The Situation in the Ukraine. #1

Failure of Putin's policy towards Ukraine?
http://www.info-news.com.ua/?q=failure-of-putin-policy-towards-ukraine

The excitement over 1025th anniversary of baptism of Kyivan Rus has died down. A lot of Ukrainian analysts have already expressed their opinion on Putin's visit to Ukraine related to this event. However, I'd like to express my point of view on current state of Russian-Ukrainian relations.

In the context of 1025th anniversary of baptism of Kyivan Rus, Viktor Yanukovych and Vladimir Putin had a meeting which lasted around 15 minutes. Instead, Putin preferred to attend the conference of Viktor Medvedchuk's Kremlin backed “Ukrainian Choice” organization aimed at destabilization of Ukrainian internal affairs by promoting “federalization”, joining the Customs Union and the use of Russian language in Ukraine.

Russia is also worried about the rapprochement between the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patriarchate). Ecumenical Patriarch of Orthodox Church Patriach Bartholomew I of Constantinople in his message to Ukrainians, urged Ukrainians to avoid division and said that the united Orthodoxy should shine brightly. Quote below.

The light of Christ has enlightened you. Stay in the light. Avoid divisions. Pursue unity in truth, which is Christ. And in His light, you shall see light, just as the countenance of Ukraine is bright and a united Orthodoxy must shine brightly “for all in its house to see.”
Some other developments took place recently. Russia forbade import of Ukrainian chocolate “Roshen” saying that this chocolate does not comply with standards of Russia/Customs Union. After Russia, Kazakhstan informed that they will also conduct their own research, and I'm sure, that Russia has already given the order to Kazakh Government to impose embargo on Ukrainian “Roshen” chocolate. Just after these developments, Belarus forbade imports of Ukrainian wine “Inkerman”. In Russo-Ukrainian relations it is a trend to forbid the imports of Ukrainian goods and/or increase price for Russian natural gas if Ukraine doesn't want to do what Russia says. Since Russia has created the Customs Union (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan), two more countries have to behave in the same way against Ukraine.

However, Petro Poroshenko, owner of “Roshen” business in Ukraine started to increase the sales of its chocolate in the European Union under the Trade Mark “Bonbonetti Choco” while also increasing the production of his candies at his factory in the Russian city of Lipetsk.

Another sticking point of Russian-Ukrainian relations became Moldovan breakaway region of Transnistria. Russia wanted to reinforce its peacekeeping contingent in TTransnistriaransnistria without approval from Moldovan side. In order to do that, Russian military helicopters have to fly over Ukraine and carry out refueling in Ukrainian territory. Ukraine neutralized this attempt by closing its sky for Russia.

Russia pledged to reinforce its peacekeeping contingent in Transnistria (Moldova), however, Moscow's first attempt to relocate 7 military helicopters failed. Chisinau said “no” and Kyiv closed its territory and sky for Russian military transit.

This event took place one year ago, but now the situation repeats itself. Russia didn't inform Moldovan side about its plans on reinforcement of its peacekeeping contingent, and Ukraine repeated the same: “We will open our territory for Russian military cargo if Moscow and Chisinau reach the agreement”. This way Ukraine showed its strong position in supporting Moldova.

Everybody knows that Russia uses its peacekeepers in order to escalate tensions in breakaway regions in the ex-USSR territory. Such escalation even resulted in a Russian-Georgian war in August 2008 when Russia violated all possible agreements and invaded Georgia. As a result Russia cut off two Georgian breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and recognized their “independence”. Nobody wants the same scenario in Moldova. However, unlike Georgia, Moldova has no border with Russia, which will make the realization of the same scenario impossible since Russia will have to request Ukraine for military transit and Ukraine will never agree on that.

