all true. And I will get back to this. But we need to understand the German "Putin understanders" like former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. Russia has been anti-Western since the Enlightenment. Solshenizin, the Russian writer holed up in Vermont after the demise of Communism, voiced that long anti-Western sentiment more recently. All nations have their own ways of seeing history. At Munich this weekend, Germans' applauding Angela Merkel's "This conflict cannot be won militarily" is a good example: Germans have a more urgent mandate to live with Russia than Americans. I saw former US Secretary of State M. Albright shake her head denying Merkel's words. Merkel has an alternative plan to her most recent Ukraine initiative: support the US arms shipments to Ukraine that is discussed in Washington now. So her and Kerry's denial of a split in the NATO alliance is correct: Putin really fights for a dying Russian system that is severely threatened by the western tilt in all of Eastern Europe during the last 30 years, now in Ukraine. Listen to the Poles, Latvians, Ukrainians. Former Polish foreign secretary Sigorski has got it right: A European Ukraine impregnates Russia with the pregnancy of freedom: This is what Russia "cannot tolerate". Putin said so. He phrased his comment differently. He actually said "we cannot tolerate western products flooding Ukraine". It is a more crude, more materialistic version of the words "we cannot tolerate western freedom."
3
This is a very realistic piece. The most important thing to remember is this: There are forces of order in this world and forces of disorder. Putin is a force of disorder. The fact is that he has been involved in the Ukrainian situation from the very first moment the Maidan began and all he created is disorder. It is time for him to step aside. If the United States and the West wants to be the force of order, we should rethink our strategy. At this point, we should concentrate on two areas: Europe and the Middle. We should work with the Europeans to bring the Atlantic alliance in order. We should strengthen our ties to Europe. The struggle for Europe is now in Ukraine. We should support the Ukrainians and arm them. They will do the rest. Iran emerges as a regional power. Maybe Iran can bring some order in the Middle East. However, if we allow Iran to play this role, we must remember that Iran presents a major threat to Israel--our oldest and most reliable ally in the region. We must do everything to ensure that Israel is protected.
Merkel and Hollande are in Putin's pocket. Obama is also hesitant. The Middle East, thanks to Bush, Cheney, Rummy, etc. have sapped America's military and economic strength. Obama doesn't want another conflagration. But sending weapons to Ukraine is really a no brainer.
Putin will chew up the Baltics next. He could be in Riga and Tallinn and Vilnius in a day's time with his tanks. The NATO "rapid" strike force would not be rapid enough. Putin I am sure is betting that he could probably pull it off. Crimea gives him confidence.
Putin will chew up the Baltics next. He could be in Riga and Tallinn and Vilnius in a day's time with his tanks. The NATO "rapid" strike force would not be rapid enough. Putin I am sure is betting that he could probably pull it off. Crimea gives him confidence.
Totally distorted article, without any facts and logic. The worst thing to do would be to arm Kiev who is controlled by Neo-Nazis. Arming them would lead to more war and casualties. If a coup d'état was not done in Ukraine, we wouldn't be here right now. The west started all this and now the US wants to take it to another level. Well my friend, I surely wouldn't hire you as an advisor.
7
Cohen's analysis is all good and fine, until he adds a quick "solution" column at the end. Showing that playing nice with Putin doesn't work isn't proof that getting tough does. John McCain exemplified this fallacy best, when he asked how long Putin could sustain a secret war if we sent weapons. He may have thought himself clever, but the obvious answer is that Putin would make the secret war an open war, provoked by western aggression. All of Ukraine could easily be turned into rubble. And who says it would neccessarily stop there? Obama can retroactively earn his Nobel peace prize, by not listening to the growing chickenhawk chorus.
5
I think Chancellor Merkel is right: there is nothing the U.S. (who else would be sending lethal aid to the Ukraine?) can give the people short of direct intervention by our own forces that could change the military balance enough to stop Russia, and trying to do so anyway plays into Putin's hands regarding his characterization of Western policy. Sending arms, not to mention fighters, into the Ukraine is hugely easier and cheaper for Russia than it is for us, and the people here most in favor of doing that are largely the same ones who continually tell us we're too poor to do things for our own people.
I don't think Mr. Cohen is one of them, but a lot of people need to separate everything into good guys and bad guys, and that dynamic is out of control in the Ukraine discussion. At bottom, the place hasn't yet learned how to be a multi-ethnic state, but it is one, and if it wants to keep it's Russian population, it needs to start thinking and acting like one. Small, weak and frightened countries always want large and powerful countries to fight their wars for them. Part of acting responsibly as an American government is developing the ability not to react to that kind of stimulus.
I don't think Mr. Cohen is one of them, but a lot of people need to separate everything into good guys and bad guys, and that dynamic is out of control in the Ukraine discussion. At bottom, the place hasn't yet learned how to be a multi-ethnic state, but it is one, and if it wants to keep it's Russian population, it needs to start thinking and acting like one. Small, weak and frightened countries always want large and powerful countries to fight their wars for them. Part of acting responsibly as an American government is developing the ability not to react to that kind of stimulus.
3
Putini hasn't taken Ukraine because Putin doesn't want Ukraine. Who would? It would be alittle like Germany absorbing Greece as a Bundesland. Who needs all of those problems and all of those bills? But it is correct to think Putin won't let Donbass go. It is leverage against a Ukraine tied to NATO that is looking increasingly hostile. It would also be very damaging to his public image to look sit idly by and watch as a natural constituency is liquidated. This is precisely why arming Ukraine is such a bad, bad idea. Kiev isn't going to win this one. Arming it will only prolong their eventual defeat, make the threat of catastrophic escalation more likely,and leave the US and Europe with massive PR problem similar to what the US had coming out of Vietnam. Coddlers and enables of a corrupt and murderous regime. The fact is the Kiev regime is a venal flock of criminals that deserves to fail. Why the US is sullying its reputation crawling into bed with these monsters is beyond my understanding.
6
easy with the monster talk. They are human beings.
2
Anyone who wants to start a fight with the Russians on the Russian border is insane. American arms killing Russian young men is a sure fire way to start WWIII. Furthermore, when a read a New York Times reporter wanting to do something stupid like this, I think back to the last war you helped get us into: Iraq. Your advice wasn't good then, and it isn't good now.
14
Actually Minister Larov's statement is more accurate than your spin.
The response to the USA proposal in1955 to rearm the western section of what had been the quadripartite occupation of Nazi Germany and incorporate it into the US dominated anti Russian military alliance NATO(anybody who has any questions about NATO being a 'Delian League' should look at the list of NATO's supreme commanders) - the Russians, who had suffered 40 million casualties defeating Hitler's 'Endlösung' nightmare, proposed the 'Austrian' solution which resulted in a constitutionally guaranteed unified neutral state with no/no foreign garrisons.
The cherry picked history (never mind the FOX network) that has become so popular among neocon maximalist hegemonists does the western world a disservice.
You make no mention of the US historical antecedents, to the continued oblique Pentagon/CIA disinformation references to the presence of 'regular Russian Units' in the Ukraine. Remember Secretary Powel tricked into to telling untruths about the non existent weapons of mass destruction and portable biochem weapons production facilities in Iraq.
Naturally - not a mention about Israel's violations of international law in its treatment of the occupied territory and pursuit of 'Lebensraum' for a greater Israel.
Words given and promises made between States, Integrity of sovereign states, - let he who is without sin (particularly over the last 50 years) cast the first stone!
The response to the USA proposal in1955 to rearm the western section of what had been the quadripartite occupation of Nazi Germany and incorporate it into the US dominated anti Russian military alliance NATO(anybody who has any questions about NATO being a 'Delian League' should look at the list of NATO's supreme commanders) - the Russians, who had suffered 40 million casualties defeating Hitler's 'Endlösung' nightmare, proposed the 'Austrian' solution which resulted in a constitutionally guaranteed unified neutral state with no/no foreign garrisons.
The cherry picked history (never mind the FOX network) that has become so popular among neocon maximalist hegemonists does the western world a disservice.
You make no mention of the US historical antecedents, to the continued oblique Pentagon/CIA disinformation references to the presence of 'regular Russian Units' in the Ukraine. Remember Secretary Powel tricked into to telling untruths about the non existent weapons of mass destruction and portable biochem weapons production facilities in Iraq.
Naturally - not a mention about Israel's violations of international law in its treatment of the occupied territory and pursuit of 'Lebensraum' for a greater Israel.
Words given and promises made between States, Integrity of sovereign states, - let he who is without sin (particularly over the last 50 years) cast the first stone!
7
If you wondered why America has been engaged in the chronic conflicts with the rest of globe since the end of the WWII (the Cold War, Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Israel, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Ukraine), the reason is more than silly.
Our strategic interests are all over the world and the identical strategic interests of other countries are limited to their own borders.
Why is so hard for the rest of globe to accept this simple premise that would give us a thousand years of world peace?
Our strategic interests are all over the world and the identical strategic interests of other countries are limited to their own borders.
Why is so hard for the rest of globe to accept this simple premise that would give us a thousand years of world peace?
2
Be careful - we may see another reply of Afganisthan strategy. If West belief that Ukraine is strategic country and must be protected, then directly protect Ukraine. Otherwise let Putin do what is right for him and in the process destroy Russia. People of Ukrine should take this fight as their fight for democracy and solve it on their term, not what West thinks best for them. If that means the division of Ukrine- so be it. In no circumstances, UD should give arms to Ukrine - ISIS is getting all their arms to fight Iraq and Syria, why Ukrine can not get it. Only thing West can do is to give money to Ukrine to buy arms on black market.
Well, this situation is certainly very complicated and also distressing. I don't know what the answers are. However, I spent a while with Google maps and I notice that Putin has a literally enormous border problem. Who knows with all the wiggly lines, but even the border between Ukraine and Russia looks like more than 1000 miles. Ask the French how much their Maginot line cost per mile, and how effective it was. I suspect that Putin wants to do something like he did in Georgia: build a buffer area along the border with Russia and throw in a seaport to sweeten the pot.
It's often been said that economic strength usually trumps military adventures over the long run. Putin's adventurism is wrecking Russia's economy.
It's often been said that economic strength usually trumps military adventures over the long run. Putin's adventurism is wrecking Russia's economy.
Then what? If your thesis is that The Putin is hell-bent on taking eastern Ukraine by force, then acknowledge we will then have reached the brink of a Russian/NATO war.
1
Bush Jr illegal Iraq war, Obama's Lybia and Syria disasters, bombing of Pakistan at will, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, the list goes on.
Whom did you call a bully again?
Whom did you call a bully again?
13
It's refreshing to see that Roger has finally awaken from his six (6) year stupor with a clear head and purposeful demeanor. It's been a long time since his days in Bosnia when he preached with vigor, sarcasm, and righteous indigenous of the perils of doing nothing in the face of genocide. Right he was then, right he is now. Too bad, however, for those poor Syrian souls, 250,000 dead, tens of thousands raped, tortured, crucified, burnt alive, 11 million displaced, homeless, starving, mostly children and women.
I am sighing about this now. It's a small sad sigh in recognition of the fact that Putin seems to want a war. Didn't Russia suffer enough in WWII? Has Putin blinded himself to what the USSR was when it existed? It was a state that jailed dissidents, did not have a robust economy unless one counts the underground one, exiled citizens who loved Russia, did not have a thriving intellectual discussion with the world because of how it limited free speech, and a country whose inhabitants distrusted every statement its officials made.
Of course if Putin wants a war there's nothing Europe or the rest of the world can do to stop him. He will have it and thousands will die. It will be one more chapter in European history where a country decided to reconstitute its former boundaries against the will of the people inside those former boundaries. It will solve nothing, create more enmity, and leave us with new cemeteries to visit. Putin would do better to let the former SSRs continue on and aid them as an ally rather than as a conqueror.
Of course if Putin wants a war there's nothing Europe or the rest of the world can do to stop him. He will have it and thousands will die. It will be one more chapter in European history where a country decided to reconstitute its former boundaries against the will of the people inside those former boundaries. It will solve nothing, create more enmity, and leave us with new cemeteries to visit. Putin would do better to let the former SSRs continue on and aid them as an ally rather than as a conqueror.
While Europe and the rest of the democratic world discuss the legalities and politics of providing Ukraine with modern western military hardware to aid Ukraine in the defense of their country; Russian separatists are on an offensive, have already taken a further 500 sq miles and have no interest in peace or ending their Russian supported and guided offensive.
While we dither, Ukrainian soldiers are dying and Ukraine is losing territory to an invader. War is already in Europe and Ukraine and Russia has given nobody any reason to think the Kremlin will lessen its war or involvement when at every juncture they have doubled down on their involvement.
Putin is never going to follow international norms and will only negotiate a settlement when his costs are too high to bear. We've already seen he is ready to sacrifice Russian and Russian's economic stability so now it is time to provide Ukraine with the tools to defend themselves and see if increased Cargo 200 shipments will help Putin admit the obvious and show Russian's the cost of Putin's ambitions.
While we dither, Ukrainian soldiers are dying and Ukraine is losing territory to an invader. War is already in Europe and Ukraine and Russia has given nobody any reason to think the Kremlin will lessen its war or involvement when at every juncture they have doubled down on their involvement.
Putin is never going to follow international norms and will only negotiate a settlement when his costs are too high to bear. We've already seen he is ready to sacrifice Russian and Russian's economic stability so now it is time to provide Ukraine with the tools to defend themselves and see if increased Cargo 200 shipments will help Putin admit the obvious and show Russian's the cost of Putin's ambitions.
4
In Ukraine we funded an opposition movement that rioted and attacked police. They fostered a coup by refusing to abide by an agreement for early elections, an arrangement brokered by Russia and the EU. The coup leaders made clear their goal to bring Ukraine into an economic and military alliance with NATO, literally on Russia's boarder.
Imagine if China formed a military alliance with Mexico and began "arming Mexico with "defensive weapons." Imagine if we discovered that the Tea party movement was funded by Russia or another country? Imagine if Brazil, citing the mistreatment of minorities in the US began funneling money into protest movements? What do you think the US response would be?
Despite the obvious answer, we continue to promote this idea of American exceptionalism, even in the face of evidence that while we promote elections, we are no friend of popular democracy. Just ask the people of Venezuela who had four internationally monitored elections, each declared free and democratic but each opposed by the US. Ask Hondurans whose military coup was supported by the US. Ask the Serbs who had the "territorial integrity" of their country torn up by the US which now talks about the integrity of Ukraine.
Putin is no saint but it's the US that remains mired in cold war thinking. The wall fell, but many popular democratic movements still oppose American hegemony.Yet we demonize them simply because they do not wish to live under this version of a "Western Illusion.".
Imagine if China formed a military alliance with Mexico and began "arming Mexico with "defensive weapons." Imagine if we discovered that the Tea party movement was funded by Russia or another country? Imagine if Brazil, citing the mistreatment of minorities in the US began funneling money into protest movements? What do you think the US response would be?
Despite the obvious answer, we continue to promote this idea of American exceptionalism, even in the face of evidence that while we promote elections, we are no friend of popular democracy. Just ask the people of Venezuela who had four internationally monitored elections, each declared free and democratic but each opposed by the US. Ask Hondurans whose military coup was supported by the US. Ask the Serbs who had the "territorial integrity" of their country torn up by the US which now talks about the integrity of Ukraine.
Putin is no saint but it's the US that remains mired in cold war thinking. The wall fell, but many popular democratic movements still oppose American hegemony.Yet we demonize them simply because they do not wish to live under this version of a "Western Illusion.".
13
@Victor
In fact, Yanukovich initiated the use of deadly force and the Maidan acted in self-defense. Further, the agreement failed because Yanukovich fled after his security forces deserted him. According to the NYTimes' story, the latter were afraid that Yanukovich was going to throw them to the wolves. It wasn't a coup.
In fact, Yanukovich initiated the use of deadly force and the Maidan acted in self-defense. Further, the agreement failed because Yanukovich fled after his security forces deserted him. According to the NYTimes' story, the latter were afraid that Yanukovich was going to throw them to the wolves. It wasn't a coup.
4
When armed paramilitaries force an elected president out of office and unilaterally seizes power that is a coup. It doesn't matter if that government was corrupt, which it surely was, it was still elected and new elections were to take place within 30 days of the signing of the agreement.
@Victor
An armed uprising isn't a coup per se. By your logic, every revolution where the revolutionaries have weapons is a coup and that "definition" Is silly on the face of it. The elections didn't take place because Yanukovich chose to flee after his security forces and political allies deserted him.
An armed uprising isn't a coup per se. By your logic, every revolution where the revolutionaries have weapons is a coup and that "definition" Is silly on the face of it. The elections didn't take place because Yanukovich chose to flee after his security forces and political allies deserted him.
1
While units of the Russian army are operating in the Ukraine, the press continues to call these Russian army units "Pro-Russian separatists."
The Russian economy is collapsing. Sanctions and low oil prices make Russian government spending plans a roadmap to bankruptcy for the Russian state. Putin has started a war and is planning a 33% increase in defense spending this year. That looks a lot like planning a major war or even planning a world war. Russia cannot afford both a civilian economy and a major war.
Arming the Ukraine will trigger an outright public invasion of the Ukraine by Russian army units that are not already in the Ukraine. But the Ukraine is a country of 40 million people, and we have seen what a medium size country can do in resisting a foreign invasion in Iraq. A long war of attrition by the people against a conventional army can be very costly for Russia.
As long as the sanctions last and the price of oil stays low Russia's economy will continue to collapse. Putin will continue to lash out and to attack the world.
Putin started a war to prove that Russia is a superpower even if the truth is that Russia is a bankrupt country in Europe. Russia is desperate now because its economy is falling into a deep recession.
The Russian economy is collapsing. Sanctions and low oil prices make Russian government spending plans a roadmap to bankruptcy for the Russian state. Putin has started a war and is planning a 33% increase in defense spending this year. That looks a lot like planning a major war or even planning a world war. Russia cannot afford both a civilian economy and a major war.
Arming the Ukraine will trigger an outright public invasion of the Ukraine by Russian army units that are not already in the Ukraine. But the Ukraine is a country of 40 million people, and we have seen what a medium size country can do in resisting a foreign invasion in Iraq. A long war of attrition by the people against a conventional army can be very costly for Russia.
As long as the sanctions last and the price of oil stays low Russia's economy will continue to collapse. Putin will continue to lash out and to attack the world.
Putin started a war to prove that Russia is a superpower even if the truth is that Russia is a bankrupt country in Europe. Russia is desperate now because its economy is falling into a deep recession.
3
To those who think Ukraine or any part of it should really belong to Russia, let's put it this way: If the Mexicans suddenly decided that Texas and California rightfully belonged to them and decided to take them back, what do you suppose the response would or should be?
1
Please, don't forget how we challenged the Russians in Afghanistan by arming the Taliban. Neither side came out ahead. Actually both sides were and still are worse off with these actions. Arming Ukraine to fight the Russians will have similar consequences.
8
You fundamentally misunderstand the two conflicts. There is nothing - nothing!- similar between secular Ukraine and fundamentalist Afghanistan.
2
Let us fight our war with Russia using Ukranian lives, so that is the point. That is the way to go. Those who ignore the reality of ethnic conflict ion Ukraine, by making arguments that are backed by cold war rhetoric- Lavrov and Mr. Cohen included, will be counting dead bodies if they this is not resolved diplomatically. Anyway, a big war is good for journalism, give it to us.
3
The Russians have long demanded 100% security on their near abroad, which means 0% security for the near abroad.
3
It is extremely sad to read NYT comments and see Russian propoganda rear it's ugly head. To see people actually think that this is somehow not a proxy war but a legitimate ethnic conflict or "civil war" is a win for Putin. He is winning the information war. The discourse should be on how to help Ukraine, not ad hoc hypothesis on how Russia is justified in it's aggression.
5
Most of the Russian propaganda in these comments either come directly from Russia (even though they say they are from Maryland) or just from professional contrarians. If you look closely, most of their comments are very similar and that's not a coincidence.
4
A common refrain from Putin's apologists is that the revolution that ousted Yanukovych was an undemocratic coup that forced Putin to intervene in Ukraine. I would like to ask the question, where is Yanukovych now? Has anyone seen or heard anything from him. Or to be more direct, if Russia is actually upset over an undemocratic coup occurring in Ukraine, then why has Russia done nothing to try to restore Yanukovych to power? Heck, why didn't Yanukovych stay in the eastern provinces or Crimea where he could have been safe and set up a new government as a first step to returning to power?
Obviously, the reason none of this happened is that Russia has no interest in the democratic process and does not care about respecting Ukrainian borders. It sees the ouster of its puppet government as the perfect opportunity to seize Ukrainian territory for the dual effect of taking the spoils of war while letting its neighbors know what will happen if they displease Putin.
Obviously, the reason none of this happened is that Russia has no interest in the democratic process and does not care about respecting Ukrainian borders. It sees the ouster of its puppet government as the perfect opportunity to seize Ukrainian territory for the dual effect of taking the spoils of war while letting its neighbors know what will happen if they displease Putin.
4
Mr. Cohen sees Ukraine from the view of the West. The Maidan riots and coup had its base in W. Ukraine which has traditionally been closer to Europe than E. Ukraine.