Another problem which bothers Russians is the Russian Black Sea fleet temporarily based in Crimea (Ukraine). Russia intends to reinforce and modernize its fleet in Ukraine, but Kremlin faces another problem, in the agreement regulating the stay of Russian Black Sea fleet in Ukraine there is no provisions regulating the modernization of fleet. Therefore Russia has to negotiate it with Ukraine but until now Ukraine didn't show the political will to let Russia modernize its fleet based in Ukrainian city of Sevastopol.

What Russia will propose to Ukraine? Intimidation is not really working. Economic pressure is not working. So, maybe discount for Russian gas? We will see, but Ukrainian President became smarter while dealing with Russians and will request a high price which Russians are not likely to pay.

Concluding this article I'd like to say that Russia is constantly trying to engage Ukraine in its geopolitical orbit but until now Putin didn't have much success. Since 2010 Yanukovych became smarter. Ukraine started to develop its shale gas deposits, signed an agreement with Germany for reverse gas supply, concluded negotiations and initialed the Association Agreement and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with the European Union and awaits for its official signature during the Eastern Partnership Summit this November in Vilnius (Lithuania).

Russia tries and will definitely try to sabotage the signature of the Association. Meanwhile Russia is losing its influence in Ukraine and Moldova. Should Ukraine wait for some “surprise” from Russians? I think we should. Ukrainian society and Government have to expect the escalation of tensions in Russo-Ukrainian relations and to be ready for countering all Russian anti-Ukrainian efforts.


My own questions by TheRealist:
1. Will Ukraine's actions threaten the Russian Black Sea Fleet's position and modernization?
2. Will Russian interest in Moldova be jeopardize?
3. Will this threaten Russian military technical cooperation, like the An-70 and sub-components supplies?
4. Is the Eurasian Union project going to be limited by this?
5. What could happen to the Pro-Russian region of Crimea?

This is very troubling in my opinion. I hope for further and deeper insights for this issue.

destabilization of Ukrainian internal affairs by promoting “federalization”, joining the Customs Union and the use of Russian language in Ukraine.

Wanting open trade (ie customs union) and for the Ukraine to allow the use of a language most of its subjects already speak is destabilising the Ukraine?

In what way I wonder?

Perhaps a customs union might help them sell their chocolate and get a better price for gas?

Also the Ukraine blocking Russian peacekeeping flights... isn't that a bit belligerent? Would a friendly neighbour do that?

Everybody knows that Russia uses its peacekeepers in order to escalate tensions in breakaway regions in the ex-USSR territory. Such escalation even resulted in a Russian-Georgian war in August 2008 when Russia violated all possible agreements and invaded Georgia.

Where to start... clearly this article is written by someone who hates Russia... the fact that they seem to be upset about something is a very good thing in my opinion.

Ukrainian President became smarter while dealing with Russians and will request a high price which Russians are not likely to pay.

I hope he does and the major Russian fleet of the Black sea can pull out of Sebastapol and move to somewhere in Russia. Not ideal but better than having a major fleet based in a hostile foreign land.

1. Will Ukraine's actions threaten the Russian Black Sea Fleet's position and modernization?

Hopefully they will hasten the decision to move the black sea fleet to Russian territory.

2. Will Russian interest in Moldova be jeopardize?

Depends on how important it is to Russia... to get there they either need to pass through Ukrainian or Romanian airspace.

3. Will this threaten Russian military technical cooperation, like the An-70 and sub-components supplies?

It will be a problem, but good for the Il-476.

5. What could happen to the Pro-Russian region of Crimea?

The people of the Crimea might decide they want independence... of course referendums are only listened to when they suit the west so a referendum that led to the Crimea becoming independent from the Ukraine and wanting closer ties with Russia will likely be condemned in the west as a Russian provocation or corruption or some such thing.

The same from Kosovo shows the beacon of democracy still shines in the world...

This is very troubling in my opinion. I hope for further and deeper insights for this issue.

I suggest you try to find an article written by a Ukrainian that doesn't hate Russia to get both sides of the story.