Ukraine is a former SSR. The Eastern half for a long time was traditionally part of Russia and the USSR. Stalin eventually seized the Western part and incorporated it into the USSR. In 1991 the borders of the SSR were used for the country instead of restoring the Pre WWI borders.
Since independence Ukraine has muddled along with one corrupt government after another. This very corruption allowed parts of Ukraine to ignore what Kiev was doing. Billionaire Oligarchs like Rinat Akhmetov and Igor Kolomoisky got entrenched.
Maidan upset the applecart. It was a Western Ukraine movement wanting to move closer to the EU. The new government was composed almost exclusively of politicians from the West -like Yatsenyuk from Lvov. The parties, representing the East were disbanded and outlawed. The East lost its representation.
Eastern Ukraine did not want to be in the EU. It seceded. Kiev sent troops and now there is a civil war.
Poroshenko has refused to federalize the country, insisting on a unitary state. He must understand that a unitary state is now impossible. Our role should be to make him understand that, not to ship weapons so he can murder more of his own citizens.
Too much blood has been shed for the East to be part of Ukraine again. We must make our puppets in Kiev understand that.
Ukraine is a former SSR. The Eastern half for a long time was traditionally part of Russia and the USSR. Stalin eventually seized the Western part and incorporated it into the USSR. In 1991 the borders of the SSR were used for the country instead of restoring the Pre WWI borders.
Since independence Ukraine has muddled along with one corrupt government after another. This very corruption allowed parts of Ukraine to ignore what Kiev was doing. Billionaire Oligarchs like Rinat Akhmetov and Igor Kolomoisky got entrenched.
Maidan upset the applecart. It was a Western Ukraine movement wanting to move closer to the EU. The new government was composed almost exclusively of politicians from the West -like Yatsenyuk from Lvov. The parties, representing the East were disbanded and outlawed. The East lost its representation.
Eastern Ukraine did not want to be in the EU. It seceded. Kiev sent troops and now there is a civil war.
Poroshenko has refused to federalize the country, insisting on a unitary state. He must understand that a unitary state is now impossible. Our role should be to make him understand that, not to ship weapons so he can murder more of his own citizens.
Too much blood has been shed for the East to be part of Ukraine again. We must make our puppets in Kiev understand that.
7
The behavior of Russia is fairly logical if you consider a little bit of history and geography.
Russia has a Black Sea naval base in Sevastopol, Crimea, rented from Ukraine until 2042. When things started to snowball against Yanukovic and talk about EU and NATO in Ukraine increased, Russia obviously became nervous about the future of this base. In Moscow, they did not trust that it could go like with Quantanamo Bay in Cuba.
Therefore, first secure Crimea and then secure land access to Crimea from Russia. And it is this latter part that is going on now.
Russia has a huge land mass but very few good ports. Sevastopol is not ideally located, either, but it is the only one in the south. And therefore not easily given up.
Russia has a Black Sea naval base in Sevastopol, Crimea, rented from Ukraine until 2042. When things started to snowball against Yanukovic and talk about EU and NATO in Ukraine increased, Russia obviously became nervous about the future of this base. In Moscow, they did not trust that it could go like with Quantanamo Bay in Cuba.
Therefore, first secure Crimea and then secure land access to Crimea from Russia. And it is this latter part that is going on now.
Russia has a huge land mass but very few good ports. Sevastopol is not ideally located, either, but it is the only one in the south. And therefore not easily given up.
3
Obviously, Mr. Cohen, you have no faith in economic sanctions & negotiations accomplishing anything other than limiting increased bloodshed in Ukraine. And while your calculation that Putin will be as restrained as the former Soviet Union in regard to use of nuclear weapons, you've forgotten one thing. Proliferation through back to the wall vengeance or as the result of political destabilization is the real threat. Let Europe handle this in their own way.
3
I do not see the conflict as an east vs. west or as a cold war resurrected. Ukraine, to many westerns and many Russians, was, is and will always be part of Russia. To Ukrainians it is a conflict to once again break free from the Russian yoke; reclaim its history and national entity and to chart its own course on the world stage. Mr. Cohen is correct on the following: Putin sees the world thru a revisionist historical lens; justifying current events with false historical precedence. In the case of Ukraine, Russia has altered, revised and blotted out Ukrainian historical facts and had stolen Ukraine's history and its cultural identity; in short suppressing a cultural national entity and making it Russian. I am not sure that supplying arms is the answer; but certainly allowing Putin’s invasion of a sovereign nation can not be justified as Russia establishing a NOVO Russ over an independent Ukraine.
1
Thanks for an accurate portrayal of what is going on. I was just there and confirm the insights provided in the article. In addition I heard about how people in Russia feel about Putin and was startled to discover how supportive many of them are and how they have accepted his version of Ukraine. One of my associates in Kiev had relatives in Moscow call them to implore them to flee the country and come to the safety and anti-fascist peace of Russia.
I understand American reluctance to get involved based on recent conflicts. But it is willful blindness to beleive Putin does not have ambitions for other coutries. in order to secure peace and freedom in this world, it seems we have to be willing to take on those that also want peace but beleive the only way to it is to steal and kill until no one is left to challenge their authority.
I understand American reluctance to get involved based on recent conflicts. But it is willful blindness to beleive Putin does not have ambitions for other coutries. in order to secure peace and freedom in this world, it seems we have to be willing to take on those that also want peace but beleive the only way to it is to steal and kill until no one is left to challenge their authority.
2
The Russian disdain for Ukraine is palpable. You can read it in many of the "disinformation comments" on this board. (Lavrov is not alone in his recounting of distorted history.) Ukraine has been an independent nation since 1990. It appears to have diligently attempted to join the Greater European community. However, the accommodations presently being given to Russia on Ukraine, by some Western European leaders, strikes many in the US as "opportunistic collaboration". This is in fact a defining moment for NATO. If Western Europe wants to be in a "middle place", it can be accomplished. The US will withdraw from NATO and TTIP will be a memory. And in conclusion, will the NYT please consider an article on Merkel and her family's post-World War II life in Germany.
3
R,
Agreed, the US out of Nato would be a good thing.
The money saved could go into schools & bridges; right here, in River City!
Agreed, the US out of Nato would be a good thing.
The money saved could go into schools & bridges; right here, in River City!
3
It is preposterous in itself to describe Russia's fears of NATO expansion a "preposterous fable of encirclement". And why, now that the Soviet collapse has occurred a quarter century ago, is NATO still even necessary? If somehow, there were still a kind of Warsaw Pact alliance that survived the Cold War, and Russia had half of South America enlisted, and was now courting Mexico to join, how upset would the United States be? Would the United States not regard that as encirclement, and respond accordingly? And again, why does the world still even need NATO, after all this time?
Besides, it is not at all difficult to imagine that the Russian speaking people of Eastern Ukraine would prefer to be united with Russia, especially when Kiev now has a leader unpopular for his economic sympathy with the same European Union which now has the people of Greece on the ropes. Let's not escalate this to an all out war---let the Russian speakers of Eastern Ukraine join Russia, and call it a day.
Besides, it is not at all difficult to imagine that the Russian speaking people of Eastern Ukraine would prefer to be united with Russia, especially when Kiev now has a leader unpopular for his economic sympathy with the same European Union which now has the people of Greece on the ropes. Let's not escalate this to an all out war---let the Russian speakers of Eastern Ukraine join Russia, and call it a day.
92
NATO is necessary precisely because of what Russia is now doing in Ukraine. Certainly Poland, Rumania and the Baltic States are very glad to be in NATO right now.
"Besides, it is not at all difficult to imagine that the Russian speaking people of Eastern Ukraine would prefer to be united with Russia, "
It's easy to imagine, but doesn't have an adequate factual support. The last independent poll prior to the war was done by Pew and founds that a majority of eastern Ukrainians (and a narrow majority of Russophones in e. Ukraine) preferred to remain part of Ukraine.
"Besides, it is not at all difficult to imagine that the Russian speaking people of Eastern Ukraine would prefer to be united with Russia, "
It's easy to imagine, but doesn't have an adequate factual support. The last independent poll prior to the war was done by Pew and founds that a majority of eastern Ukrainians (and a narrow majority of Russophones in e. Ukraine) preferred to remain part of Ukraine.
7
Isn't up to the whole of Ukraine to decide to split up or not? It is not up to Germany, the U.S., NATO, or God-forbid, Russia. Either you understand and support the concept of sovereignty or you think military might trumps national borders. And, yes I agree with your probable rebuttal: the US has invaded other other countries and violated their sovereignty. We are not without blame, but that is a poor excuse to condone Russian aggression.
3
We are just so lucky Nato didn't disband after all. Now we have a dictator banging on the doors of Europe. Give Ukraine the means to defend itself!
2
Let Putin take eastern Ukraine..He is not interested in the western half. He knows he could never control it even if the Russians were to militarily take over the entire country. Kiev has already been seduced by the allure of Europe. What we are witnessing here is realpolitik. A wink here and a nod there. The West will have to accept a Russian sphere of influence (and Russia itself for that matter) extending into Crimea and the eastern Russian speaking regions of Ukraine, all verbal bluster aside. But by forceful and credible back room discussion, we just tell Putin that that is where it all ends, and we visibly put forward NATO units throughout the Baltics, Poland, and Romania. He has no interest in having a big power confrontation, he will only test the West on the margins..
46
The Western half, having surrendered the eastern half should be immediately allowed to join the EU and NATO.
The question that would have to be asked is the Ukraine the last place Russia would subvert and invade. I don't think so Putin seems to want to rebuild the Russian Empire which is definitely not in our interest or the interest of his neighbors.
Real Politik is allowing the Ukraine to protect itself from aggression, anything else is appeasement. And the world will have to deal with this dictator somewhere else! Ukraine can handle this given the means to do so.
2
two words ... nuclear weapons.
30
Yes, the US has them. Zero chance Obama is going to nuke Russia. You can sleep easy now.
"two words ... nuclear weapons."
One word: insanity
One word: insanity
1
Nuclear weapons, despite the horror that those words conjure up, have been (and will continue to) keep the peace for over sixty years. Once Ukrain is made part of NATO, and receives its own compliment of strategic nuclear weapons (as well as antiballistic missiles), Russia will realize that there is no way for them to achieve their goal of Ukrainian/Russian reunification. Furthermore, it is the Russian oligarchy itself that will put a choker collar on Vladdy Punetang if they feel that the shirtless premier in Moscow is putting their Krystal and caviar lives at risk. I would say that even a coup is certainly not out of the question if they feel their little pit bull Vlad needs to be put down.
Roger,
No one in the West is going to die for any part of Eastern Europe.
To suggest otherwise does those nations of the the former USSR no service.
Their only realistic course is to seek the best possible terms they can with Putin.
No one in the West is going to die for any part of Eastern Europe.
To suggest otherwise does those nations of the the former USSR no service.
Their only realistic course is to seek the best possible terms they can with Putin.
4
Count me among those who find the march to arming Kiev wrong headed and potentially disastrous. No matter what we send, the Russians can and will up the ante, leading to a more vicious and serious conflict with greater loss of life. We're not going to (nuclear) war over Ukraine, Putin knows it, so let's find out what he'll settle for and go with that.
9
Arms are a possible way to go, but so are threats of arms and even the possibility or threats. There are many ways to go and they all fall short of actual arms which will escalate the problem. We must see some of these statements as part of the negotiations. Not as part of the problem. That is too partisan.
Yanukovych's own political machine turned on him after large numbers of protestors were gunned down by police and Berkut troops.
Following his sudden flight to Russia - what most would call dereliction of duty on the part of a head of state, the existing parliament of Ukraine voted in a provisional goverment, followed up with presidential and parlimentary elections that are recognized by every state.
How is this a 'facist coup'?
Following his sudden flight to Russia - what most would call dereliction of duty on the part of a head of state, the existing parliament of Ukraine voted in a provisional goverment, followed up with presidential and parlimentary elections that are recognized by every state.
How is this a 'facist coup'?
7
This article allows comments on Ukraine. Therefore. allow me to say: "What Dr. John J. Mearsheimer says below in his article today on this page." He is completely correct, and completely refutes the assumptions and prescriptions of this article by Cohen.
16
It makes little sense to escalate a military conflict with Russia. Ukraine is on Russia's doorstep, perceived "US aggression" plays into the propaganda and fear that (while oil prices are low) are the very source of Mr. Putin's power and did I mention Russia has nuclear weapons?! Russia has nuclear weapons. Are we really going to beat Russia by sending in stinger missiles? Do you see Putin going "oh no, now we have to retreat, America is too tough for us"? Sending in more weapons will only result in more death and destruction for the poor people who unfortunately live in Donetsk. As badass, righteous and amazing as we think we are here in the US there will never be peace solely on US terms in Ukraine. Our foreign policy is dominated by the corrupt industries and politicians that benefit from our non-stop war machine, witness the new American century. I thought Mr. Cohen had more sense.
13
In my original post to this column I wrote, "On PBS in particular, we hear "guests" prattle on about how this entire Ukraine dust-up is the West's fault, that the popular disgust, then rebellion, against the King of kleptocrats, Viktor Yanukovich, was furtively launched in Washington or Brussels."
This is relevant to your post.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
This is relevant to your post.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
1
while I don't buy most of the arguments in favor of arming Ukraine, there are two core issues that should be addressed before we do anything.
1. we have no treaty commitment to Ukraine. the "Budapest memorandum" was not a treaty so it was never ratified by the senate. we should have learned from the past. no administration should go off an involve the country in a conflict without a thorough debate and approval by congress. that is what the framers of the constitution had in mind when they placed the power to declare war with congress. supplying weapons will not be sufficient. as sure as night follows day, Ukraine will not be able to resist Russia with just additional weapons, so the next step is American troops.
2. This conflict is for EUROPE to solve. the western ukranians want to join Europe not the US. the US spent billions of dollars after WWII to rebuild Europe so they would be able to stand up for themselves. Germany does not want to supply the weapons. we should take the lead from them
1. we have no treaty commitment to Ukraine. the "Budapest memorandum" was not a treaty so it was never ratified by the senate. we should have learned from the past. no administration should go off an involve the country in a conflict without a thorough debate and approval by congress. that is what the framers of the constitution had in mind when they placed the power to declare war with congress. supplying weapons will not be sufficient. as sure as night follows day, Ukraine will not be able to resist Russia with just additional weapons, so the next step is American troops.
2. This conflict is for EUROPE to solve. the western ukranians want to join Europe not the US. the US spent billions of dollars after WWII to rebuild Europe so they would be able to stand up for themselves. Germany does not want to supply the weapons. we should take the lead from them
5
Not true at all. Kiev was formed by the Rus - not the Russians.
Russia as nation has had a completely distinct political evolution from Ukraine, which has historically been much closer to Poland than to Asiatic Moscow.
The descendants of the founders of Kiev still live there.
Russia as nation has had a completely distinct political evolution from Ukraine, which has historically been much closer to Poland than to Asiatic Moscow.
The descendants of the founders of Kiev still live there.
4
Who are the Russians and where do they live? As far as I can tell Russia has always been an empire. Is Scandinavia the real Russia? Is there really a Russia at all? Wasn't the Kiev Rus Viking conquerors? Maybe the military solution is to invade, conquer and dominate Russia like we did with Hawaii? Just a thought.
Roger has it right. It has been obvious for a long time that peace negotiations have only served the purpose of decoy as Putin establishes facts on the ground. For those afraid of confrontation, the Sudetenland serves as a historical reminder as to the price of appeasement and empty promises on paper. The least the west can do against this aggressor is supply weapons to the Ukrainians to defend their country before Putin becomes increasingly megalomaniacal and goes after more and more. There should be no underestimating what is at stake here.
5
Merkel speaks Russian and comes from the eastern half of Germany, once in the Russian bloc. I think Cohen brings a great deal to the Ukraine problem in a good, "gray" way, as one reader notes. To some degree, Putin is on the same side of history as other groups who have atavistic aims, whether from the Islamic jihadists to the "don't tread on me" Americans. Or gray Confederates from the South in the USA. The use of weapons first rather than last has become far too common. The Soviets were there for us against Nazis, the German bacteria in WWII. Their recent actions in Crimea, Ukraine suggest a troubling aggressive pattern that require cool responses from others.
1
Russia can easily match with offensive weapons anything that
the U.S. provides by way of defense. So what does Mr. Cohen
offer as the next step on the escalator?
the U.S. provides by way of defense. So what does Mr. Cohen
offer as the next step on the escalator?
14
well the UN charter and "tearing up" the sovereignity clause...
there is the Kosovo standard...where we carved a part out of Srbia. Of course one could say Serbia was no state after the collapse of Yugoland, but...
then there is the Bosnia standard, where when half the country clearly wants out of a state spun out of the blow up of Yugoland, that can not happen...
talking out both sides of our mouth.
What Russia has seen is a steady advance to its borders. It has drawn a line.
Forget all treaties, this is war, or not.
Isn't it time to put it that blunt and ask the people- what's your pleasure?
there is the Kosovo standard...where we carved a part out of Srbia. Of course one could say Serbia was no state after the collapse of Yugoland, but...
then there is the Bosnia standard, where when half the country clearly wants out of a state spun out of the blow up of Yugoland, that can not happen...
talking out both sides of our mouth.
What Russia has seen is a steady advance to its borders. It has drawn a line.
Forget all treaties, this is war, or not.
Isn't it time to put it that blunt and ask the people- what's your pleasure?
10
There has been a steady march to the east, toward Russia's borders, and your comment correctly recognizes this. To my mind, the most unsettling part of this whole episode has been the way Putin has lied with a straight face about Russian troops and materiel that are so verifiably in eastern Ukraine.
If the world is to have real peace, the words of major world leaders have to contain at least a semblance of truth. No world leader since Hitler has lied so blatantly and obviously since Hitler, and this bodes ill for the future.
If the world is to have real peace, the words of major world leaders have to contain at least a semblance of truth. No world leader since Hitler has lied so blatantly and obviously since Hitler, and this bodes ill for the future.
Putin's Russia is indeed long on illusion, the dream to have imperial influence at the time of people's assertion to independent thought and action...from a bully dictating verse and prose of how things ought to go, a pseudo-colonial attitude thought dead long ago. The reality of Russia's military prowess is in full display on Ukrainian territory, a muscled invasion denied by Putin and Lavrov, against all evidence...except for the russian people, fed with offfcial propaganda depicting the 'wicked' West expansion to its door, supposedly to give Ukrainians the chance for self-determination. Unfortunately, suspicions abound, as selfish interests by the West (Europe and the U.S.) are fresh enough to be remembered. Still, current ongoing diplomatic efforts ought to be the best, if not the only, alternative on the table. Meanwhile, Russia is being cornered by sanctions and by the coincident fall in its main export, gas and oil, to hopefully bring some sanity to its ambitions. Russia would do well noticing North Korea's pariah status, and pursue a more promising different avenue, join the community of nations, once again, in good standing and on the right side of history. And Putin's KGB experience of mistrust and suspicion notwithstanding.
5
Sadly the world never seems to learn.
At this point what with their monetary policies and their international appeasement stance I believe Germany and the Merkel Goverment are replaying thier Nazi past.
Russians will always be Russians and Germans will always be Germans. And I suspect that they wouldn't have it any other way.
Would we for ourselves?
At this point what with their monetary policies and their international appeasement stance I believe Germany and the Merkel Goverment are replaying thier Nazi past.
Russians will always be Russians and Germans will always be Germans. And I suspect that they wouldn't have it any other way.
Would we for ourselves?
1
You dream on, Roger. the "good guys, bad guys" approach to world affairs is always a mistake. Russia and Ukraine have one important thing in common: neither country has a tradition of democracy and neither people has true respect for democratic institutions. There is more than enough corruption to go around in both. And Putin is understandably opposed to having his neighbor cozy up to and become part of NATO (which shouldn't even exist any more---it was created to prevent the spread of totalitarian communism, which no longer exists in Europe).
11
Mr. Cohen wants peace and prosperity in the Ukraine and he's willing to kill to get it.
Sending more weapons to Kiev would be like putting out fire with gasoline. What the anti-Russian hawks propose is a sure-fire way to provoke a full-scale invasion.
The US should back off and let the chips fall where they may. If eastern Ukraine becomes an autonomous Russo-centric region, how is that a problem for us? The only possible beneficiaries of increased weaponization of Ukraine are the perpetual warmongers of our military industrial establishment.
Sending more weapons to Kiev would be like putting out fire with gasoline. What the anti-Russian hawks propose is a sure-fire way to provoke a full-scale invasion.
The US should back off and let the chips fall where they may. If eastern Ukraine becomes an autonomous Russo-centric region, how is that a problem for us? The only possible beneficiaries of increased weaponization of Ukraine are the perpetual warmongers of our military industrial establishment.
29
I agree. This situation is akin to the tension between the U.S. and the Soviet Union in 1963 when they attempted to place missiles in Cuba. That was far too uncomfortable for us and we nearly went to war over that. Now, the situation is reversed and it is the U.S. that is attempting to further encroach on Russia’s “sphere of influence.” Why? For starters, the International Monetary Fund (controlled by the U.S.) wanted the profit and economic/political control of the Ukraine through financial loans that the Ukrainian government decided to reject.
I keep reading commentators like Cohen and others, and their followers complain and worry about the “aggressiveness and ruthlessness of our adversaries,” but seldom address the aggressiveness and ruthlessness our leaders use to pursue their dreams of domination. Does anybody remember the cheering and hoopla over “Shock and Awe” in Iraq? Our government has the power to impose and punish, through economic sanctions and its military power, nearly any country in the world that resists our policies and we use it. Our military budget is larger that of the rest of the world’s nations combined and we have more military bases around the world that of any other country.
I suggest that we, to paraphrase Mathew 7:5, first remove the beam out of our own eye, and then we may see clearly to remove the speck out of our brother’s eye.
I keep reading commentators like Cohen and others, and their followers complain and worry about the “aggressiveness and ruthlessness of our adversaries,” but seldom address the aggressiveness and ruthlessness our leaders use to pursue their dreams of domination. Does anybody remember the cheering and hoopla over “Shock and Awe” in Iraq? Our government has the power to impose and punish, through economic sanctions and its military power, nearly any country in the world that resists our policies and we use it. Our military budget is larger that of the rest of the world’s nations combined and we have more military bases around the world that of any other country.
I suggest that we, to paraphrase Mathew 7:5, first remove the beam out of our own eye, and then we may see clearly to remove the speck out of our brother’s eye.
6
It's true that Ukraine "gave up more than 1,800 nuclear warheads in exchange for a bogus commitment from Russia back in 1994 to respect its sovereignty and borders". We stood idly by as Russia annexed Crimea last year! It's not right! We shouldn't let Putin bully and change other countries' borders to his liking!
But we are also in a dilemma! Putin knows that Ukraine is weak and he takes advantage of Europe's fragile economy and the lack of appetite for a deeper recession.
Nobody knows how Putin would react, if we stood by Ukraine and armed its military. The problem is that European leaders fear an all out war on our eastern rim would hurt us more than it hurt Putin.
But we are also in a dilemma! Putin knows that Ukraine is weak and he takes advantage of Europe's fragile economy and the lack of appetite for a deeper recession.
Nobody knows how Putin would react, if we stood by Ukraine and armed its military. The problem is that European leaders fear an all out war on our eastern rim would hurt us more than it hurt Putin.
3
Many have compared Putin to Stalin. There are also a lot of comparisons to Hitler. Not in 'psychotic genocidal' category (though I wouldn't put it past him if he isn't stopped), but in the 'death by a thousand cuts' category. He pushes a little here, a little there, getting bolder every time by everyone's refusal to take him seriously.
Hitler annexed Austria in 1938, followed a few months later by the Sudetenland. And what was his excuse? "I am simply demanding that the oppression of three and a half million Germans in Czechoslovakia cease and that the inalienable right to self-determination take its place."
Sound familiar?
It won't stop. Anyone who thinks that another dictator like Hitler isn't possible should check their ego at the door. The world of the 1930s didn't think a dictator like Hitler was possible. Germany was too educated, too advanced. The world had grown too small and interdependent.
So take Putin seriously. Make a formal protective alliance with Ukraine. Make it too much trouble for Putin to get what he wants. And if he gets upset? So be it. Find his breaking point.
Hitler annexed Austria in 1938, followed a few months later by the Sudetenland. And what was his excuse? "I am simply demanding that the oppression of three and a half million Germans in Czechoslovakia cease and that the inalienable right to self-determination take its place."
Sound familiar?
It won't stop. Anyone who thinks that another dictator like Hitler isn't possible should check their ego at the door. The world of the 1930s didn't think a dictator like Hitler was possible. Germany was too educated, too advanced. The world had grown too small and interdependent.
So take Putin seriously. Make a formal protective alliance with Ukraine. Make it too much trouble for Putin to get what he wants. And if he gets upset? So be it. Find his breaking point.
9
Putin is many things, most abhorrent, but he is no idiot. His manoeuvring, a word which ironically has French roots, has given France a seat at the negotiating table. Hollande is not qualified to park cars (apologies to hard-working garage attendants), let alone negotiate the future of a country. Poor Ukraine. As if the Soviet Union did not extract their tons of flesh from purges, de-kulakization, collectivization and famine, they now face partition negotiated by France. Give away your own country, again, if you must, but stay out of mine.
2
As a loyal reader of the NYT I am still waiting patiently for a different point of view expressed on the editorial pages regarding the Russia/Ukraine conflict. Instead we get continuous anti-Putin diatribes recommending a US involvement in another no win foreign policy adventure. The Europeans have a much more balanced and realistic approach. What is the US national interest in ethnic struggles in Western Ukraine? Oh, I know, if we don't stop him there Putin will be taking over New Jersey! Please. If Germany and France don't see the issue why should we??
12
The U.S. appears to have an obsessive fascination with Vladimir Putin teetering on the psychotic. Ukraine is the principal over with two machismo countries, or super-powers, depending on your psychological framework, duke it out on the world stage. Being the last satellite in the former Soviet orbit, Ukraine has always been a corrupt country hobbled along with Russian's charity monies in order to buy influence. Then, the U.S. decides to get involved, according to Putin, and sends the CIA in to rearrange the Ukrainian chemistry in Kiev.
Putin is a former KGB agent and is fascinated by everything CIA as a man who wants to know how to do put the genie back in the bottle to save his Russian empire. Some may call it paranoia, others may more aptly classify Putin's state of mind as defending nationalistic boundaries and the classical and distinctive Russian culture from the contamination of Western influence. Putin is not backing down from this power struggle and he refuses to give up his Ukrainian Russian ethnic people in the East who still pledge allegiance to Russia as the motherland.
The U.S. is placing Western Europe in the awkward position of mediator in order to broker a deal to allow Ukraine to become neutral in the face of outside monied influence. If Merkel and Hollande are successful they will allow the EU to avoid a potential fully engaged war on their doorstep. The U.S. would be wise to hold off on the tough talk and allow diplomacy to reign.
Putin is a former KGB agent and is fascinated by everything CIA as a man who wants to know how to do put the genie back in the bottle to save his Russian empire. Some may call it paranoia, others may more aptly classify Putin's state of mind as defending nationalistic boundaries and the classical and distinctive Russian culture from the contamination of Western influence. Putin is not backing down from this power struggle and he refuses to give up his Ukrainian Russian ethnic people in the East who still pledge allegiance to Russia as the motherland.
The U.S. is placing Western Europe in the awkward position of mediator in order to broker a deal to allow Ukraine to become neutral in the face of outside monied influence. If Merkel and Hollande are successful they will allow the EU to avoid a potential fully engaged war on their doorstep. The U.S. would be wise to hold off on the tough talk and allow diplomacy to reign.
3
When the West regards the current Ukraine government's desires for the nation to be free and attempts to rid itself of persistent remnants of Soviet culture, including pervasive corruption and a stultifying bureaucracy, it needs to consider the odds of success. There are those who give them at best a 50-50 chance of succeeding, forgetting for a moment the pressures Vladimir Putin is placing on them in their east.
They may fail. If they do, Russia will dominate one way or another, even without further annexations of their territory. Yet any lethal aid the West might give them will be at least a generational cause of serious friction between the West and Russia.
Roger is waxing belligerent with respect to Putin, and it's a strong temptation to do so, resulting in the lethal aid that Angela Merkel so recently rejected in near-absolute terms. But I'd suggest that we need to pause and, like Mrs. Merkel, consider what this all could mean.
Unless Ukraine can prove a credible ability to re-make itself successfully, serious involvement by the West could mean an obligation to massively subsidize a nation that exists artificially only by those subsidies -- perpetually. Sounds to me like Afghanistan. We may not be any more sophisticated in the sense of a Metternich for all our trials of the past decade and more, but we should at least have learned that nations must be capable of their own salvation before others invest in that salvation.
They may fail. If they do, Russia will dominate one way or another, even without further annexations of their territory. Yet any lethal aid the West might give them will be at least a generational cause of serious friction between the West and Russia.
Roger is waxing belligerent with respect to Putin, and it's a strong temptation to do so, resulting in the lethal aid that Angela Merkel so recently rejected in near-absolute terms. But I'd suggest that we need to pause and, like Mrs. Merkel, consider what this all could mean.
Unless Ukraine can prove a credible ability to re-make itself successfully, serious involvement by the West could mean an obligation to massively subsidize a nation that exists artificially only by those subsidies -- perpetually. Sounds to me like Afghanistan. We may not be any more sophisticated in the sense of a Metternich for all our trials of the past decade and more, but we should at least have learned that nations must be capable of their own salvation before others invest in that salvation.
5
The world is divided between neo fascist totalitarian regimes with atomic bombs such as Russia, China and North Korea and fumbling democracies in Europe and the United States. Japan moves only when China and North Korea shoot missiles over it. India replaced british colonialism with hindu natinalism which benefits only the rich and upper castes.
The western democracies are imperfect. But if the borders came down for 24 hours, three quarters of the world would move to Europe and the United States. Russia and China would be desolate except for the oligarchs and the russian and chinese communist parties and their militarizes.
The mind set of totalitarian regimes is power for the few at the top supported by savage security system.
So how do you deal with the russian invasion of the Ukraine? To begin with remember Hitler and Stalin and try to figure out what has changed. Not much. What happened? A world catastrophe.
The western democracies are imperfect. But if the borders came down for 24 hours, three quarters of the world would move to Europe and the United States. Russia and China would be desolate except for the oligarchs and the russian and chinese communist parties and their militarizes.
The mind set of totalitarian regimes is power for the few at the top supported by savage security system.
So how do you deal with the russian invasion of the Ukraine? To begin with remember Hitler and Stalin and try to figure out what has changed. Not much. What happened? A world catastrophe.
1
It is not hard to understand the desire for a strictly political/diplomatic solution, as Germany and France are pushing for now. This is the preferred method of dealing with conflicts that arose out of World War II, United Nations and modern international norms while being a cornerstone of European peace and policy.
The problem is, Putin is not playing by enlightened European rules and modern international political and diplomatic norms but rather is using Europe's and the modern worlds expectation and desire to use such legalistic and enlightened methods to push a two-prong plan.
One side of the Kremlin's mouth negotiates with the EU and Ukraine speaking of peace, ending conflicts and stability while the other side of the Kremlin's mouth is pushing Russian forces to take and occupy more Ukrainian territory.
Ukraine does not have the luxury of time to play Russia's games of doublespeak that Europe seems ready to and each passing week, Russia takes more of their country.
Providing modern western defensive military aid is and must always be for the benefit of Ukraine and Ukrainian's to defend themselves from Russia. It is Ukrainian's country under attack and it is their country being taken in bites by Russia while it is our moral and international duty to help Ukraine defend themselves.
Merkel forgets what held Russia back through the Cold War, a wall of steel at their borders that allowed the USSR to rot from within. Today Ukraine needs their wall of steel.
The problem is, Putin is not playing by enlightened European rules and modern international political and diplomatic norms but rather is using Europe's and the modern worlds expectation and desire to use such legalistic and enlightened methods to push a two-prong plan.
One side of the Kremlin's mouth negotiates with the EU and Ukraine speaking of peace, ending conflicts and stability while the other side of the Kremlin's mouth is pushing Russian forces to take and occupy more Ukrainian territory.
Ukraine does not have the luxury of time to play Russia's games of doublespeak that Europe seems ready to and each passing week, Russia takes more of their country.
Providing modern western defensive military aid is and must always be for the benefit of Ukraine and Ukrainian's to defend themselves from Russia. It is Ukrainian's country under attack and it is their country being taken in bites by Russia while it is our moral and international duty to help Ukraine defend themselves.
Merkel forgets what held Russia back through the Cold War, a wall of steel at their borders that allowed the USSR to rot from within. Today Ukraine needs their wall of steel.
6
Washington, the seat of power in the western world, is engaged in its final push to be the single dominant power on the planet, using any and all means, including war, if such be the only alternative.
Since the end of WW11, it is obvious to anyone who takes the time to look at the facts, that the end game would result in a greatly reduced Russian sphere of influence, making Russia impotent never again to be a threat of any kind.
The American engineered coup in Ukraine was one step too far, the prod that woke the fitfully slumbering bear, who now rightly is defending his home.
How will it play out ? Washington will arm the Ukrainians, Russia will cease the pretense, and move entire divisions into Ukraine, and up to the borders of their other satellites, some fool will make a terrible judgment call, and war in Europe will again be a reality.
The .01%ters are salivating at the wealth that will come from the mayhem they will once more visit on the unwitting.
Since the end of WW11, it is obvious to anyone who takes the time to look at the facts, that the end game would result in a greatly reduced Russian sphere of influence, making Russia impotent never again to be a threat of any kind.
The American engineered coup in Ukraine was one step too far, the prod that woke the fitfully slumbering bear, who now rightly is defending his home.
How will it play out ? Washington will arm the Ukrainians, Russia will cease the pretense, and move entire divisions into Ukraine, and up to the borders of their other satellites, some fool will make a terrible judgment call, and war in Europe will again be a reality.
The .01%ters are salivating at the wealth that will come from the mayhem they will once more visit on the unwitting.
9
There has been enough war in Europe, so I hope the Ukrainians still manage to let the Crimea in exchange for some Russian gas. Maybe not such a bad deal since the value of an always open, warm water, navy port, rises as the price of natural gas falls.
1
I don't think the West, at least Western Europe, has any illusions about the mediocrity and corruption of its politicians, especially for France and Great Britain. Putin has several advantages. He has the full support of his country, he is fighting to protect his kinsmen and Russia is not communist anymore. The soviet system is now in place in Brussels and whatever enthusiasm Europeans may have had for Europe lays now shattered by apparatchiks who control the curvature of bananas and pay 30 billions euros of taxpayers money as agricultural subsidies to the Prince of Monaco and the big land owners of Great Britain including the Royal Family. Not sure Europeans are ready to fight for its corrupt elites, and many would welcome Putin just to get rid of their rotten politicians.
9
Cohen is looking for open warfare. In the meantime, how much are we already covertly arming the Ukrainian army?
8
What Mr Cohen suggests is a step in the right direction but more needs to be done to apply a Realpolitik solution to the conflict with Russia. The US and NATO should do the following: 1) Permanently station substantial NATO forces in the Baltic countries. It is to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania that we owe our greatest allegiance and commitment, since they are full members of NATO. This will help to ease their fears and show Russia that there are lines it will never be able to cross. 2) Arm the Ukrainians with a plethora of defensive weapons. As suggested by Mr Cohen, this will up the cost end of Russia's cost-benefit analysis of involvement in the country. 3) Recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea. The people of Crimea overwhelmingly support being a part of the Russian state. Their wishes should be respected and, in any event, Russia will not pull out of that province under any likely future scenario. 4) Call for a free and fair UN plebiscite in contested areas of eastern Ukraine. Many easterners may vote to be a part of Russia and, if so, their wishes, too, should be respected. Also, Ukraine itself would be a far stronger, united and more secure state without some of these areas. Much of the worst corruption in the Ukraine comes from the oligarchs from the east. Better to let Russia have them. Finally, the Ukraine would be far less vulnerable to Russian meddling with fewer areas of questionable loyalty for them to get their claws into.
4
I agree. If it was so cut and dried would not the revolution of the mid 00's ( Orange?) have been maintained? Didn't the pro Western parties lose national elections?
It is my opinion that Chancellor Angela Merkel is responsible for the economic damage to the Euro countries of the European Union because of her austerity policies imposed on others.
When it comes to being against sending heavy weaponry to the Ukraine, though, I think she is absolutely right, fearing that it would lead to an extremely dangerous escalation not seen since the end of the Cold War.
When it comes to being against sending heavy weaponry to the Ukraine, though, I think she is absolutely right, fearing that it would lead to an extremely dangerous escalation not seen since the end of the Cold War.
14
"It’s time to get real over Putin. … He will not let Ukraine go." - Roger Cohen
"The West’s current Ukraine diplomacy is long on illusion and short on realism." - Roger Cohen
With lines like these one would think Mr. C. would "get it," but that doesn't appear to be the case.
Let's put it simply: Ukraine is and (so long as there is a Russia) always will be within the Russian sphere of influence. "The West" can visit, trade, and make nice with Ukraine, but it cannot encourage the Ukrainians to snarl at the Russian Bear or join NATO -- both of which we have been doing.
Putin is certainly not a nice guy, but his actions in this matter have been far more correct than have those of "the West."
"The West’s current Ukraine diplomacy is long on illusion and short on realism." - Roger Cohen
With lines like these one would think Mr. C. would "get it," but that doesn't appear to be the case.
Let's put it simply: Ukraine is and (so long as there is a Russia) always will be within the Russian sphere of influence. "The West" can visit, trade, and make nice with Ukraine, but it cannot encourage the Ukrainians to snarl at the Russian Bear or join NATO -- both of which we have been doing.
Putin is certainly not a nice guy, but his actions in this matter have been far more correct than have those of "the West."
12
If we were to supply Ukraine with anti-tank missiles and sophisticated radar and other military assistance, Russia would not back down. They would simply be more overt and abandon the fiction of Ukrainians battling Ukrainians. Those uniforms without insignias would disappear and massed Russian forces would overrun Ukraine. Then what would NATO do? What would we do? Do we really want to get into this kind of situation? Remember, all of Russia encompasses Ukraine; supply lines are very short and a few American carriers in the Mediterranean or even the Black Sea would not frighten Russia.
14
I totally concur. Only one thing will work with Putin. Firepower!
3
Just like only one thing will work on the USA. Firepower! Sometimes I think Anti Communist, anti Soviet ideology was a cover for anti Russianism.
2
Mr Cohen,
You walk the company line, admirably.
Anyone watching the events since February 20th can read that Putin does not want to be responsible for a chronically dysfunctional Ukraine.
Since April, he has consistently made two points.
1) no NATO membership for Ukraine
2) A serious autonomy for SE Ukraine within a federation.
If he had want part, or all, of Ukraine, he could have taken over any time, this last 16 months, within two weeks.
You walk the company line, admirably.
Anyone watching the events since February 20th can read that Putin does not want to be responsible for a chronically dysfunctional Ukraine.
Since April, he has consistently made two points.
1) no NATO membership for Ukraine
2) A serious autonomy for SE Ukraine within a federation.
If he had want part, or all, of Ukraine, he could have taken over any time, this last 16 months, within two weeks.
13
"Anyone watching the events since February 20th can read that Putin does not want to be responsible for a chronically dysfunctional Ukraine."
Umm.. I'd say anyone watching the events can clearly see that Putin is trying to cause a chronically dysfunctional Ukraine.
Umm.. I'd say anyone watching the events can clearly see that Putin is trying to cause a chronically dysfunctional Ukraine.
4
Takes two to tango, Brian
Kiev never had a functional moment.
You give way too much credit to Vlad.
The once devoted Neo-Nazi, Parubiy was in charge of Maidan Security. They ultra nationalists are a threat to Porochenko.
There demonstrations were shown in this paper.
Kiev never had a functional moment.
You give way too much credit to Vlad.
The once devoted Neo-Nazi, Parubiy was in charge of Maidan Security. They ultra nationalists are a threat to Porochenko.
There demonstrations were shown in this paper.
1
Ah... I see.. you're part of the 'facts are only facts if they come from Pravda or RT' gang.
No use having a true debate on the facts when the facts don't really matter to you.
No use having a true debate on the facts when the facts don't really matter to you.
1
I like how quite a few Americans and Brits use the same logic that was used before WWII. All is fine, those countries naturally belong to Germany, they have their own citizens/language speakers there. Kind of like what Putin does. If this was happening in Alaska every single one of these political experts would be yelling "bloddy murder, kill ruskies!" Don't think so?
We've been on the receiving end of your politics, we were the ones who were given away to USSR. Wasn't fun. Not to ones deported to Siberia for being too educated, for having their own thoughts. And what about population that is Russian in those areas? How about an "import" of Russians to live in Lithuania/Crimea?
Putin is a bully now and until he sees someone who is able to stand up to him he will not back down. That is it. That is the reason why Baltic states and Polish politicians, presidents tell Europe not to back down on sanctions, that is the reason we form battalions for quick response action in case green dressed aliens land in our cities.
So, please, stop pretending that everything is US/Ukraine/NATO's fault and understand that it is Russia and specifically Putin who is doing all he can (through propaganda and half of commentators on this and other pages, even more in Lithuanian news sites) to confuse you and to believe his truth.
We've been on the receiving end of your politics, we were the ones who were given away to USSR. Wasn't fun. Not to ones deported to Siberia for being too educated, for having their own thoughts. And what about population that is Russian in those areas? How about an "import" of Russians to live in Lithuania/Crimea?
Putin is a bully now and until he sees someone who is able to stand up to him he will not back down. That is it. That is the reason why Baltic states and Polish politicians, presidents tell Europe not to back down on sanctions, that is the reason we form battalions for quick response action in case green dressed aliens land in our cities.
So, please, stop pretending that everything is US/Ukraine/NATO's fault and understand that it is Russia and specifically Putin who is doing all he can (through propaganda and half of commentators on this and other pages, even more in Lithuanian news sites) to confuse you and to believe his truth.