I mean Russia hasn't blocked NATO transport of material to Afghanistan and has actually allowed its transfer over its borders, yet Ukraine is happy to block the transfer of peacekeepers to an area of conflict... well dress that up any way you like.

I see your point GarryB, given that Russia has major interest in Moldova and in Ukraine I do believe Moscow has major concerns. Correct me if I am wrong but a number of Russian vessels are still being powered by Ukrainian built engines and that the Russian military still rely upon Ukraine in some spare parts or sub-components, especially the ICBM like Voyevoda (SS-18) and some parts for aircraft. And in my view both Ukraine and Moldova serve as Russia's buffer zones, losing them will further complicate Russian security issues.

I also see the point on rationale of the Russian navy building a new naval base in Novorossiysk, so that to more independent and have the freedom to modernize the Black Sea Fleet.

I also know that not all of Ukrainians hate Russia. I think Yanukovych has some economic interests in the EU, hence the Associate Agreement.

Very biased article written under the veneer of objectivity yet in actual fact being anything but.

Bunch of completely baseless claims and paranoia about Russian provocations and imperialism. No evidence presented, just emotions and make-believe.

I wouldn't worry about its predictions and conclusions; generally speaking the more propagandistic an article is - the less relation it has to reality.

This is truly very interesting to me...

Can't really play 'divide and conquer' without polarizing relations first.
Goes to prove (time and again) that you can turn everyone (even brothers) against each other, if you are a true Machiavelli...
Seen it happen quite a few times before, but it makes me both sad and angry every single time I see it.
Slavic people are very emotional and prone to being played by outsiders (and please note that I only use the term 'emotional' since I don't want to use 'stupid' to describe people that I myself am a part of, but it is a term that would suit the explanation far, far better...).

Could never have happened if there wasn't a touch of hubris on the Russian side that results in a touch of resentment (but also in an inferiority complex) on the side of the Ukrainians.
Have seen it happen between us and the Serbs and us and the Bulgarians... Truly tragic and laughable behavior, but also one that serves 'outside forces' the most...like I said: can't play 'divide and conquer' without it.

flamming_python wrote:Very biased article written under the veneer of objectivity yet in actual fact being anything but.

Bunch of completely baseless claims and paranoia about Russian provocations and imperialism. No evidence presented, just emotions and make-believe.

I wouldn't worry about its predictions and conclusions; generally speaking the more propagandistic an article is - the less relation it has to reality.

Pretty much.

Some Ukrainians have an overinflated sense of importance when it comes to Russia.

TR1 wrote:

flamming_python wrote:Very biased article written under the veneer of objectivity yet in actual fact being anything but.

Bunch of completely baseless claims and paranoia about Russian provocations and imperialism. No evidence presented, just emotions and make-believe.

I wouldn't worry about its predictions and conclusions; generally speaking the more propagandistic an article is - the less relation it has to reality.

Pretty much.

Some Ukrainians have an overinflated sense of importance when it comes to Russia.

Care to explain?!
Seems Ukraine is important enough for Putin to go there to celebrate a pretty important anniversary, perhaps he wasn't too aware that it is miniscule in importance because he didn't consult random people on an internet forum?!
But, I should thank you for proving my point.

Did you not read the article?

It is a typical Ukrainian piece of panic mongering.

I've read it and posted my opinion upon it.
My reaction was vis-a-vis:

TR1 wrote:Some Ukrainians have an overinflated sense of importance

My view is biased by defense related blogs by Ukrainians online.

It is an absurd mixture of pride and Russophobia.

TR1 wrote:My view is biased by defense related blogs by Ukrainians online.
It is an absurd mixture of pride and Russophobia.

You've seen nothing if you haven't seen the Serbophobia and Bulgarophobia many Macedonians post online...
Still I like to keep an open mind and see the bigger picture...