19
Recent German history includes two wars with Russia, one of which they won (in 1917) and one of which they lost (in 1945). This helps the Germans think more realistically about what war in the Ukraine might involve.
Moreover, Angela Merkel is an intelligent woman whose personal history includes East Germany before reunification. The nature of Russian politicians is not exactly unknown to her.
I'd be inclined to go with her judgement on this.
Moreover, Angela Merkel is an intelligent woman whose personal history includes East Germany before reunification. The nature of Russian politicians is not exactly unknown to her.
I'd be inclined to go with her judgement on this.
159
They dropped out of the one in 1917!
"Today, in similar fashion, President Vladimir Putin’s Russia would be quite happy to absorb all of Ukraine, which it views as an extension of the motherland, an upstart deluded by the West into imagining independent statehood."
You forget that the people in the Ukraine voted to be closer to Russia and tried to (successfully) rid themselves of their Fascist government. We (US) forced a new Fascist government on them and they rebelled. What are your motives for such an out and out lie?
You forget that the people in the Ukraine voted to be closer to Russia and tried to (successfully) rid themselves of their Fascist government. We (US) forced a new Fascist government on them and they rebelled. What are your motives for such an out and out lie?
5
Cohen declares that Putin would take all of Ukraine if he could.
He could. He didn't. He isn't now.
Ukraine is a mess. It was a mess when Russia walked away from it, it was a much worse mess before this fighting began, and it is an unfathomable mess today that a mere end of fighting won't fix.
Russia gave up the burdens it walked away from for a reason, a reason that still applies. They were a drag that did not justify itself, and which they could not afford. That is still true.
Before the USSR broke up, the Defense and Security sectors PROPOSED getting rid of these burdens, and published those proposals for years of discussion. I read those at the time, so I'm sure. We didn't think they'd do it, but they did.
Ukraine is one of the worst cases, because of its size and the cost of a fix.
Russia was getting what it wanted, without cost. Now it stands to make a profit while getting what it wanted, as the West pays for the Ukraine gas supply that Russia had been financing to the tune of 20% of its own defense budget.
Russia might want a connecting piece to Crimea, if it doesn't cost too much, but other than that there is NO EVIDENCE except the fears of those who push us into confrontation for the idea that Russia wants to take Ukraine. As Putin already said, he could take it in two weeks, but then he'd have it.
This is shades of WMD. We must not make policy based on fears without evidence, fears hyped by those with their own agenda.
He could. He didn't. He isn't now.
Ukraine is a mess. It was a mess when Russia walked away from it, it was a much worse mess before this fighting began, and it is an unfathomable mess today that a mere end of fighting won't fix.
Russia gave up the burdens it walked away from for a reason, a reason that still applies. They were a drag that did not justify itself, and which they could not afford. That is still true.
Before the USSR broke up, the Defense and Security sectors PROPOSED getting rid of these burdens, and published those proposals for years of discussion. I read those at the time, so I'm sure. We didn't think they'd do it, but they did.
Ukraine is one of the worst cases, because of its size and the cost of a fix.
Russia was getting what it wanted, without cost. Now it stands to make a profit while getting what it wanted, as the West pays for the Ukraine gas supply that Russia had been financing to the tune of 20% of its own defense budget.
Russia might want a connecting piece to Crimea, if it doesn't cost too much, but other than that there is NO EVIDENCE except the fears of those who push us into confrontation for the idea that Russia wants to take Ukraine. As Putin already said, he could take it in two weeks, but then he'd have it.
This is shades of WMD. We must not make policy based on fears without evidence, fears hyped by those with their own agenda.
33
"Russia walked away from it"
>please explain how Russia 'walked away' from a country that declared independence from the Russian dominated USSR in 1991?
"Russia might want a connecting piece to Crimea"
>and what if the residents of Mariupol, part of your "connecting piece" you are so ready to appease the invading Russia with, don't want that? Do they matter? Should more die by GRAD rocket attack? Because Russia wants this, FROM A COUNTRY YOU KEEP SAYING THEY 'WALKED AWAY FROM', should they just be rewarded with it?
"Russia was getting what it wanted. without cost"
>The costs were the 5,000+ Russian servicemen used as cannon fodder for Putin's war. The costs were the weak sanctions imposed by the West, which did have some limited effect. The costs were being kicked out of the G8 and the recognition that Russia has become a pariah state that cannot be trusted, and that any agreement it signs is worthless.
IF Russia could take Ukraine in two weeks, how come it took them 7 months to capture one airport?
Why not help the people of Ukraine defend themselves? They don't want your troops. They need defensive weapons to stop the Russian bear. The same bear you are ready to appease and give whatever it wants no matter how many Ukrainian lives it costs
>please explain how Russia 'walked away' from a country that declared independence from the Russian dominated USSR in 1991?
"Russia might want a connecting piece to Crimea"
>and what if the residents of Mariupol, part of your "connecting piece" you are so ready to appease the invading Russia with, don't want that? Do they matter? Should more die by GRAD rocket attack? Because Russia wants this, FROM A COUNTRY YOU KEEP SAYING THEY 'WALKED AWAY FROM', should they just be rewarded with it?
"Russia was getting what it wanted. without cost"
>The costs were the 5,000+ Russian servicemen used as cannon fodder for Putin's war. The costs were the weak sanctions imposed by the West, which did have some limited effect. The costs were being kicked out of the G8 and the recognition that Russia has become a pariah state that cannot be trusted, and that any agreement it signs is worthless.
IF Russia could take Ukraine in two weeks, how come it took them 7 months to capture one airport?
Why not help the people of Ukraine defend themselves? They don't want your troops. They need defensive weapons to stop the Russian bear. The same bear you are ready to appease and give whatever it wants no matter how many Ukrainian lives it costs
5
Mark is ignoring recent history in that Putin assumed and needed Ukraine as a member of his Eurasian Economic Union. It was Putin's machinations to stop Ukraine's closer association with the EU and to join with the EEC that led to Yanukovych's backing away from his promised agreement with the EU thus causing the Maidan protests and eventual ouster after the massacre of protestor's by his forces in Feb 2014. Without Ukraine's population as a consumer base and its manufacturing sector, the EEU is an economic stillbirth which will end up as nothing more than a footnote in the history books.
The mess that Ukraine was in was also a product of Putin's policies as well - the corrupt oligarchic nature of Ukraine's political and economic life served Putin's need to keep Ukraine dependent on and attached to Russia. The large loans and discounted natural gas shipments to Ukraine were not a help to that county at all but a hinderance and furthered Putin's goals.
It is also a contradiction for Mark to say "We must not make policy based on fears without evidence, fears hyped by those with their own agenda." and later endorse the NYT Mearsheimer opinion piece. In that article, Mearsheimer is doing little more than attempting to spread hysteria about Russia's nuclear capabilities, not even attempting to deny that Putin has sent men/material into E. Ukraine or to use the discredited argument, as he did earlier in a World Affairs piece, about fascist domination of Ukraine's gov/military.
The mess that Ukraine was in was also a product of Putin's policies as well - the corrupt oligarchic nature of Ukraine's political and economic life served Putin's need to keep Ukraine dependent on and attached to Russia. The large loans and discounted natural gas shipments to Ukraine were not a help to that county at all but a hinderance and furthered Putin's goals.
It is also a contradiction for Mark to say "We must not make policy based on fears without evidence, fears hyped by those with their own agenda." and later endorse the NYT Mearsheimer opinion piece. In that article, Mearsheimer is doing little more than attempting to spread hysteria about Russia's nuclear capabilities, not even attempting to deny that Putin has sent men/material into E. Ukraine or to use the discredited argument, as he did earlier in a World Affairs piece, about fascist domination of Ukraine's gov/military.
1
Brent -- It did not take the Russian Army 7 months to take that airport. That was the rebels. If the Russian Army rolled in, it would be Georgia all over again, but worse now that they have modernized.
Why not help the Ukraine people fight Russia? Because it is a really bad idea for the US to try to fight Russia. NATO's key EU members have already refused, both UK and Germany.
Does this leave Ukraine in a tough spot? Sure. Should have thought of that before we meddled in the overthrow of the elected government. And yes, the US did meddle, and did brag about it before it went wrong. Denying it is now common, but a flat lie.
Why not help the Ukraine people fight Russia? Because it is a really bad idea for the US to try to fight Russia. NATO's key EU members have already refused, both UK and Germany.
Does this leave Ukraine in a tough spot? Sure. Should have thought of that before we meddled in the overthrow of the elected government. And yes, the US did meddle, and did brag about it before it went wrong. Denying it is now common, but a flat lie.
3
Colonel Putin only wants to reverse greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th Century by restoring the borders of the old Russian Empire to make it safe from western aggression. Why would anyone oppose that except for a few poles, Ukrainians and Balts -- totally unreasonable.
3
This is a dangerous fantasy. If you compare the two, Putin's actions now are much more modest than those of Kennedy who brought the world to the brink of nuclear war over Cuba.
The West committed slow aggression against Russia through a gradual expansion of NATO and is now pretending that Putin is the aggressor. This is a very dangerous way to think as it will lead us directly into war.
The West committed slow aggression against Russia through a gradual expansion of NATO and is now pretending that Putin is the aggressor. This is a very dangerous way to think as it will lead us directly into war.
2
This is a nice little piece of Western delusional propaganda. Mr. Cohen buys the fact that the Right Front activity on Maidan Square was not orchestrated by the West, or that the people of Crimea, would not choose to be in Russia rather than the Ukraine (Khrushchev put them there remember), or that the million refugees from the Eastern provinces aren't fleeing for safety in Russia rather than the Western Ukraine, or that the Ukrainian army hasn't inflicted more than 5000 civilian casualties while bombarding Donetsk and other towns into rubble. If this military holocaust were being perpetrated on Kiev and the Western Ukraine by Yanukovich and the military when he controlled it, the West would be howling about genocide. This is delusional propaganda for the people fed a line to whip up war fever in the West. We will probably arm Kiev and thereby accelerate the conflict with the Eastern provinces and Russia. A political settlement is needed. If they up the ante there will be much more blood.
38
It was fitting that they met in Munich. All that was missing was for Merkel and Holland to hold up a piece of paper claiming peace in our time.
1
I could hardly find one claim in Roger Cohen's piece that could be supported by evidence: that Russia wants to take over the entire Ukraine; that President Yanukovych was a Russian puppet (i.e. unelected); that the U.S. had nothing to do with his removal; that the U.S. (and NATO) have not been trying to surround Russia.
Public Editor: take note. In their effort to achieve balance, the Times has paired Mr. Cohen with Prof. John Mearsheimer:There is no contest.
Public Editor: take note. In their effort to achieve balance, the Times has paired Mr. Cohen with Prof. John Mearsheimer:There is no contest.
15
World to read.
The hardest thing for an American columnist is to speak the truth because there has been no freedom of speech and democracy in America since 1973.
Anybody whose hundreds of submissions, op-eds and letters were trashed since the 9/11 knows it perfectly well. What was written in those discarded analyses? The repetitive predictions that if America stayed on the wrong course, we would end up exactly in the current situation.
Why was 1973 such a critical year?
That’s when the US government decided to support one side in the Israeli-Arab war and ever since we have been in permanent conflict with the Muslim world. Not that I have anything nice to say about the Muslim misinterpretations of the Koran, a Sunni-Shiite schism, the Hadiths and the sharia. I am just saying that without our chronic mistakes they would fight each other, not us.
What is wrong regarding our approach to Ukraine?
Strategically, the West is responsible because the conflict was absolutely preventable. Ukraine is a specific case because it borders Russia. It means it should have been a package deal. Either both countries could have been invited to join the NATO or they should be left as-is.
The point is that if we don’t change our strategy, we will end up in multi-decade conflict with Russia like we are in the confrontation with the Muslim world.
The question is whether the NYT editors will give this analysis a prominent place to warn the fellow Americans or just trash it as many times before...
Anybody whose hundreds of submissions, op-eds and letters were trashed since the 9/11 knows it perfectly well. What was written in those discarded analyses? The repetitive predictions that if America stayed on the wrong course, we would end up exactly in the current situation.
Why was 1973 such a critical year?
That’s when the US government decided to support one side in the Israeli-Arab war and ever since we have been in permanent conflict with the Muslim world. Not that I have anything nice to say about the Muslim misinterpretations of the Koran, a Sunni-Shiite schism, the Hadiths and the sharia. I am just saying that without our chronic mistakes they would fight each other, not us.
What is wrong regarding our approach to Ukraine?
Strategically, the West is responsible because the conflict was absolutely preventable. Ukraine is a specific case because it borders Russia. It means it should have been a package deal. Either both countries could have been invited to join the NATO or they should be left as-is.
The point is that if we don’t change our strategy, we will end up in multi-decade conflict with Russia like we are in the confrontation with the Muslim world.
The question is whether the NYT editors will give this analysis a prominent place to warn the fellow Americans or just trash it as many times before...
9
What I don't understand is this; if Russia has invaded Eastern Ukraine why have we not seen the pictures on tv ? In this age of instant information and where US satellites can pick up items as small as a €2 coin, why have we no satellite pictures of Russian armoured forces crossing the border into Eastern Ukraine ? The fact is we haven't. The best the Kiev can do is produce "passports" of "Russian soldiers" but they are not prepared to give copies of these to the Russians.
As a European, I trust the Russians more than I do the Americans. The US is involved in wars all over the world, some of which are "covert operations". Russia is not. Russia has legitimate interests in Ukraine, which is on their border whereas it is thousands of miles from the US. Who gave the US the right to interfere as they are, certainly not the UN.
As a final point I would say "remember the Iraq invasion in 2003". What good did that do ?
As a European, I trust the Russians more than I do the Americans. The US is involved in wars all over the world, some of which are "covert operations". Russia is not. Russia has legitimate interests in Ukraine, which is on their border whereas it is thousands of miles from the US. Who gave the US the right to interfere as they are, certainly not the UN.
As a final point I would say "remember the Iraq invasion in 2003". What good did that do ?
17
"What I don't understand is this; if Russia has invaded Eastern Ukraine why have we not seen the pictures on tv?"
Here's a possibility: Because Russia HASN'T invaded Eastern Ukraine.
If a media source repeats an allegation over and over and over, pretty soon readers and viewers just assume it must be undisputed fact. Surely someone wouldn't just make it up merely because it would help his case if it were true.
Would he?
Here's a possibility: Because Russia HASN'T invaded Eastern Ukraine.
If a media source repeats an allegation over and over and over, pretty soon readers and viewers just assume it must be undisputed fact. Surely someone wouldn't just make it up merely because it would help his case if it were true.
Would he?
3
So the families of those Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine were just making it up?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/19/russia-official-silence-for...
NATO did produce satellite pictures. If you want to argue what they prove, that's one thing, but the pictures are out there. One can also question your apparent assumption that such photos would have to consist of troops carrying signs saying "I am from Russia" for them to be true.
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_112193.htm
The OSCE has also made reports of Russian troops going into Ukraine.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/19/russia-official-silence-for...
NATO did produce satellite pictures. If you want to argue what they prove, that's one thing, but the pictures are out there. One can also question your apparent assumption that such photos would have to consist of troops carrying signs saying "I am from Russia" for them to be true.
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_112193.htm
The OSCE has also made reports of Russian troops going into Ukraine.
1
This is unfortunate that Mr. Cohen does not believe in a peaceful solution, based on political negotiations, on a strong economical pressure (like the sanctions) on Russia, and on mutual concessions.
The present Ukrainian government should modify its political stances considerably as well. It began its work with an extremely wrong, hostile law on the Ukrainian minorities, including millions of ethnic Russians. Now it is high time to show some generosity toward the minorities, offering autonomies and using their languages as a second official language where they live.
The present Ukrainian government should modify its political stances considerably as well. It began its work with an extremely wrong, hostile law on the Ukrainian minorities, including millions of ethnic Russians. Now it is high time to show some generosity toward the minorities, offering autonomies and using their languages as a second official language where they live.
11
At this very moment (4:45am PST), the Russian Federation is flying combat aircraft over Ukraine attacking Ukrainian forces. And people are worried about "escalating the conflict" by giving military aid to Ukraine !
3
Mr Cohen is in error on several points.
The USSR -- Stalin -- did indeed wish a unified Germany after WW2. This offer, made several times, was rejected by the West.
The Crimea is not a part of historic Ukraine. It was added to the Ukrainian SSR by Khrushchev in 1954. Russians are by far the largest ethnic group.
Since 1991 the Ukrainian government has refused to make Russian an official language of Ukraine, even though about half the population spoke it as their native language, and that this is normal practice in the rest of Europe.
During WW2 Ukrainian collaborators helped the Nazis in the Holocaust and murdered about 100,000 Poles (the Volhynian massacres). Many who fled West with the Germans ended up in the USA where they were supported by the CIA for decades. The US government knew of their crimes.
These fascist forces have become very powerful in independent Ukraine. Ukraine is the only country in Europe where Nazi collaborators and mass murderers -- Stepand Bandera and his Ukrainian Nationalist Organization -- are officially honored with monuments, in street names, and in history books.
C
The USSR -- Stalin -- did indeed wish a unified Germany after WW2. This offer, made several times, was rejected by the West.
The Crimea is not a part of historic Ukraine. It was added to the Ukrainian SSR by Khrushchev in 1954. Russians are by far the largest ethnic group.
Since 1991 the Ukrainian government has refused to make Russian an official language of Ukraine, even though about half the population spoke it as their native language, and that this is normal practice in the rest of Europe.
During WW2 Ukrainian collaborators helped the Nazis in the Holocaust and murdered about 100,000 Poles (the Volhynian massacres). Many who fled West with the Germans ended up in the USA where they were supported by the CIA for decades. The US government knew of their crimes.
These fascist forces have become very powerful in independent Ukraine. Ukraine is the only country in Europe where Nazi collaborators and mass murderers -- Stepand Bandera and his Ukrainian Nationalist Organization -- are officially honored with monuments, in street names, and in history books.
C
34
"The USSR -- Stalin -- did indeed wish a unified Germany after WW2. This offer, made several times, was rejected by the West."
Yes, because his proposal would have produced a Germany that was all East Germany. Stalin wanted it all, but settled for the part he made East Germany until recently.
Yes, because his proposal would have produced a Germany that was all East Germany. Stalin wanted it all, but settled for the part he made East Germany until recently.
2
Putin needs to get his nose blodied. The Ukranians cannot do this w/o effective military assistance. Relative to this assistance, there has been ongoing controversy here at home surrounding the retirement of the A-10 Warthog. The A-10 is a cold war weapons system whose sole purpose was to turn Soviet tanks into smoldering piles of scrap metal should an invasion of Western Europe
materialized.
The Pentagon believes the A-10 is a relic of the past which is no longer relevant to today's battlefield. If the Pentagon no longer wants them, I'm sure the Ukranian military would be elated to have a couple of A-10 squadrons to turn Russian tanks and armored vehicles into "smoldering piles of scrap metal"
materialized.
The Pentagon believes the A-10 is a relic of the past which is no longer relevant to today's battlefield. If the Pentagon no longer wants them, I'm sure the Ukranian military would be elated to have a couple of A-10 squadrons to turn Russian tanks and armored vehicles into "smoldering piles of scrap metal"
2
I think Putin sees it differently. The way he sees it is that the West breaks countries to control and grab resources while invoking democracy. And if we can do it then he can do it too.
9
Putin is daring the GOP Neocons to take over in 2016. Unfortunately this will become a huge political football in the US.
GOP may find out there is very little desire for another war over Ukraine.
GOP may find out there is very little desire for another war over Ukraine.
2
By all means, let's send lethal aid to the Ukrainian separatists. What does it matter if this embroils the US in yet another confrontation that, given the right set of unforeseeable events, will produce a war that nobody in this country outside of the chickenhawks like Cohen is willing to fight.
Let's launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran! Let's gather a huge army and begin hostilities again in an Iraq that our own misguided military adventurism has turned into failed states. Let's fight everywhere and anywhere on the globe where we consider some kind of international wrong to have been committed. After all, in our sophisticated understanding of history, we Americans are the world's best judges of what should be done.
Endless war fed by delusions about American power and righteous exceptionalism. Sounds an awful lot like what Hitler convinced the German people was in their best and enduring interest.
If this article had been signed by Dick Cheney, would anyone have questioned its authorship?
Let's launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran! Let's gather a huge army and begin hostilities again in an Iraq that our own misguided military adventurism has turned into failed states. Let's fight everywhere and anywhere on the globe where we consider some kind of international wrong to have been committed. After all, in our sophisticated understanding of history, we Americans are the world's best judges of what should be done.
Endless war fed by delusions about American power and righteous exceptionalism. Sounds an awful lot like what Hitler convinced the German people was in their best and enduring interest.
If this article had been signed by Dick Cheney, would anyone have questioned its authorship?
37
I won't fight nor will my children or grandchildren, and I like a just cause- perhaps the last "good war" was the republican side in the Spanish Civil War 1936-39.
All sentient persons know that WW2 was won in the east. The USSR lost 25 million dead. The US 286,000. US arms and money Russian blood.
The siege of Sevastopol in the Crimean War was one of Russia's great lost battles. Ukraine only by quirk ended up with possrssion of Crimea.
Nato should have been disbanded at the demise of the USSR. Instead it continued hinters Russia as prey and foolishly expanded. The saber rattling has opened my eyes to the grotesque American imperialism even more than the decades of provocations and wars in the ME and the treasonous attachment to Israel.
All sentient persons know that WW2 was won in the east. The USSR lost 25 million dead. The US 286,000. US arms and money Russian blood.
The siege of Sevastopol in the Crimean War was one of Russia's great lost battles. Ukraine only by quirk ended up with possrssion of Crimea.
Nato should have been disbanded at the demise of the USSR. Instead it continued hinters Russia as prey and foolishly expanded. The saber rattling has opened my eyes to the grotesque American imperialism even more than the decades of provocations and wars in the ME and the treasonous attachment to Israel.
The precedent of carving out parts of Ukraine is not necessarily catastrophic for the operation of international law in Europe. Russia’s annexation of Crimea was not, as is often claimed, the first attempt since 1945 to move European borders by military force. Borders have been forcibly changed in the breakup of Yugoslavia, the Turkish invasion of Northern Cyprus. And then there was the breakup of the Soviet Union itself that gave birth to Ukraine just 20 years ago.
I think that behind all this handwringing in the West is a simple amazement that Russia can act to protect what it sees as its vital interests, despite being hit repeatedly with the stick of sanctions. As the US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power said, "what should we do to make Russia listen?" Make Russia listen? Russia has been listening. But it also wants to be heard. It has been saying for years that it views NATO expansion to Ukraine as an unacceptable national security threat. The West went ahead and supported a regime change in Kiev. The new government was virulently anti-Russian from the start.. That made expansion of NATO to Ukraine only a matter of time. In response, Russia has acted to remove that threat. And it will keep going until the threat is eliminated.
I think that behind all this handwringing in the West is a simple amazement that Russia can act to protect what it sees as its vital interests, despite being hit repeatedly with the stick of sanctions. As the US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power said, "what should we do to make Russia listen?" Make Russia listen? Russia has been listening. But it also wants to be heard. It has been saying for years that it views NATO expansion to Ukraine as an unacceptable national security threat. The West went ahead and supported a regime change in Kiev. The new government was virulently anti-Russian from the start.. That made expansion of NATO to Ukraine only a matter of time. In response, Russia has acted to remove that threat. And it will keep going until the threat is eliminated.
12
The comparsions arent apt. No country outside of Turkey recognizes the soi-disant "Republic of Northern Cyprus" while the breakup of the Soviet Union didn't involve one country trying to forcibly redraw the borders of another. The Yugoslavia case involve dealing with Serbian acts of aggression and ethnic cleansing (the recent World Court acquitted Serbia of genocide, not ethnic cleansing) and even there, it was Serbia that attempt to redraw the borders of the consituent republics after the break-up of Yugoslavia.
NATO membership for Ukraine wasn't in the offing, although, ironically, the Russian seizure of Ukrainian territory may make that a reality. The government was not "virulently" anti-Russia, it simply chose a deal with the EU over one with Russia.
NATO membership for Ukraine wasn't in the offing, although, ironically, the Russian seizure of Ukrainian territory may make that a reality. The government was not "virulently" anti-Russia, it simply chose a deal with the EU over one with Russia.
4
"Russia’s annexation of Crimea was not, as is often claimed, the first attempt since 1945 to move European borders by military force."
By force? Was there not a referendum? How many shots were fired?
The West did not accept the referendum but when has the West ever accepted the results of an election whose outcome they did not like?
By force? Was there not a referendum? How many shots were fired?
The West did not accept the referendum but when has the West ever accepted the results of an election whose outcome they did not like?
1
@R36
Considering that the "referendum" took place after Russian forces broke out of their bases and seized the territory, "by force" is an appropriate phrase.
Considering that the "referendum" took place after Russian forces broke out of their bases and seized the territory, "by force" is an appropriate phrase.
1
Hoping John J Mearsheimer's argument wins the day. Collaborating to save the economy of a neutral Ukraine would be ideal. We do not need another failing Democracy's corrupt government as our dependent. We don't have to let Putin "swallow that porcupine", but if we can get Putin to cooperate and stop the military assault there, the lives of the people in that part of the world could become peaceful again. The alternative is CRAZY!
15
"There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones." Understands and presumably speaks.
Which brings me to my point. If we stipulate that Putin is the embodiment of Satan let loose on an innocent earth by dark forces lurking in the Russian subcontinent, we unfortunately have not gotten any closer to understanding what will work.
The Washington Elite were, through thick and thin, agreed that the Communist regime in North Vietnam was the embodiment of... etc. However, their strategy for ridding the earth of this menace didn't work.
Mr. Cohen, convince me that pouring arms, and the "advisers" that will inevitably go with them, will work. I will even let you define what "work" means. Define it and then convince me that your proposals will work.
Bloviation does not work.
Which brings me to my point. If we stipulate that Putin is the embodiment of Satan let loose on an innocent earth by dark forces lurking in the Russian subcontinent, we unfortunately have not gotten any closer to understanding what will work.
The Washington Elite were, through thick and thin, agreed that the Communist regime in North Vietnam was the embodiment of... etc. However, their strategy for ridding the earth of this menace didn't work.
Mr. Cohen, convince me that pouring arms, and the "advisers" that will inevitably go with them, will work. I will even let you define what "work" means. Define it and then convince me that your proposals will work.
Bloviation does not work.
19
Your analysis is every bit as distorted as Lavrov's. There is a very real ethnic confict taking place in Ukraine. Putin's view is that the West is to blame. Your view is that Putin is to blame. This ignores the conflict's deep roots and makes a peaceful settlement that much more elusive.
Like Lavrov, you should brush up on your math.
Like Lavrov, you should brush up on your math.
82
Yes, Mr. Cohen naturally thinks that the Palestinians are angling for a land-grab from the Israelis and the US should never let that happen.
An important aspect of your analysis is that there are hundreds of ethnic conflicts smoldering and waiting to burst into flame. We need to develop deeper understandings about how to work with these conflicts.
As world population growth presses groups into tighter spaces a few preventive measures will greatly help.
As world population growth presses groups into tighter spaces a few preventive measures will greatly help.
Ethic conflict - really? You mean 70% Russian-speaking Ukrainians against 30% Russian-speaking Ukrainians, or the other way around?
Maiden was about installing democracy and corruption, the present government is not change but a continuation of previous kleptocrats.
Don't forget 'Yats' and Poroshenko were ministers before Maiden.
The trouble is, the USA always start off on the wrong foot.
Look at any conflict over the last 50 years, the USA never supported the forces for good, 99 times out of a 100 they created chaos and then left.
They invariably help the thugs and gangs lurking in the background.
They have done this in Syria when the secular Assad opposition was banned from joining the 'friends of Syria' effectively cutting off the money tap.
By doing so, it turns out they either supported the creation, or turned a 'blind eye' to the formation of ISIL.
They did the same when they bombed Libya back to the stone age again supporting criminal gangs and religious fanatics, instead of pursuing negotiations
Over Iraq, again its a bl**dy mess.
This discussion over arming the Kiev army, which one?
The Ukrainian army, or rather the fighting section is composed largely of private militia's. these far right extremists groups do not want peace.
They are on a semi religious mission for a greater Ukraine (look up Azov, Pravy sektor on the web). These militia's are a new ISil in the making, they form the best equipped battalions of the combined Kiev military.
Which ever way you look at it, a new ISIL in the making.
Putin will not bring peace neither will the USA
Don't forget 'Yats' and Poroshenko were ministers before Maiden.
The trouble is, the USA always start off on the wrong foot.
Look at any conflict over the last 50 years, the USA never supported the forces for good, 99 times out of a 100 they created chaos and then left.
They invariably help the thugs and gangs lurking in the background.
They have done this in Syria when the secular Assad opposition was banned from joining the 'friends of Syria' effectively cutting off the money tap.
By doing so, it turns out they either supported the creation, or turned a 'blind eye' to the formation of ISIL.
They did the same when they bombed Libya back to the stone age again supporting criminal gangs and religious fanatics, instead of pursuing negotiations
Over Iraq, again its a bl**dy mess.
This discussion over arming the Kiev army, which one?
The Ukrainian army, or rather the fighting section is composed largely of private militia's. these far right extremists groups do not want peace.
They are on a semi religious mission for a greater Ukraine (look up Azov, Pravy sektor on the web). These militia's are a new ISil in the making, they form the best equipped battalions of the combined Kiev military.
Which ever way you look at it, a new ISIL in the making.
Putin will not bring peace neither will the USA
10
"By doing so, it turns out they either supported the creation, or turned a 'blind eye' to the formation of ISIL."
I usually go much further than this simply because evidence of ISIS recruitment and faily sophisticated training preceded the evens. No one can deny the training camps in East Jordan managed by the CIA and Pentegon. No one can really dispute the role of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey in bring the situation in Syria to its boiling point.
That Assad is still around and fighting was a big surprise to all conspirators. Friend of Syria, yeah right. With friends like these.....
I usually go much further than this simply because evidence of ISIS recruitment and faily sophisticated training preceded the evens. No one can deny the training camps in East Jordan managed by the CIA and Pentegon. No one can really dispute the role of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey in bring the situation in Syria to its boiling point.
That Assad is still around and fighting was a big surprise to all conspirators. Friend of Syria, yeah right. With friends like these.....
2
Let slip the dogs of war? Is there anyone more fervent than a convert?
Putin is not a threat of the world, other than in the doddering imagination of McCain, or the fervid mind of Cohen et al. I feel sorrow for the people of the Ukraine region. War is never pleasant. So why risk a bigger conflagration? And anyone mentioning Chamberlain knows nothing of contemporary affairs or of history.
Putin is not a threat of the world, other than in the doddering imagination of McCain, or the fervid mind of Cohen et al. I feel sorrow for the people of the Ukraine region. War is never pleasant. So why risk a bigger conflagration? And anyone mentioning Chamberlain knows nothing of contemporary affairs or of history.
15
So Vladimir Putin still sees the Ukraine as part of the old Soviet Union which he thinks has been corrupted by the evil West into declaring an independent state. Gee, this story sounds oddly familiar now doesn't it? I know exactly what the UN will do--absolutely nothing. There will be no whiny hand wringing over Russia ignoring any violations of the UN charter. There will be no calls for boycotts. Russia also has lots of nukes and I don't hear anyone complaining about the need for Russia to dismantle its nukes posthaste in the name of World Peace. Russia can dream about becoming "Greater Russia" again and the response will be silence. I guess I Russia doesn't need a babysitter because it knows everyone will rush to appease its temper tantrums.
2
Even timid, apologetic, Canada has seen through this tyrant's wall of lies. The day Ukraine was invaded, our Prime Minister, Stephen Harper revoked all travel visa's issued to Russians and set them home -- even a hockey team. When that happens in Canada, you know we're serious. Speaking of serious, were are the usual throngs of commenters with their righteous indignation? Putin sure gets lots of reader attention when he says anything about sexual preferences. Why does this get a NYT yawn?
11
Wow!
He's right. What are we doing here. We're just going to let a thug conquer another country and annex its land in a completely unprovoked action.
It's not like Ukraine attacked Russia to kill all its people and take all its land like say...hmmm...all the Arab nations encircling Israel. But of course Israel's annex territories have never been internationally recognized.
He's right. What are we doing here. We're just going to let a thug conquer another country and annex its land in a completely unprovoked action.
It's not like Ukraine attacked Russia to kill all its people and take all its land like say...hmmm...all the Arab nations encircling Israel. But of course Israel's annex territories have never been internationally recognized.
2
Has it only been 13 years since the drums of war pushed us into Iraq? And now, the next destination: Ukraine. Again, we are promised cheap, easy, nearly risk-free.
But before we jump into this latest adventure, answer me this: when Russia responds to our "defensive aid" with a full-blown invasion and annexes Ukraine, will we: a) walk away and pretend it never happened; or b) get into the war ourselves, send US troops, spend trillions of dollars, and reinstate the draft? There is no in-between.
If we aren't willing to spend trillions and draft our children to fight, kill, and die in Eastern Europe, let's not get started. This is Europe's war, not ours.
But before we jump into this latest adventure, answer me this: when Russia responds to our "defensive aid" with a full-blown invasion and annexes Ukraine, will we: a) walk away and pretend it never happened; or b) get into the war ourselves, send US troops, spend trillions of dollars, and reinstate the draft? There is no in-between.
If we aren't willing to spend trillions and draft our children to fight, kill, and die in Eastern Europe, let's not get started. This is Europe's war, not ours.
43
Lots of "in-between's" but we call that process "diplomacy."
1
Anything the US has touched over the last 20 years has turned into a bloodbath for the locals. How can one be so blind to history, when the record is so blatantly poor?
2
Mr. Cohen rather liked the idea of destroying Iraq in order to promote democracy by regime change. Think of him as an American Trotskyite. Neocons are in love with revolution by force of arms. They are the true believers in justification by violence. Most unfortunately for the free world, they are currently calling the tune in Washington, and God knows they have the media resources to fool most of us into compliance with their plans.
1
The disdain for Russia is simply astonishing and makes understanding what the United States has been attempting for years, which is the ringing of Russia with NATO countries and NATO missiles aimed at Russia. There is no actual analysis here simply name-calling and a show of contempt, masking a push to turn a sad new Cold War to a hot war.
Analysts who have pushed America to needless and strategically harmful war repeatedly for years are now pushing for war indirectly or even directly with Russia.
Sadness and madness.
Analysts who have pushed America to needless and strategically harmful war repeatedly for years are now pushing for war indirectly or even directly with Russia.
Sadness and madness.
217
Correcting:
The disdain for Russia is simply astonishing and makes understanding what the United States has been attempting for years, which is the ringing of Russia with NATO countries and NATO missiles aimed at Russia, impossible. There is no actual analysis here simply name-calling and a show of contempt, masking a push to turn a new Cold War we have created to a hot war.
Analysts who have pushed America to needless and strategically harmful war repeatedly for years are now pushing for war indirectly or even directly with Russia.
Sadness and madness.
The disdain for Russia is simply astonishing and makes understanding what the United States has been attempting for years, which is the ringing of Russia with NATO countries and NATO missiles aimed at Russia, impossible. There is no actual analysis here simply name-calling and a show of contempt, masking a push to turn a new Cold War we have created to a hot war.
Analysts who have pushed America to needless and strategically harmful war repeatedly for years are now pushing for war indirectly or even directly with Russia.
Sadness and madness.
14
Do you think it is NATO's desire to invade Russia? To the contrary, given Russia's (Soviet Union) history of imposing misery on much of the world, it is a counterbalance. No more, no less. Putin's actions are a perfect example of this. Watch the recent Frontline expose on Putin and you will come away with different feelings.
4
There is no way for "NATO to ring Russia with NATO member countries", simply because Russia is a huge country spanning 11 time zones, and no one has invited the countries neighboring it in the East or South to join NATO. What is happening instead is that all the Eastern European countries that were under the Russian boot for 50 years, experiencing repression and poverty, want to be part of a better bloc, and to be defended against the violent neighbor to the East. These countries have a sovereign right to seek defense alliances that fit their interests.
7
Anti Semitic fascism is part if the Ukraine government. It is dishonest and soviet like to blame Putin for this.
Now Cohen, go fight in Ukraine. I ain't.
While fighting in Ukraine figure out how the U.S. invades Syria and redraws borders in Iraq while placing Israel's land theft above all its own national interests and defending the integrity of borders Kerry was just mindlessly yammering on about. Duh.
This stuff isn't complicated, though incompetence and dishonesty make it seem so. The Ukraine mess is the gift of incompetence and no foreign policy.
Now Cohen, go fight in Ukraine. I ain't.
While fighting in Ukraine figure out how the U.S. invades Syria and redraws borders in Iraq while placing Israel's land theft above all its own national interests and defending the integrity of borders Kerry was just mindlessly yammering on about. Duh.
This stuff isn't complicated, though incompetence and dishonesty make it seem so. The Ukraine mess is the gift of incompetence and no foreign policy.
74
Query: sorry, the antisemitic past is a serious public discussion issue where I live, I cannot let your statement on "Anti Semitic fascism is part [of] the Ukraine government" without comment.
Just after Maidan I have visited a webpage (on YT) of one of Ukrainian Jewish organisations. It contained a report/statement that during and after Maidan movement there was no rise in antisemitic incidents in Ukraine. One of the comments (by an anti-Maidan visitor) to this statement was "them Jews always lie".
I think this accurately illustrates the issue of the campaign accusing current (Maidan derived) Kiev government of antisemitism and/or fascism.
Just after Maidan I have visited a webpage (on YT) of one of Ukrainian Jewish organisations. It contained a report/statement that during and after Maidan movement there was no rise in antisemitic incidents in Ukraine. One of the comments (by an anti-Maidan visitor) to this statement was "them Jews always lie".
I think this accurately illustrates the issue of the campaign accusing current (Maidan derived) Kiev government of antisemitism and/or fascism.
8
Russia is way more anti Semitic than Ukraine- way more.. just ask all of those who fled from there in the last 50 years.
2
The Russians have vivid memories of what Stinger missiles did to them in Afghanistan. Stingers and Javelin anti-tank missiles should be going into Ukraine now. Just lie about doing so, since Putin lies about everything.
Have Putin and Lavrov considered the costs of rebuilding the Dombas after they destroyed it? What does rebuilding a city like Donetsk cost, along with the lives of Dombas citizens?
Have Putin and Lavrov considered the costs of rebuilding the Dombas after they destroyed it? What does rebuilding a city like Donetsk cost, along with the lives of Dombas citizens?
13
The Russians' vivid memories are not as vivid as ours. We are still in the process of losing in Afghanistan. They already did that.
@bob h - what about Putin's bombings in Chechnya? He has been bullying the Caucuses and the U.S. never made a sound. How is Ukraine different than this Muslim region in importance to the world?
1
bob h,
We are just as right on Ukraine as we were funding the Mujahideen.
It is so ironic that you would use that example.
We are just as right on Ukraine as we were funding the Mujahideen.
It is so ironic that you would use that example.
Putin is a typical Russian thug who has long ago restarted the Cold War.
The liberals cannot and do not want to believe this.
If the West does not stop him, his aggression will expand.
The liberals cannot and do not want to believe this.
If the West does not stop him, his aggression will expand.
19
The goal of United States Foreign Policy is to drive a permanent wedge between Europe and Russia, and then to open up a Russian free corridor from the Balkans, through the Central Asian Plain, to the borders of India and China, for an American Dominated system of gas pipeline to exploding Asian Economies.
This Russian free corridor will allow the United States to continue to act as the reserve currency to the world denominated in dollars, and subordinate Europe to the will of Washington throughout the duration of this Century. This is what has been meant by the notion of a New American Century which had been embraced by Dick Cheney and his neocon henchmen.
This Russian free corridor will allow the United States to continue to act as the reserve currency to the world denominated in dollars, and subordinate Europe to the will of Washington throughout the duration of this Century. This is what has been meant by the notion of a New American Century which had been embraced by Dick Cheney and his neocon henchmen.
1
By "liberals", are you referring to Germany's Angela Merkel?
1
You must be a Russian shill.
No one in the US has ever seriously even discussed, much less proposed, such outrageous ideas!
No one in the US has ever seriously even discussed, much less proposed, such outrageous ideas!
3
Washington, and by extension the NY Times, apparently think that Vladimir Putin is stupid.
Why on Earth would Russia "move west" and attempt to annex pro-Western provinces that feel antipathy to Russia and to him?
Eastern provinces, with affinity for Russia and reviled by Kiev, are under attack from the West, and the U.S. is so dead-set on war with Russia it will not grant autonomy to Eastern Ukraine and call it a day.
Washington always blames its aggression on soneone else, and its story, on calm inspection, is always risible.
Why on Earth would Russia "move west" and attempt to annex pro-Western provinces that feel antipathy to Russia and to him?
Eastern provinces, with affinity for Russia and reviled by Kiev, are under attack from the West, and the U.S. is so dead-set on war with Russia it will not grant autonomy to Eastern Ukraine and call it a day.
Washington always blames its aggression on soneone else, and its story, on calm inspection, is always risible.
110
It is essential to the United States that Russia never be recognized by Europe as the integral part of Europe which it surely is. Russia is the fossil fuel powerhouse, which if Europe were to wise up and integrate formally into the European System, could trump all other Economic Arrangements throughout the world. The United States will provoke a war before we will allow a European visa a vis Russian rapprochement.
The goal of United States Foreign Policy is to drive a permanent wedge between Europe and Russia, and then to open up a Russian free corridor from the Balkans, through the Central Asian Plain, to the borders of India and China, for an American Dominated system of gas pipeline to exploding Asian Economies.
This Russian free corridor will allow the United States to continue to act as the reserve currency to the world denominated in dollars, and subordinate Europe the will of Washington throughout the duration of this Century. This is what has been meant by the notion of a New American Century which had been embraced by Dick Cheney and his neocon henchmen.