True but the issue is Ukraine is far too unstable politically and socially towards Russia.
Commercially, I will let the market work itself out, but regarding military projects I am 100% for Russia pulling out as much as it can from joint projects with Ukraine.
Any funding used to pay Ukraine can be used to support Russian industry, and it is a dangerous policy if push ever comes to shove.

TR1 wrote:True but the issue is Ukraine is far too unstable politically and socially towards Russia.
Commercially, I will let the market work itself out, but regarding military projects I am 100% for Russia pulling out as much as it can from joint projects with Ukraine.
Any funding used to pay Ukraine can be used to support Russian industry, and it is a dangerous policy if push ever comes to shove.

Oh FFS mate!
Did you not know that NATO used not only our airspace but also our airports to bomb Serbia?!
Do you think Macedonians agreed?! Overwhelming majority (close to 97%) were against it! Many demonstrations occurred and even the American Embassy was attacked and torched. Do you think our politicos cared?! Not in the least!
Why did it happen?! For many reasons, including ones I've mentioned in my first post on this topic.
And there were even Serbs that approved of the NATO actions against their country! Just goes to prove my point on how easy it is to play 'divide and conquer' with 'some' people. Now, there are many Serbs that want to join NATO and the EU (same as here). You would think that impossible but there it is...

macedonian wrote:

TR1 wrote:True but the issue is Ukraine is far too unstable politically and socially towards Russia.
Commercially, I will let the market work itself out, but regarding military projects I am 100% for Russia pulling out as much as it can from joint projects with Ukraine.
Any funding used to pay Ukraine can be used to support Russian industry, and it is a dangerous policy if push ever comes to shove.

Oh FFS mate!
Did you not know that NATO used not only our airspace but also our airports to bomb Serbia?!
Do you think Macedonians agreed?! Overwhelming majority (close to 97%) were against it! Many demonstrations occurred and even the American Embassy was attacked and torched. Do you think our politicos cared?! Not in the least!
Why did it happen?! For many reasons, including ones I've mentioned in my first post on this topic.
And there were even Serbs that approved of the NATO actions against their country! Just goes to prove my point on how easy it is to play 'divide and conquer' with 'some' people. Now, there are many Serbs that want to join NATO and the EU (same as here). You would think that impossible but there it is...

So every Ukrainian in the Ukraine can be in favour of a union with Russia. But if they have a government that refuses to budge, and makes problems year after year then clearly there are no chances for co-operation.
All that it would result in is a large amount of delays, lost money and so on while the Russian military will be left waiting for its toys and many Russian producers that rely on Ukrainian parts for various defense products will be left without them and won't be able to produce anything either.
At its worst the Ukrainians can pass sensitive data onto the West too; like it has done with armour and anti-aircraft technology already.

Personally I take the middle-line between you two. I think it is possible to draw the Ukraine in, but it has to be done gradually. Start with the non-sensitive stuff first; An-148s (Russia has Superjets anyway) and An-70s (can always be replaced with Il-476s which are already in production anyway). An-140s too, if they're profitable.
Then we'll see how it goes from there. If there are no more upsets in relations, no more new governments that throw tantrums, then co-operation can be expanded. Nuclear technology, space technology, armour, etc...
But the process should be started (it is already fortunately); because as co-operation expands, there is less of a chance that the Ukraine will join NATO or the EU; it will be more appealing to them to make more money with Russia and so gradually relations will continue to stabilize.

I think this idiot (original article we are discussing) has managed to put us all on the defensive and as a result we are helping him by suggesting the Russian Navy leave its home and that Russian pull out of the An-70 program etc etc.

The base in the Crimea is useful for Russia and I am sure they can negotiate terms to keep them there a while longer.

Any pressure the Ukraine tries to exert will be counterproductive... to get cheaper gas they will need some serious concessions... developing other ports in the Black Sea would make a lot of sense anyway as a viable alternative gives them more negotiating flexibility.