With the consolidation of the Arch of Conflict in American Hands, world domination will have been completed by the United States. It will be able to be said by history that with this coup America had gone Roman.
There is however, one major problem for those of us who rather enjoy this Republic as a Republic. As Tony Judt opened before his recent untimely death: "For an Empire to rise, a Republic must fall."
The goal of United States Foreign Policy is to drive a permanent wedge between Europe and Russia, and then to open up a Russian free corridor from the Balkans, through the Central Asian Plain, to the borders of India and China, for an American Dominated system of gas pipeline to exploding Asian Economies.
This Russian free corridor will allow the United States to continue to act as the reserve currency to the world denominated in dollars, and subordinate Europe the will of Washington throughout the duration of this Century. This is what has been meant by the notion of a New American Century which had been embraced by Dick Cheney and his neocon henchmen.
With the consolidation of the Arch of Conflict in American Hands, world domination will have been completed by the United States. It will be able to be said by history that with this coup America had gone Roman.
There is however, one major problem for those of us who rather enjoy this Republic as a Republic. As Tony Judt opened before his recent untimely death: "For an Empire to rise, a Republic must fall."
3
First, it is not clear what Washington-Times link you are referencing.
Second, no one is saying Putin is stupid. Instead, they are saying he is smart and calculating. Further, the calculations so far have paid off.
Third, the facts on the ground--Russian regulars posing as green army men--are indicative of Russian, not Western aggression in the region. There are recordings of phone calls back to HQ ruing the downing of the Malaysian Airlines jet. Or are you suggesting this is Washington's doing? The families would be surprised.
"Autonomy under Russia " is a non-sequitur.
Second, no one is saying Putin is stupid. Instead, they are saying he is smart and calculating. Further, the calculations so far have paid off.
Third, the facts on the ground--Russian regulars posing as green army men--are indicative of Russian, not Western aggression in the region. There are recordings of phone calls back to HQ ruing the downing of the Malaysian Airlines jet. Or are you suggesting this is Washington's doing? The families would be surprised.
"Autonomy under Russia " is a non-sequitur.
4
@Bill Appledorf
If the problem is that eastern parts of Ukraine are under attack from Ukraine, how is it that since the last ceasefire Russia-sponsored separatists have captured 500 square-miles of Ukrainian territory?
That does not sound like Russia's separatists militants are the ones under attack but instead are the ones attacking and taking territory.
If the problem is that eastern parts of Ukraine are under attack from Ukraine, how is it that since the last ceasefire Russia-sponsored separatists have captured 500 square-miles of Ukrainian territory?
That does not sound like Russia's separatists militants are the ones under attack but instead are the ones attacking and taking territory.
6
Angela Merkel is showing how truly out of step Germans are. They have gotten it wrong on the European economy and on the Ukraine. If the European project collapses, it will be because of their recalcitrance. Hopefully the U.S. And Britain will not allow them to make the same mistakes in the Ukraine. The Germans may like Ms. Merkel but she is woefully lacking in skills and knowledge to run anything other than the one state, sort of like George Bush.
26
Over the last 12 years, the US has messed up every single foreign intervention. In 2003, none could have possibly imagined that Iraq and Libya could be worse off than under Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi. America's War on Terror has further destabilized Pakistan, and turned Yemen into a failed state. Egypt is again under the control of a military junta and the Arab Spring has been a complete and utter desaster. The American failure to regulate its financial sector led to the worst financial crisis since 1929. With this track record, the US is not exactly in a pole position for solving the world's problems.
Merkel has made many mistakes. But there still is Euro, and, with the exception of Greece, all other PIIGS can finance themselves again on the open market. And yes, there is still a Ukraine, which would disappear if the US turned it into the battle ground of a proxy war. Then Putin would have his proof that this is about US encirclement and use his new and improved army to put an end to Ukrainian statehood - to the applause of the Russian people..
Merkel has made many mistakes. But there still is Euro, and, with the exception of Greece, all other PIIGS can finance themselves again on the open market. And yes, there is still a Ukraine, which would disappear if the US turned it into the battle ground of a proxy war. Then Putin would have his proof that this is about US encirclement and use his new and improved army to put an end to Ukrainian statehood - to the applause of the Russian people..
8
Mr Gifford,
I really don't believe that the US, Britain, nor the whining Baltic States have much standing to decide the policy.
I really don't believe that the US, Britain, nor the whining Baltic States have much standing to decide the policy.
3
David It's a shame how everybody is always out of step except Uncle Sam. Why can't the rest of the world just get with the program and live in an earthly paradise - like the bottom 51% of the USA economic ladder ("nickled and dimed" - not just the title of a book - it's a painful way of life.
1
I wholeheartedly understand your perspective.
Everything the west supplies into Ukraine will simply accelerate the escalation and ultimately work against our strategy (it is to be forever, yes?). And in that information QooQoo environment, the history will again be reformulated however they see fit.
We just need to keep our heads down and keep America's namesame void of any citation.
Everything the west supplies into Ukraine will simply accelerate the escalation and ultimately work against our strategy (it is to be forever, yes?). And in that information QooQoo environment, the history will again be reformulated however they see fit.
We just need to keep our heads down and keep America's namesame void of any citation.
1
There is still a way out of this if Russia is ready to accept that Ukraine is a truly independent country, not some "sphere of influence" with Moscow having a "right" to put/support thieves as Ukraine's rulers. Maidan was NOT against Moscow, it was FOR fixing the Ukraine, by Ukrainians.
Russia's demand that Ukraine does not join NATO is of course infringing on sovereignty of Ukraine, but maybe Ukrainians could swallow this, provided Russia truly leaves Ukraine free otherwise (EU!). Which would be the main thing - is Russia ready to let Ukrainian people to choose their own fate and govern themselves, and what Russia wants in return? Not fair (wanting something for letting people free), but this is another matter.
Of course demands like changes in Ukraine constitution to enable Moscow meddling are not acceptable - past and current history in dozens of places shows that Moscow supports corruption if given control in return, this is not something people on Maidan had been dying for.
If this type of a deal (where many things "for Russia" which do not make mockery of the freedom of Ukrainians could be probably included) cannot be worked out, the only thing left is to let Ukrainians have really effective defensive weapons now.
I always think back to Poland's refusal in late 1930 to ally with Nazis (would spare 6M Poles killed later by the Nazis, but would have put us in the company of criminals). "Peace has very high price, but there is no such thing as peace at any price".
Russia's demand that Ukraine does not join NATO is of course infringing on sovereignty of Ukraine, but maybe Ukrainians could swallow this, provided Russia truly leaves Ukraine free otherwise (EU!). Which would be the main thing - is Russia ready to let Ukrainian people to choose their own fate and govern themselves, and what Russia wants in return? Not fair (wanting something for letting people free), but this is another matter.
Of course demands like changes in Ukraine constitution to enable Moscow meddling are not acceptable - past and current history in dozens of places shows that Moscow supports corruption if given control in return, this is not something people on Maidan had been dying for.
If this type of a deal (where many things "for Russia" which do not make mockery of the freedom of Ukrainians could be probably included) cannot be worked out, the only thing left is to let Ukrainians have really effective defensive weapons now.
I always think back to Poland's refusal in late 1930 to ally with Nazis (would spare 6M Poles killed later by the Nazis, but would have put us in the company of criminals). "Peace has very high price, but there is no such thing as peace at any price".
23
What about E. Ukraine which does not want to be in the EU - Should they be forced to have their culture and way of life destroyed by the EU.
Maidan was a revolution made in W. Ukraine which expressed the viewpoint of We. Ukraine and installed a government of only W. Ukrainians. Those in E. Ukraine have another view. They do not want to be in the EU, they do not want to be westernize -- they never have, So this coup was really about what W. Ukraine wanted - so there should be no surprise that E. Ukraine is unhappy and fighting to get away from the West.
1
Judyw,
Yes,
If the eastern part of Ukraine does not want to join the EU, too bad. That's like asking if parts of the US didn't want to join NAFTA.
And no one is destroying their culture and way of life. Well, Russia certainly is as the entire region gets blown to bits.
Yes,
If the eastern part of Ukraine does not want to join the EU, too bad. That's like asking if parts of the US didn't want to join NAFTA.
And no one is destroying their culture and way of life. Well, Russia certainly is as the entire region gets blown to bits.
4
And what is your advice to the people of the Crimea and Donetsk? That they should be content to be ruled by unsympathetic, in many cases bigoted foreigners just because someone drew a line on a map several worlds ago? Read some history Roger, and tell us when the Crimea was ever part of an independent and sovereign Ukraine. Until the breakup of the USSR the answer is never.
88
You have to read some history crimea was coqoured by russia like 200years ago Turks owned Crimea before turka there was Greeks for lot more then russians . Russians came and took over with force just like now with ukrainians didn't have to fight my point is crimea wasn't russian as well as ukraine if you brought up history take a history lessons
If Russia did not have a fleet in the warm-water Black Sea, Putin may not have seized Crimea.
You mean the bigoted, unsympathetic foreigners from Russia who are currently stealing every business or piece of real estate they can get their hands on in Crimea and the Donbass, and who are currently all about redrawing Ukraine's borders - or some other foreigners?
3
What the West needs to realize, as you have alluded to, is that we are dealing with what amounts to a lunatic in the fashion of Hitler and Stalin. No amount of reasonableness and niceties will change that fact. Just as Chamberlain found out, power hungry autocratic leaders are basically psychopaths. They care only about themselves and their deluded ambitions.
It's better that we understand this sooner rather than later. Facts speak louder than words.
It's better that we understand this sooner rather than later. Facts speak louder than words.
38
Praise for Mr. Cohen for saying what must really happen. I hope Angela reads this because for whatever reason (among them, Germany's extensive commercial ties with Russia) she refuses to acknowledge that force must sometimes be met with force. Putin has perfectly played the West's limp response to his aggression: more aggression. It must become more dangerous and more expensive for him to make that play. Once he experiences military pushback, he will not ratchet up his efforts. He and his surrogates will doublespeak from their absurd universe that the effort is won, that Ukraine has been victoriously secured and we can all return triumphant to the motherland. Whatever he says no longer matters; whatever the West makes him do, that play's the thing.
25
If Russia were sitting on the Canadian and Mexican borders what would we do about it? We are sitting on their borders, and installed a puppet regime of our own within their sphere of interest. As a result of a coup d'etat, Ukraine is engaged in a civil war, which isn't exactly going its way. And you say the solution is to rearm Ukraine? Are you nuts?
The solution is to pull NATO back from Russia's borders in accord with the understanding GHW Bush forged with the leaderships at the time the Soviet Union pulled out of Eastern Europe, and let the Europeans by gas from where it will.
The solution is to pull NATO back from Russia's borders in accord with the understanding GHW Bush forged with the leaderships at the time the Soviet Union pulled out of Eastern Europe, and let the Europeans by gas from where it will.
170
indeed.
1
I can easility propose a solution that I am sure amboycharlie would appreciate even more than his own modest measures: pull back NATO from Poland and the Baltic states, pull it back behind the Elbe, where it was in 1989. Russia has a common border with Poland, just as the US borders Canada and Mexico, doesn't it ? Show Russia you understand its aspirations to expansion and world dominance ! Maybe once Russia regains its lost superpower status it will show its gratitute. Or maybe not and then it will be too late.
4
Amboycharlie: "If Russia were sitting on the Canadian and Mexican borders what would we do about it?"
You really want to go there? The United States tried to annex large portions of Canada in the War of 1812 and we rightfully got our butts handed to us. States don't have the right to invade their neighbors, however much they may dislike them. While you and your waves of commenters rush on to these op-ed pieces to defend Russia's interests, maybe you should keep in mind something even more sacrosanct, and that is Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Oh, never mind. I see you can all too conveniently characterize a popular uprising as a "coup d'etat" and dismiss any subsequent national elections. It's funny how you're all so sensitive to the rights and slights of Vladimir Putin and not so much to those of common people who'd like to have a better life.
You really want to go there? The United States tried to annex large portions of Canada in the War of 1812 and we rightfully got our butts handed to us. States don't have the right to invade their neighbors, however much they may dislike them. While you and your waves of commenters rush on to these op-ed pieces to defend Russia's interests, maybe you should keep in mind something even more sacrosanct, and that is Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Oh, never mind. I see you can all too conveniently characterize a popular uprising as a "coup d'etat" and dismiss any subsequent national elections. It's funny how you're all so sensitive to the rights and slights of Vladimir Putin and not so much to those of common people who'd like to have a better life.
5
Mr. Cohen has the kernel right - there is no military solution in Ukraine unless one side abdicates. The West's failure to provide the Ukrainians the means to defend themselves is both a military and a moral abdication.
23
When it comes to Ukraine and anything related to Russia, Dove Roger Cohen suddenly transforms to chickenhawk. So many of us told him the last time he wrote on the subject that his views on this subject are not the American mainstream. Surely there are many American Netanyahu's who would like nothing better than going into nuclear war with Russia, but we write them off as flakes who need to re soak their teabags.
But Roger is not one of those, and he certainly does not give me the impression that he cares much for Netanyahu. That is why I find it strange when a different Roger Cohen comes here with the mentality of the Likud hard right. Whatever his move in seeking a destructive war with Russia, by arming Ukrain, which we already have, or through direct military showdown with Putin I hope the large number of his fans see the how reckless he can become, contrary to his docile peaceful dove that we are used to.
But Roger is not one of those, and he certainly does not give me the impression that he cares much for Netanyahu. That is why I find it strange when a different Roger Cohen comes here with the mentality of the Likud hard right. Whatever his move in seeking a destructive war with Russia, by arming Ukrain, which we already have, or through direct military showdown with Putin I hope the large number of his fans see the how reckless he can become, contrary to his docile peaceful dove that we are used to.
75
And please tell us which Likud spokesman has issued any public statement in support of the Russian position.
No one. Why do you ask? You seem to have missed the point of my response which was directed at Roger. He knows the context of that conversation. But thank you for asking.
1
"But Roger is not one of those...."
Roger is just doing his duty by siding with the likes of Bill Browder, who are done with Russia and have their sights set on Ukraine. Putin won't let Hermitage play, so Ukraine has to be split from Putin.
Whether or not Roger realizes, this is about who gets to loot Ukraine, nothing more. They don't care about recklessness, or what it means for US, all they care about is filling their coffers.
Roger is just doing his duty by siding with the likes of Bill Browder, who are done with Russia and have their sights set on Ukraine. Putin won't let Hermitage play, so Ukraine has to be split from Putin.
Whether or not Roger realizes, this is about who gets to loot Ukraine, nothing more. They don't care about recklessness, or what it means for US, all they care about is filling their coffers.
2
However distorted the Russian vision of this conflict may be, so is Mr. Cohen's. This conflict is full of gray, and both sides are trying to make it black and white. "Change Putin's cost-benefit analysis"! How about cost-benefit analysis for the civilians caught in the middle of all this who are the primary victims? How about some vision and long-term cost-benefit analysis for the US?
The ideal way to have dealt with this conflict from the start, would have been through free, local elections under international observation. The Eastern and Western Ukraine have different histories, language preferences, and ethnic identities. It was always a divided state put together by the Soviets. It was going to be trouble from the very beginning. True democracies try to solve problems by elections. Instead, when the US looks at Russia it sees the red cape and wants to go to war just like an angry (but stupid) bull with a comparable cost-benefit analysis.
The ideal way to have dealt with this conflict from the start, would have been through free, local elections under international observation. The Eastern and Western Ukraine have different histories, language preferences, and ethnic identities. It was always a divided state put together by the Soviets. It was going to be trouble from the very beginning. True democracies try to solve problems by elections. Instead, when the US looks at Russia it sees the red cape and wants to go to war just like an angry (but stupid) bull with a comparable cost-benefit analysis.
142
Can we win a war in Ukraine we could not win one in Iraq? What about if Putin retalliate by causing instability in the Baltic Reoublics? Have we found out what Putin wants before we decide war is the only option.
"The ideal way to have dealt with this conflict from the start, would have been through free, local elections under international observation."
Russia opposed this option.
"The Eastern and Western Ukraine have different histories, language preferences, and ethnic identities."
Not so much as you make out - and they are united on the most important questions: 75% of Russian speakers, for instance, want to stay in the Ukraine and not become part of Russia or a "separatist" state. The majority of voters in the East voted for the current President of Ukraine, who is a favorite son.
"True democracies try to solve problems by elections."
The Ukraine had them. The democratically elected Parliament impeached and removed the President after he illegally ordered troops to massacre peaceful protestors and then fled the country. (He was also shown to have looted the public purse.) The new President was elected with a huge majority nationwide, including in the east. In a few places, Russian backed "separatist" thugs disrupted the polling, but it wasn't enough places to have changed the outcome given the big margin. He is now asking us for weapons to defend against a foreign invasion.
And democratically elected leaders in the Dombas region? They were seized and imprisoned at gun point by Russian soldiers and the thugs they back. This includes even some who were pro-Russian. Some who later were freed tell stories of torture and abuse.
Russia opposed this option.
"The Eastern and Western Ukraine have different histories, language preferences, and ethnic identities."
Not so much as you make out - and they are united on the most important questions: 75% of Russian speakers, for instance, want to stay in the Ukraine and not become part of Russia or a "separatist" state. The majority of voters in the East voted for the current President of Ukraine, who is a favorite son.
"True democracies try to solve problems by elections."
The Ukraine had them. The democratically elected Parliament impeached and removed the President after he illegally ordered troops to massacre peaceful protestors and then fled the country. (He was also shown to have looted the public purse.) The new President was elected with a huge majority nationwide, including in the east. In a few places, Russian backed "separatist" thugs disrupted the polling, but it wasn't enough places to have changed the outcome given the big margin. He is now asking us for weapons to defend against a foreign invasion.
And democratically elected leaders in the Dombas region? They were seized and imprisoned at gun point by Russian soldiers and the thugs they back. This includes even some who were pro-Russian. Some who later were freed tell stories of torture and abuse.
1
T totally agree that the Russians will understand only force. The NYT editorial is delusional. We have to arm Ukraine if it is not too late already.
16
Hello there Mr Cohen
It's a little strong on policy push for say an article I am used to reading; in contrast to John J Mearsheimer's opinion also in the pages here, you seem bent on what I have just read as being a Monroe Doctrine's use for going in and deffending Eukraine from Russia? (And I don't know US history etc.) But from the European side of the pond between us, it seemed Pres. V Yanukovych originally was under great strain by dealing with both the Europen Union and Putin at the outset of this problem. And that strain, I believe placed firmly into his decsions was brought to a peak by the EU and Putin openly and publicly vying for legitimate trade and and loan and such and so forth deals and influence. Yanukovych caved to Russia as Europe declined EC entry and viola...the history in Eukraine up to the form and in forms we see as occuring.
You are correct to push for defence of Eukraine, I totally agree. Yet gently gently. The peoples war is just that over there on the Western side of the debacle. The Russians...well I'm not up to speed on the reasons of their continued approach to 'protecting' their ethinc counterparts in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. But it seems Putin is the carrier of blame and not Russian's themselves. Like you guys there hear of yoursleves all over the place, it's not the US people but the Administration's policies which your foes respond to. Give the Russian people their due, It's not them but the Duma. Take it easy please. Thanks
It's a little strong on policy push for say an article I am used to reading; in contrast to John J Mearsheimer's opinion also in the pages here, you seem bent on what I have just read as being a Monroe Doctrine's use for going in and deffending Eukraine from Russia? (And I don't know US history etc.) But from the European side of the pond between us, it seemed Pres. V Yanukovych originally was under great strain by dealing with both the Europen Union and Putin at the outset of this problem. And that strain, I believe placed firmly into his decsions was brought to a peak by the EU and Putin openly and publicly vying for legitimate trade and and loan and such and so forth deals and influence. Yanukovych caved to Russia as Europe declined EC entry and viola...the history in Eukraine up to the form and in forms we see as occuring.
You are correct to push for defence of Eukraine, I totally agree. Yet gently gently. The peoples war is just that over there on the Western side of the debacle. The Russians...well I'm not up to speed on the reasons of their continued approach to 'protecting' their ethinc counterparts in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. But it seems Putin is the carrier of blame and not Russian's themselves. Like you guys there hear of yoursleves all over the place, it's not the US people but the Administration's policies which your foes respond to. Give the Russian people their due, It's not them but the Duma. Take it easy please. Thanks
10
It is essential to the United States that Russia never be recognized by Europe as the integral part of Europe which it surely is. Russia is the fossil fuel powerhouse, which if Europe were to wise up and integrate formally into the European System, could trump all other Economic Arrangements throughout the world. The United States will provoke a war before we will allow a European visa a vis Russian rapprochement.
Mearsheimer has built his notoriety as a leading Putin apologist in US academia, and has since the beginning of the Ukraine crisis been arguing that it was the West, rather than Putin that was responsible for Putin attacking Ukraine.
5
Your prescription for sending more armaments to Ukraine is risking a Cuban missile-style confrontation and we all know how badly that can turn out if the other side doesn't blink.
183
That's an idiotic comparison. The U.S. played an role in getting Ukraine to give up its nuclear arms in exchange for Russian pledges to respect it's borders. How has that worked out for Ukraine so far?
Giving radar systems and anti-tank weapons to the outgunned Ukrainian defenders is hardly the start of a nuclear confrontation.
Giving radar systems and anti-tank weapons to the outgunned Ukrainian defenders is hardly the start of a nuclear confrontation.
6
that crisis prevented russia from placing nuclear missels in cuba. sometimes you have to stand up to a bully
But they WILL blink. The Putin regime is populated by insanely wealthy Russian mobsters. They have been living like kings since the collapse of the Soviet empire. They have no real quarrel over Ukrain, and are not about to risk nuclear annihilation simply to save Putin's pride. Given an eyeball to eyeball confrontation with the U.S., they wil force Putin to blink even if it means killing him. The Russian elite are only concerned that the beluga caviar keeps coming.
1
It's Europe that's going to face the heat of Ukrainian crisis not the US, and arming Ukraine by the West against the German-Franco peace initiative would surely be playing into the hands of Putin who might only be more than happy to justify his aggression and stand on Ukraine whether that amounts to perpetuating the conflict that has serious ramifications for the European stability and peace.
99
Wow - the last time people believe this was just before Japan attacked us. Could this really be the 1930s again? Ignoring despots did not work then, won't work now.
1
I really don't think that the US really wants this happen, but my guess is that this is what will happen:
We arm the Ukrainians, a big war start, the war spreads to other European countries, Europe's industry is ruined, and voila, the US is again at the top of the food chain, just as it was at the end of WWII.
We arm the Ukrainians, a big war start, the war spreads to other European countries, Europe's industry is ruined, and voila, the US is again at the top of the food chain, just as it was at the end of WWII.
Putin does not want peace in the region. He wants his dominance in the region. Our friends have an alternative to what we propose to do. Fine. Let's discuss this alternative. That's what we are doing now. If this alternative is not good, we'll drop it. Even our friends in Europe guarantee that their proposal will lead to peace. What if Ukrainians refuse to accept it? What if they refuse to accept it even against their own government? What if, and that's a very real if, there is a third Maidan? Ukrainian volunteers are fighting now against Russian forces in the east. The population of Ukraine collects money to arm them. They are buying weapons all over the place wherever they can find. When volunteers need nightscopes, people collect money and buy them. That's unprecedented commitment to independence. These people spent four months in bitter cold standing on the Maidan. Do you think that they will easily accept Putin's noose? Think again.
Putin won't go to the diplomatic solution. He trusts only in force of arms. It occupy part of Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine. Ukraine which has the third in the world after the US and Russia nuclear potential, voluntary gave 5000 warheads and cruise missiles, destroys launching silo, and 43 strategic Tu-160 and Tu-95МС superbombers went to scrap metal. The USA, United Kingdom and Russia default on the Budapest memorandum. Now none of them wants to give the weapon to Ukraine. I think in our civilization now all understand that only the weapons of mass destruction are capable to protect the nation.
9
I see that Roger is still full of illusions and not just over Ukraine.'There is a language Moscow understands: antitank missiles, battlefield radars, reconnaissance drones. ' And Roger they expect the Coup Masters in Washington to supply the weapons and lie about it. You know like the Folks the US was not torturing before this was exposed as a lie then it this publicly admitted .The split with Europe is in its early stages . Supply the guns publicly and the split will go public. If the US wants to start a war with Russia do it some where else not in Europe. Washington's Ukrainian play was among its dumbest since the Iraq triumph.
25
There was no coup in Ukraine. You have been banging this propaganda drum for almost a year now.
Still doesn't make it any more true.
Still doesn't make it any more true.
4
Roger, what is your real motivation to call for arms? Your love for Libia-Iraq-Kosovo scenario and 'global police' duties? Or are you into driving sales of American arms to create jobs? Bring US troops to Ukraine?
With all due respect I'm not buying a version of humanitarian grounds for the US. Am I wrong here?
With all due respect I'm not buying a version of humanitarian grounds for the US. Am I wrong here?
18
It's time to send in the clowns, er ... arms. Or is that schmarms. Anyway, the West does understand energy prices, our lingua franca.
2
Contrary to Mr. Cohen’s delusions: -
1. There was a coup d'état in Ukraine in February 2014. It was very similar in execution to that in Persia in 1953 which overthrew the legitimate Prime Minister Mossadegh and installed the Shah as an American puppet.
2. There is evidence that the USA State Department has been working for years to destabilise State institutions in Ukraine. If finally chose to use Fascist agents provocateur to overthrow the State.
3. These agents had been condemned as Fascist by the European Parliament in a vote on Dec 13 2012, well before the coup d'état.
4. In the Kiev coup d'état members of the Svoboda Party were given positions of power in Ukraine. Svoboda has popularly been described as a neo-Nazi grouping. The World Jewish Congress has demanded that Svoboda be banned and it was also condemned by the EU’s own European Parliament, which passed a motion on Dec. 13, 2012 categorically condemning Svoboda.
5. The coup d'état provoked a Civil War in Ukraine currently being fought between the Kiev regime and anti Kiev forces in the breakaway regions of Eastern Ukraine. The Kiev forces are aided by fascist ‘volunteer’ battalions such as the infamous Asov; on the anti-Kiev side there also appear to be volunteer battalions from Russia members of which have very close family ties with Ukraine.
6. The primary objective of the fascist elements in the Kiev Regime is to draw the USA into confrontation with Russia.
1. There was a coup d'état in Ukraine in February 2014. It was very similar in execution to that in Persia in 1953 which overthrew the legitimate Prime Minister Mossadegh and installed the Shah as an American puppet.
2. There is evidence that the USA State Department has been working for years to destabilise State institutions in Ukraine. If finally chose to use Fascist agents provocateur to overthrow the State.
3. These agents had been condemned as Fascist by the European Parliament in a vote on Dec 13 2012, well before the coup d'état.
4. In the Kiev coup d'état members of the Svoboda Party were given positions of power in Ukraine. Svoboda has popularly been described as a neo-Nazi grouping. The World Jewish Congress has demanded that Svoboda be banned and it was also condemned by the EU’s own European Parliament, which passed a motion on Dec. 13, 2012 categorically condemning Svoboda.
5. The coup d'état provoked a Civil War in Ukraine currently being fought between the Kiev regime and anti Kiev forces in the breakaway regions of Eastern Ukraine. The Kiev forces are aided by fascist ‘volunteer’ battalions such as the infamous Asov; on the anti-Kiev side there also appear to be volunteer battalions from Russia members of which have very close family ties with Ukraine.
6. The primary objective of the fascist elements in the Kiev Regime is to draw the USA into confrontation with Russia.
40
@Robert Jennings
1--It wasn't a coup. This was carried out by a popular uprising that started after Yanukovich initiated the use of deadly force against the Maidan and ended when Yanukovich's allies in the security forces deserted him and the Rada turned against him.
2--There is no such evidence--$200-250 million/year to NGOs hardly constitutes destabiliazation.
3--4--Svoboda/Right Sektor had only a small presence in the first Yatsenuk cabinet and none in the current one; they also only have a sliver of the Rada.
5--The war was started by Russian-sponsored and, initially, Russian-led rebels.
1--It wasn't a coup. This was carried out by a popular uprising that started after Yanukovich initiated the use of deadly force against the Maidan and ended when Yanukovich's allies in the security forces deserted him and the Rada turned against him.
2--There is no such evidence--$200-250 million/year to NGOs hardly constitutes destabiliazation.
3--4--Svoboda/Right Sektor had only a small presence in the first Yatsenuk cabinet and none in the current one; they also only have a sliver of the Rada.
5--The war was started by Russian-sponsored and, initially, Russian-led rebels.
6
Enough with the coup nonsense. There was no coup in Kiev.
There were, however, at least four coups in other parts of Ukraine, namely Crimea, Slavyansk, Donetsk and Luhansk. Why do you never mention those?
There were, however, at least four coups in other parts of Ukraine, namely Crimea, Slavyansk, Donetsk and Luhansk. Why do you never mention those?
4
Right, the American state department was able to get those stupid, niave Ukriainians to stand for three solid months outside through a Kievian winter where tempatures never rise above freezing just to advance American policy.
You are a very stupid man if you think that a foreign government has the power to do that.
If so, the Russians would have done it first.
The Ukrainians want a future similar to Polands present, not Russia's kleptocratic present. That was the choice and that's why they stood out in the cold for 3 long bone freezing months and against hostile forces.
In 1990 Ukraine was a more productive economy than Poland. Today Ukraine has 3rd world incomes, with 3rd world institituions, while Poland is rich, 1st world productivity, incomes and first class institutions. Why is this so hard for Russians and Putiniks to figure out?
Russia has no future. Without extraction industries such as oil, Russia's per capita income is identical to Ukraine's. That's not a future. That's a horrendous present.
You are a very stupid man if you think that a foreign government has the power to do that.
If so, the Russians would have done it first.
The Ukrainians want a future similar to Polands present, not Russia's kleptocratic present. That was the choice and that's why they stood out in the cold for 3 long bone freezing months and against hostile forces.
In 1990 Ukraine was a more productive economy than Poland. Today Ukraine has 3rd world incomes, with 3rd world institituions, while Poland is rich, 1st world productivity, incomes and first class institutions. Why is this so hard for Russians and Putiniks to figure out?
Russia has no future. Without extraction industries such as oil, Russia's per capita income is identical to Ukraine's. That's not a future. That's a horrendous present.
2
Putin is playing a game one sees at a high school wrestling match: letting his opponents exhaust themselves first, then moving in for the pin. He has been dreaming imperialist dreams and will continue to use the pretext of Russia's own conflict with Islamic fundamentalist terror, such as the bombing last year at Volgograd, as justification to expand Russian hegemony further westward. He knows that Barack Obama will do nothing substantive but content himself to rattle sabres safely from within his Oval Office, since the USA is trying to extricate itself from its latest own ill-conceived foreign interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. No one wants to see nuclear brinksmanship of the sort that I grew up with in the early 1960s, especially if we end up with a president in 2016 who pronounces it "nukular."
4
The problem is not Putin's doublethink, it's Europe's, and the United State's, feigned belief in it.
4
I would not be so quick to dismiss Lavrov's description of what happened in Ukraine as a coup. To most Russians, not just Putin and his circle, the deposition of a democratically elected President, whatever his failings, by street protests and tacit military backing, with clear and visible Western instigation, was certainly a coup. Yanukovich had won an election. He represents a not insignificant number of pro-Russian Ukrainians. The irony is that to argue that it was a popular uprising not a coup would require calling the Egyptian coup a popular uprising as well, since it was identical (a popularly backed military overthrow of an elected president, followed by new elections and new government). I suspect Mr Cohen and most western observers would shudder at the comparison. For what its worth, when Putin told Merkel that the West has systematically defaulted on its promises to Gorbachev not to expand NATO and the EU to Russia's borders, he was not wrong. Whatever your views of the legitimate desires of Ukrainians to join Europe, Russia's sensitivities were laughably underestimated by the West on this matter.
67
"Coup d'etat" is not a phrase most Americans use very often. What does it mean, exactly? From the American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (2005):
"A quick and decisive seizure of governmental power by a strong military or political group. In contrast to a revolution, a coup d'état, or coup, does not involve a mass uprising. Rather, in the typical coup, a small group of politicians or generals arrests the incumbent leaders, seizes the national radio and television services, and proclaims itself in power."
This is most definitely not what happened in Ukraine last year. A mass uprising, inspired by the revulsion Cohen aptly describes, overthrew the massively corrupt racket known casually as "government."
The people rose up against the bandits in 2004, and they have just done it again.
The word is "revolution." Ask the throngs of Ukrainians who strolled through Yanukovich's stolen paradise in the aftermath.
"A quick and decisive seizure of governmental power by a strong military or political group. In contrast to a revolution, a coup d'état, or coup, does not involve a mass uprising. Rather, in the typical coup, a small group of politicians or generals arrests the incumbent leaders, seizes the national radio and television services, and proclaims itself in power."
This is most definitely not what happened in Ukraine last year. A mass uprising, inspired by the revulsion Cohen aptly describes, overthrew the massively corrupt racket known casually as "government."
The people rose up against the bandits in 2004, and they have just done it again.
The word is "revolution." Ask the throngs of Ukrainians who strolled through Yanukovich's stolen paradise in the aftermath.
5
@NYT Reader
Where was the tacit military backing? The situation is different from Egypt, in the latter the military itself seized power, It had issued an ultimatum in the face of the anti-goverment protests and then moved in directly, with General Sisi, the head of the armed forces, taking power. In Ukraine, the military, such as it was, doesn't seem to have been involved at all.
There was no promise not to expand NATO.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141845/mary-elise-sarotte/a-broke...
Where was the tacit military backing? The situation is different from Egypt, in the latter the military itself seized power, It had issued an ultimatum in the face of the anti-goverment protests and then moved in directly, with General Sisi, the head of the armed forces, taking power. In Ukraine, the military, such as it was, doesn't seem to have been involved at all.
There was no promise not to expand NATO.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141845/mary-elise-sarotte/a-broke...
4
Well, NYT Reader, the definition of a coup has been explained to you, and others like you, over and over and over again and yet it never seems to sink in.
There was no coup in Kiev. In other parts of Ukraine, absolutely. What happened in Crimea was most definitely a coup. Same for eastern Ukraine.
Those were sudden removals of the legal leaders by a small group of well armed persons who then installed themselves as leaders.
That most certainly did not happen in Kiev.
There was no coup in Kiev. In other parts of Ukraine, absolutely. What happened in Crimea was most definitely a coup. Same for eastern Ukraine.
Those were sudden removals of the legal leaders by a small group of well armed persons who then installed themselves as leaders.
That most certainly did not happen in Kiev.
3
Yes, Putin is a bad actor, and none (including Merkel) thinks that he is trustworthy. But he runs a country with 450 ICBMs and 8500 nuclear warheads, which is why "getting real" is a delicate matter.
According to current NATO estimates, the Russian army could take Kiev and the whole of Ukraine in less than two weeks, and annihilate the Ukrainian forces in the Dombass region in less than 48 hours. And this is exactly what Putin will do, if the US turns this into a proxy war.
Ukraine is not a member of NATO, which is why NATO won't start WWIII over it. That's too bad for the Ukrainians, but Ukraine will only survive this conflict as an independent nation if there is a political solution that turns the Dombass into another Transnistria, and keeps enough pressure on Russia not to gobble up the rest of the country.
According to current NATO estimates, the Russian army could take Kiev and the whole of Ukraine in less than two weeks, and annihilate the Ukrainian forces in the Dombass region in less than 48 hours. And this is exactly what Putin will do, if the US turns this into a proxy war.
Ukraine is not a member of NATO, which is why NATO won't start WWIII over it. That's too bad for the Ukrainians, but Ukraine will only survive this conflict as an independent nation if there is a political solution that turns the Dombass into another Transnistria, and keeps enough pressure on Russia not to gobble up the rest of the country.
22
Your lack of faith in the US to manage a proxy war that leads to victory ignores the fact that that is exactly what happened in the 1980s in Afghanistan after the Soviet invasion and occupation.
I would imagine that the Ukrainian people have even more animosity towards Russia now than the Afghans did against the Soviets back then.
While it is true that Russia is a nuclear power, that does not mean they would be foolish enough to actually use them.
I would imagine that the Ukrainian people have even more animosity towards Russia now than the Afghans did against the Soviets back then.
While it is true that Russia is a nuclear power, that does not mean they would be foolish enough to actually use them.
4
Before taking potshots at Russian re-writing of history, let us recall that the first Russian political unit was formed in Kiev around 882 AD. This nation was founded by The Rus (Slavic for “Vikings”), hence the name “Russia”. Moscow did not become the capital of Russia until 1340. Ukraine is historically the original heartland of Russia. Thus to scoff at Putin’s claims over Ukraine is to disregard and, indeed, to re-write history. Moscow has the better claim over Ukraine than the USA or NATO.
50
James Luce: nobody has "better claim over Ukraine", and this is the point. It is an independent country. Not "near abroad", not "traditional sphere of influence". And what they do should be decided by it's people, not in Moscow or Washington.
2
Following your logic the American Indian tribes should run the USA, the Turks should run Crimea, and the Mongols should run Russia.
6
If I would apply your absurd logic to Spain (the country you seem to be writing from), then the Moors would have "the better claim over" Spain than anyone else.
8
Putin's hypocrisy is clearly breathtaking.
Putin will happily defend and arm tyrants like Assad who rain advanced weaponry on civilians - killing thousands and displacing millions in the process - all to quash a rebellion against cruel, dictatorial rule.
Similarly, when Chechens wanted independence, Putin created a war with questionable apartment bombings in Moscow as a justification, and turned Grozny into dust with a relentless and brutal campaign against its people.
Meanwhile, when armed terrorists seize government buildings in Ukraine, and Kiev attempts to stop them, Putin decries them as them as "Nazis."
The state of Russia and its hypocrisy is truly laughable. Except it's not funny. It's a sick joke where gangsters rule the roost, and thousands of innocent lives are lost in Putin's nationalist push for popularity.
And we are supposed to feel proud to stand back and do nothing against this tyrant? Our brave forefathers must be turning in their graves.
Putin will happily defend and arm tyrants like Assad who rain advanced weaponry on civilians - killing thousands and displacing millions in the process - all to quash a rebellion against cruel, dictatorial rule.
Similarly, when Chechens wanted independence, Putin created a war with questionable apartment bombings in Moscow as a justification, and turned Grozny into dust with a relentless and brutal campaign against its people.
Meanwhile, when armed terrorists seize government buildings in Ukraine, and Kiev attempts to stop them, Putin decries them as them as "Nazis."
The state of Russia and its hypocrisy is truly laughable. Except it's not funny. It's a sick joke where gangsters rule the roost, and thousands of innocent lives are lost in Putin's nationalist push for popularity.
And we are supposed to feel proud to stand back and do nothing against this tyrant? Our brave forefathers must be turning in their graves.
27
Yes, of course you have the right idea. But yet, it's today and not yesterday if I may suggest. I ease up on a waring attitude for Ukraine and arming them despite agreeing with you and in large part Mr Cohen. I'd really care to see the upshot of Merkel and Obama before shifting my position. To take OUR LADS and LADIES into any battle...it's against my grain. Over there the Ukrainian's are in it deeply. But as the evidence shows the Western Ukrainian's are in no position to stand up to full scale Russian (backed or in force) attack. No matter how armed by Kiev and their allies such as the US. Let us lot talk here, let Pres. Obama and Merkel thrash this through...and let Putin and cohorts read these comments. The right wing US law makers and defence bods are all there and we know it. Putin knows it. So us lot on these pages, defend life firstly on all sides eh!? As if we don't, our opinions I guess will be taken as read we are all living with the wedge of Russia parting our own resolve. Life firstly...Putin should listen to that and I'd hope ease up. If not, then that's for tomorrow. And that could be dreaful beyond any words. Grief, just grief...
How did our latest interventions go in Iraq, Lybia, Syria and so on? You want to add another failed state with Ukraine. More weapons will not mean Ukrainians win the war. It means more innocent will be dying. This is not a conflict that can be won militarily by the Ukrainians. The Russian army is too strong for that. If the real target is - as some suggest - regime change in Russia it will be even more of a gamble. If Russia becomes chaotic after Putins reign who will be able to tell for sure that the nukes are secure. Putin is no Hitler. Ih he was he would have put half of Europe on fire by now. He is a bad guy but not a madmen. With a strong far right inside Russia his successor could very well be a Hitler.
1
Zero people died in Crimea. Thousands dead in the rest of Ukraine. The west would be happy to see thousands more die all to defend their interests. The bloody coup was rigged by the west, another regime change brought on by meddli g and without thought to consequence.
Let's get over Russia as an enemy, they are a far greater ally especially on the ever hot war on terror. Least we create more battlefields and bring about our own decline.
Besides, when the sleeping giant, China, awakens, Russia will have us by the balls as we come crawling to Moscow looking for a powerful ally. They share much I common with us including religious inclination. We're so similar in fact that perhaps what we fear most is merely a reflection.
Let's get over Russia as an enemy, they are a far greater ally especially on the ever hot war on terror. Least we create more battlefields and bring about our own decline.
Besides, when the sleeping giant, China, awakens, Russia will have us by the balls as we come crawling to Moscow looking for a powerful ally. They share much I common with us including religious inclination. We're so similar in fact that perhaps what we fear most is merely a reflection.
59
There was no coup. At least not in Kiev.
You laud the lack of deaths in Crimea so I guess that would be a bloodless coup since the Russian tossed out the legal and legitimate government there and replaced it with a handpicked pro-Russia one before the fake referendum.
The only people that have turned Russia into an enemy are the Russians themselves, specifically Putin.
You laud the lack of deaths in Crimea so I guess that would be a bloodless coup since the Russian tossed out the legal and legitimate government there and replaced it with a handpicked pro-Russia one before the fake referendum.
The only people that have turned Russia into an enemy are the Russians themselves, specifically Putin.
3
zero died because Putin did his dirty deed quickly quietly- not so in Eastern Ukraine... Crimea was given to Ukraine legally by Kruschev - no doubt , all factual, What is factual is that Putin stole Crimea, and by his own words wants half of Ukraine for himself. Ukraine is justified 100% in fighting to stop this invasion with and by any and all means necessary. too bad Germany and France are clouded by greed to see this. Lithuania , Latvia, Estonia,, Poland and as of last week, Belarus, which used to be Russia's closest ally, see it.
1
The USA carry out its policies, do not settle with anyone.
The USA became the world's policeman, and even more - the world's
terrorist.
Politics in Ukraine led out to situation, that according to German
special services (not Russian!), killing about 50,000 people over time of
conflict.
Ukraine is split out into several parts politically, and there is no longer possible combine them on the basis of what.
The goal is achieved - another state fell out as a victim due to USA policy.
Supply of weapons to Ukraine would mean the beginning of a full-scale war
on the European continent. There would have been dragged all of Europe.
Neither Germany, nor France, nor Britain would not support such a course of events.
As a result, the USA will remain in isolation, together with their gangsters from Ukraine...
The USA became the world's policeman, and even more - the world's
terrorist.
Politics in Ukraine led out to situation, that according to German
special services (not Russian!), killing about 50,000 people over time of
conflict.
Ukraine is split out into several parts politically, and there is no longer possible combine them on the basis of what.
The goal is achieved - another state fell out as a victim due to USA policy.
Supply of weapons to Ukraine would mean the beginning of a full-scale war
on the European continent. There would have been dragged all of Europe.
Neither Germany, nor France, nor Britain would not support such a course of events.
As a result, the USA will remain in isolation, together with their gangsters from Ukraine...
22
I disagree with those that believe that this is a "thirst for revenge" that will "make[s} everything worse". We are not proposing sending in waves of Abrams battle tanks to duel the T-80's, we are talking about anti-tank missiles and related equipment. This is about self-defense and anyone thinking Putin is going to be talked out of it or pressured economically with sufficient force is deluded. Perhaps more deluded than Neville Chamberlain, who to be completely fair, never believed he had gotten anything more than a brief reprieve and some free toilet paper. The Ukrainians deserve more.
17
What are you proposing when Russian troops threaten Kiev like they did in Gerogia?
I am totally fed-up and so are all of the citizens of the Ukraine, with Putin, Lavrov and all their puppets in Donbass- the lies the misinformation, the suffering, the death, the destruction- I am absolutely certain that almost every citizen of Ukraine wants peace and a united country and rid of those Russian idiots once and for all. Roger here is spot on 100pc. Obama has to be careful about sending potential lethal weapons to Ukraine theater - its not shyness or cowardice- its proper military planning and Putin's troll army won't stand a chance once all this falls into place. Putin would be an idiot if he did not accept whats on the table now by the EU- he wont though because he is- time the Russian public stood up and shouted ubiraysya.
25
Prof. John J. Mearsheimer in today's Opinion provides a different view regarding arming Ukraine. It is a shame that Mr. Cohen probably did not see it before he published his piece and it is a shame that Prof. Mearsheimer's article was not opened up for comments (as of writing this comment) as it is a far more balanced and learned piece than Mr. Cohen's.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html?rref=opi...®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article
Ironically, the "realism" that Mr. Cohen seeks in Western policy in Ukraine is probably more of the "illusion" that he shuns.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html?rref=opi...®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article
Ironically, the "realism" that Mr. Cohen seeks in Western policy in Ukraine is probably more of the "illusion" that he shuns.
124
I agree with you. Prof. Mearsheimer talks sense. Cohen is bent on taking us down a very risky path.
2
I couldn't agree more Mearsheimer column is on the right path and is far superior to what Mr. Cohen has written. Prof. Mearsheimer understand the situation in Ukraine, Mr. Cohen does not. Mr. Cohen is just parroting the words of John McCain and Lindsey Graham.
1
@Joshua Schwartz: It is even more frustrating that Prof. Mearsheimer's op-ed against arming Ukraine, which was posted earlier today, is not showing up on the front page next to Mr. Cohen's column. Would have been much more appropriate to keep the two simultaneously, if for no other reason but to keep some appearance of a balanced opinion section.
Again, here's a link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html
Again, here's a link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html
1
Cohen's foolish personal diatribe against Putin adds nothing to the debate concerning the Ukrainian-Russian conflict. Mr. Cohen constantly prefers to avoid any mention in his articles of several salient facts that give support to Russia's position in the dispute; i.e. (a) the people of Crimea overwhelmingly voted in an open election to leave Ukraine and join Russia, (b) the peoples of the "separatist" region of eastern Ukraine predominately speak Russian and, based on several independent surveys, appear to prefer being a part of Russia, (c) the Ukraine was historically a political unit within Russia, (d) the ouster of Yanukovych was indeed a "coup d'etat", and (e) Russia's policies toward the Ukraine are highly popular with the Russian people. There is no suggestion that the conflict has in any manner resulted in any "ethnic purges' against Jews or anyone else. While Mr. Putin's policies may indeed be misguided, commentaries such as Mr. Cohen's do nothing but beat the drum in U.S. public opinion for another wrong-headed policy.
105
Putin is turning into a despot day by day. He threatens world peace and the Germans are just deluding themselves. There is nothing wrong-headed about this article and one should carefully read it before commenting.
5
There was abosultely no fair election in east Ukraine giving the locals a choice whether to stay in Ukraine or not.
Instead you had a miltary take over by pro-Moscow goons who offered locals the option of getting food and voting yes for separation or possibly getting beaten and thrown in a basement cell somewhere.
People were allowed to vote 'on behalf of' relatives, multiple times, with no ID needed, and staying in Ukraine was not even a referendum option.
There were no trained election observers, but instead members of radical far-right Western European political groups were brought in to give their stamp of approval. As complete a travesty of democracy as one could come up with.
Instead you had a miltary take over by pro-Moscow goons who offered locals the option of getting food and voting yes for separation or possibly getting beaten and thrown in a basement cell somewhere.
People were allowed to vote 'on behalf of' relatives, multiple times, with no ID needed, and staying in Ukraine was not even a referendum option.
There were no trained election observers, but instead members of radical far-right Western European political groups were brought in to give their stamp of approval. As complete a travesty of democracy as one could come up with.
9
@Bill
That "open election" in Crimea took place under Russian guns after those forces broke out of their basis and seized the territory, after the harassment of anti-annexationist persons and without any credible international observers.
There are no independent surveys that indicate that the residents of the Donbass prefer to be part of Russia. The last survey that took place before Russian clients seized power was the Pew survey in April and it found that eastern Ukrainians want to stay part of Ukraine. Even among Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine, the unified-secession split was 58-27.
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/05/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Ukraine-Russ...
The ouster of Yanukovich wasn't a coup.
Belarus, the Baltics and parts of Poland had been parts of Russia as well. Favor redrawing those boundaries?
That "open election" in Crimea took place under Russian guns after those forces broke out of their basis and seized the territory, after the harassment of anti-annexationist persons and without any credible international observers.
There are no independent surveys that indicate that the residents of the Donbass prefer to be part of Russia. The last survey that took place before Russian clients seized power was the Pew survey in April and it found that eastern Ukrainians want to stay part of Ukraine. Even among Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine, the unified-secession split was 58-27.
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/05/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Ukraine-Russ...
The ouster of Yanukovich wasn't a coup.
Belarus, the Baltics and parts of Poland had been parts of Russia as well. Favor redrawing those boundaries?
3
Facism exists on both sides because this comes down to who gets to control oil and gas and its distribution in the Ukraine. It's a game of war that only leads to death and destruction of the locals, while enriching the arms dealers and banks, all the while business is working together behind the scenes. It is history. I was shocked to learn Ford Motor sold to the enemy during WWII as well as oil and gas companies sold to all sides as well. It opened my eyes to how things really work. Huge wealth was accumulated during WWII as the US war machine cranked up. To this day, our country derives much of its living from the military industrial complex, while our infrastructure crumbles and our middle class atrophies. To add insult to injury, our young is little more than convenient cannon fodder.
78
Thank you, Carolyn, for reminding the public about a part of our history that few Americans know. There are many things we Americans can be proud of -- our artistic and scientific achievements, our generosity at times. But, unless we also know the darker side of our history, and of our actions today, we will be unable to change our policies for the better.
1
Only the USA made a profit out of WWII.
Oh please don't throw around "fascism" for everything you don't like. Cohen uses the term precisely, you don't.
1
It's great how the counter argument to sending arms to this conflict is dismissed as "There are risks but no policy is risk-free."
Cohen forgets that Putin is not Saddam or Qaddafi, and Russia has 8000 nukes and considers Ukraine a core strategic interest. This is not Iraq or Syria or North Korea.
What will sending arms achieve beyond escalation with a cornered nuclear power? Can anyone imagine a scenario where Putin cries "uncle," says, OK Ukraine can be part of NATO/EU, and slinks back to Moscow?
Be prepared for more dangerous overflights by Russian airplanes in Europe, more arms and maybe even an open invasion if Ukraine, and all with the risk of a nuclear escalation.
But hey, "no policy is risk-free". That phrase can be used to justify any lunacy.
Here's a different view: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html?refer...
Cohen forgets that Putin is not Saddam or Qaddafi, and Russia has 8000 nukes and considers Ukraine a core strategic interest. This is not Iraq or Syria or North Korea.
What will sending arms achieve beyond escalation with a cornered nuclear power? Can anyone imagine a scenario where Putin cries "uncle," says, OK Ukraine can be part of NATO/EU, and slinks back to Moscow?
Be prepared for more dangerous overflights by Russian airplanes in Europe, more arms and maybe even an open invasion if Ukraine, and all with the risk of a nuclear escalation.
But hey, "no policy is risk-free". That phrase can be used to justify any lunacy.
Here's a different view: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html?refer...
292
So, since I can't imagine ANY scenario in which Putin cries "uncle", does that mean that anything Putin wants, Putin gets? If Putin's Russia blames the West for the splitting of Germany, is there any scenario where Putin "slinks back to Moscow", or will he keep pushing westward as he "protects" Russian speakers?
3
Ukraine "can't defeat" Russia any more than Afghanistan could, right?
And we supplied Afghanistan with weapons.
And we supplied Afghanistan with weapons.
1
What is the difference between Putin and Saddam? The answer you give is 8000 nukes. So, because he has 8000 nukes we should tolerate his aggression? Is this good logic? Now, nukes are dangerous. However, what will he do with his nukes? Bomb Berlin? Paris? New York? Copenhagen? Nonsense! Will he bomb Kiev? Why? The mythology of nukes is a strawman. If he does not want to leave Ukraine alone, he will fight a conventional war. Let him. Ukrainians are ready and willing to defend their independence, just as much as any other nation in the world, including Russia. Russia does not need Ukraine for its security. It only needs Ukraine for one purpose: to have an opportunity in the future to solve its problems at its expense, as has been in the past. Ukrainians will not accept it, not after the Maidan. That's why Putin hates the Maidan so much and that's why Ukraine is a "threat" to Russia.
1
Thank you, Mr. Cohen. You are, of course, 100% correct.
The only thing that will stop Putin is a sharp punch in the nose. The west should give Ukraine the arms it needs to defeat the separatists and if Putin then responds by sending in more of his own forces, the west should intervene directly with our own military might.
Putin only respects strength. He laughs at economic sanctions and will not cut a peace deal unless he believes that the west is prepared to go to war against him. Anyone who seriously believes otherwise is either delusional or a fool.
But he also knows that his armed forces would be shredded in any open conflict with NATO and that such a defeat would probably spell the end of his regime.
So NATO and Ukraine hold the trump cards here. All that's needed is the will to play them, will that's been sadly lacking in Washington and Brussels so far.
The only thing that will stop Putin is a sharp punch in the nose. The west should give Ukraine the arms it needs to defeat the separatists and if Putin then responds by sending in more of his own forces, the west should intervene directly with our own military might.
Putin only respects strength. He laughs at economic sanctions and will not cut a peace deal unless he believes that the west is prepared to go to war against him. Anyone who seriously believes otherwise is either delusional or a fool.
But he also knows that his armed forces would be shredded in any open conflict with NATO and that such a defeat would probably spell the end of his regime.
So NATO and Ukraine hold the trump cards here. All that's needed is the will to play them, will that's been sadly lacking in Washington and Brussels so far.
73
"But he also knows that his armed forces would be shredded in any open conflict with NATO and that such a defeat would probably spell the end of his regime."
You know that Russia is a nuclear power, and that a shooting war with NATO would lead to nuclear Holocaust, no?
You know that Russia is a nuclear power, and that a shooting war with NATO would lead to nuclear Holocaust, no?
32
Ukraine can defeat a resurgent Russia? In what universe?
8
Absolutely agree with you Danram! Negotiations are simply a decoy Putin uses as he establishes facts on the ground. Far more dangerous than confrontation is acquiescing and appeasing thereby emboldening and legitimizing a despot/kleptocrat who clearly is carried away with his delusions of grandeur and consequent paranoia. Comparisons to the Sudetenland serve as an appropriate history lesson. Self determination for Ukraine never posed any threat to Russia. It only exists as such in the mind of a psychologically disturbed leader who at his core is deeply insecure and addicted to control.
5
Richard, you are about half right here and, unfortunately, you are wrong about some really important things. There is no question that Ukraine has the right to determine its own future and that Russia's actions in the country are illegal -much like the US invasion of Iraq, or Israel's occupation of Palestine, just to put things in perspective. But what is also true are these things: Russia, for decades, has practically begged NATO not to expand to its borders. Russia, given its history, really does feel threatened by NATO and, given NATO's willingness to use violence since the end of the Cold War, this seems a valid concern. The coup that deposed Yanukovych was profoundly undemocratic and leads to the question of what a real, national election in Ukraine would have wrought, especially given that Yanukovych was a democratically elected leader (Eastern Ukrainians voted, after all) and the EU agreement that the coup pre-empted and negated; the US and other Western powers have been actively intervening in the Ukraine to advance their own interests, as the wiretaps of American diplomats demonstrated; and there is certainly no question at all that the US is seeking global domination through liberal imperialism. Indeed, that is obvious from almost everything the US has done since the end of the Cold War. The situation in Ukraine is the result of mistakes and arrogance on the part of the West every bit as much as arrogance and neo-imperialism on the part of Russia.
273
Whom wire-tapped the American diplomats and for what reason- KGB thats who- nice neighbors over there- they'll put their stooges in charge of you and paint you new flags and insist you speak official Ruskie- and gift you with all the latest hi-tech killing machines- and just for good measure send in unidentifiable people to point their guns onto you and beat you down. Frankly I'd rather suffer Greek austerity than have this thrust on me. By the way- Ukraine can jump into bed with Kerry, and Biden if they want its an independent country and also if they want a coup-de-ta good luck to them- your just jealous that Russians can't do the same in Moscow.
1
Thank you Shaun for this succinct analysis.
I am no supporter of Putin, a petty tyrant, probably a murderer. Our efforts to secure Ukraine for the west are not excused by his corruption though.
Sending weapons to our supporters in Ukraine would be comparable to Putin sending weapons to Venezuela. We would not tolerate it.
Sanctions are enough. This is a European problem and the United States should follow the European lead. A full scale civil war in Ukraine is not good for Europe and that is a likely outcome where Russia will become thoroughly involved.
The same cheerleaders who promoted the invasion of Iraq for phoney reasons are enticing us to arm the Ukrainians. They were wrong in Iraq and are wrong in Ukraine.
I am no supporter of Putin, a petty tyrant, probably a murderer. Our efforts to secure Ukraine for the west are not excused by his corruption though.
Sending weapons to our supporters in Ukraine would be comparable to Putin sending weapons to Venezuela. We would not tolerate it.
Sanctions are enough. This is a European problem and the United States should follow the European lead. A full scale civil war in Ukraine is not good for Europe and that is a likely outcome where Russia will become thoroughly involved.
The same cheerleaders who promoted the invasion of Iraq for phoney reasons are enticing us to arm the Ukrainians. They were wrong in Iraq and are wrong in Ukraine.
10
Russia is not truly afraid of the expansion of NATO. First, NATO is a toothless tiger, as has been demonstrated in many current situations. If the USA did not emphatically lead, NATO would now be a mostly ceremonial organization. What the Russian oligarchy is apprehensive about, therefore, is the example of democratization and the values of human rights which Ukranian autonomy would examplify to its own citizens (and right on its borders).
2
If you want to turn up the heat, the russians will turn up the heat too, and they have the means. Do you really believe that Putin will withdraw, after he had put his whole national credibility into this conflict ?
Thirst for revenge, even if morally justifiable, makes everything worse.
If you want some tit for tat, just read the economic prospects for russia, Russia is getting weaker day by day. The second soviet empire will fail like the first one did, we should just lay low, trust our own economical power and wait for this to happen. Fighting the separatists in the ukraine is a distracting strategy that doesn't serve the operative goal.
Thirst for revenge, even if morally justifiable, makes everything worse.
If you want some tit for tat, just read the economic prospects for russia, Russia is getting weaker day by day. The second soviet empire will fail like the first one did, we should just lay low, trust our own economical power and wait for this to happen. Fighting the separatists in the ukraine is a distracting strategy that doesn't serve the operative goal.
253
@Mathias Weitz
The problem is, Russia has already turned up the heat and has only continued to turn up the heat at every juncture. If you are worried about Russia creating violence and war in Ukraine and Europe, you're too late. Putin already has and has shown no sign of changing that course.
Doesn't Ukraine deserve the right to chart its own peaceful course?
Do Ukrainian's deserve the political independence and sovereignty that is outlined in the UN charter?
Don't Ukrainian's deserve the implicit right to defend their nation and territory from a foreign aggressor, Russia, from taking their lands and creating violence?
If so, providing defensive military aid to Ukraine shouldn't be a problem given all of those rights are being violated by Russia. Ukrainian's deserve the help to defend themselves from those that would snatch their independence, sovereignty and territory - just as every nation does.
The problem is, Russia has already turned up the heat and has only continued to turn up the heat at every juncture. If you are worried about Russia creating violence and war in Ukraine and Europe, you're too late. Putin already has and has shown no sign of changing that course.
Doesn't Ukraine deserve the right to chart its own peaceful course?
Do Ukrainian's deserve the political independence and sovereignty that is outlined in the UN charter?
Don't Ukrainian's deserve the implicit right to defend their nation and territory from a foreign aggressor, Russia, from taking their lands and creating violence?
If so, providing defensive military aid to Ukraine shouldn't be a problem given all of those rights are being violated by Russia. Ukrainian's deserve the help to defend themselves from those that would snatch their independence, sovereignty and territory - just as every nation does.
26
If Putin wants to turn up the heat, he will also have to expose his own lies of non-Russian involvement.
Putin relies wholesale on propaganda. Exposing his lies destroys that propaganda, therefore it chips heavily at his power base.
Whilst I don't disagree with economic sanctions and their effects, it is difficult to justify standing back as a people are slaughtered and their land force-ably taken.
Putin relies wholesale on propaganda. Exposing his lies destroys that propaganda, therefore it chips heavily at his power base.
Whilst I don't disagree with economic sanctions and their effects, it is difficult to justify standing back as a people are slaughtered and their land force-ably taken.
16
You are the referee of rights and their guardian? It's such a chuckle to see an American worry about the rights of other nations.
2
Risk nuclear war? And why not?
For which Mr. Cohen is so hot!
Stay with ecopressure
With more for good measure,
And don't throw powder in the Pot.
For which Mr. Cohen is so hot!
Stay with ecopressure
With more for good measure,
And don't throw powder in the Pot.
84
And your own suggestion?
Leaving a people defenseless against the brutal, bullying gangster state of Russia?
Leaving a people defenseless against the brutal, bullying gangster state of Russia?
11
Another silly statement.
Cohen is right, you have to make it more costly for Russia, you have to defend the Ukraine from the armored invaders. It is about having a moral compass and head for the 'real politic'
Cohen is right, you have to make it more costly for Russia, you have to defend the Ukraine from the armored invaders. It is about having a moral compass and head for the 'real politic'
13
Ecopressure and diplopressure should be the only options on the table... but will in no way thwart Vladimir. Better than nothing but still consist of nothing more than a 'beau geste' since Putin's got his eyes on the prize and couldn't care less if his people, or Ukrainians, suffer in the long or short run for his objectives.
And in the coming year, sadly, probably, the world will have to accept that, as Crimea was lost, the east part of Ukraine will go too, from Luhansk to Mariupol to give Moscow a land access to Crimea.
It may sound defeatist to some, but Angela Merkel is the realist right now. Arming Ukraine will - not - benefit - anyone.
Or in other words, what do we prefer? A small land grab or a much larger conflict with nukes as a prospect?
And in the coming year, sadly, probably, the world will have to accept that, as Crimea was lost, the east part of Ukraine will go too, from Luhansk to Mariupol to give Moscow a land access to Crimea.
It may sound defeatist to some, but Angela Merkel is the realist right now. Arming Ukraine will - not - benefit - anyone.
Or in other words, what do we prefer? A small land grab or a much larger conflict with nukes as a prospect?
57