With regard to the An-70 they need to negotiate full licencing rights so they can make their own planes if needs be rather than having to include Ukrainian made components.

I am terribly sorry if I have offended or made it uncomfortable for my fellow forum partners and Russian brothers and sisters for any discomfort coming from posting this article. I have no intention in causing sleepless nights for all.

He's just another butthurt Ukrainian troll that's all. There are plenty of those around

Checked out another of his articles (lol!)
http://www.info-news.com.ua/?q=1025th-anniversary-of-baptism-of-kyivan-rus

I've decided to write this article to lay down some light on the event which will take place this Sunday, July 28, 2013. Ukraine will celebrate 1025th anniversary of baptism of Kyivan Rus (988-1240), strong medieval feudal state in Europe.

Recently the information about 1025th anniversary of baptism of Russia appeared in Russian and French media. What is this? Rewriting of history? Or just an ignorance of some western journalists? The thing is that 1025 years ago Russia simply didn't exist.

Neither the Russian Federation nor the Ukraine nor Belarus existed in fact. It was all one state called Kieven Rus' which was the ancestor of all 3. So yes, indeed Kieven Rus' is Russia, and Russia has every right to celebrate its baptism.

At that time Kyivan Rus incorporated mostly present day Ukrainian, Belarusian and some Russian lands.

It included all the 'Russian lands' at that time (9th-13th centuries) that there were. Does this joker mean to imply that because ancient Kieven Rus' didn't reach Murmansk, Ossetia and the Kuril Islands that it only included 'some Russian lands'?

Grand Prince of Kyiv Volodymyr Sviatoslavych (Володимѣръ Свѧтославичь) who ruled from 980 until 1015, decided to get married with Anna Porphyrogenita, sister of Byzantium Emperor Bazil II. At that time Kyivan Rus as its ruler Volodymyr Sviatoslavych was pagan while Byzantium Empire was christian. In order to get married he had to accept Christianity, and it actually happened in 988. Then the Christianity was spread in Kyivan Rus (often referred in Ukraine as Ruthenia).

Funny how he mentions 'Ruthenia' as being what Kieven Rus' is called in the Ukraine, considering that 'Ruthenia' is actually the name for Kieven Rus' that was coined and used exclusively in Latin-language manuscripts and documents in Western and Central Europe.

There is simply no such word in Russian and I'm pretty sure in Ukrainian too. It's just called Rus'.

Kyivan Rus flourished until XII century, but due to the succession system it was divided into small separate principalities, the main among them are: Principality of Chernihiv, Principality of Galicia-Volhynia (later Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia), Principality of Polotsk, Principality of Vladimir-Suzdal (predecessor of Russia and the vassal state of the Golden Horde). But only the Mongol invasion (starting from 1223 when troops of Kyivan Rus, except troops from Vladimir-Suzdal, met with Mongols near the river Kalka) triggered the decline of Kyivan Rus.

Nice little attempted dig at Russia here. The implication being that the Vladimir-Suzdal cowards; i.e. the exclusive ancestors of modern-day Russians (nevermind Murom-Ryazan, Smolensk principalities, Novgorod republic) - were too scared to even fight the Mongols.

Of course it's bullshit though of the highest degree. Vladimir-Suzdal indeed didn't take part in the Battle on the Kalka River but most of the other principalities didn't either; Kieven Rus' military wasn't all concentrated into one large army; it was impossible due to its large size, huge communications and logistics distances, and decentralisation into multiple principalities ruled by different and sometimes rival princes of the same dynasty. After the battle the Mongols retreated from Rus' lands having plundered enough for the moment, and thus it was impossible to gather another army and engage them again in time.

However the principality of Vladimir-Suzdal did fight against the Mongols - when they returned 15 years later and demanded submission from everyone. The ruler of Vladimir-Suzdal, Yuri II, refused and gathered his forces, meeting the Mongols at the Battle of the Sit River where his army was completely annihilated, he himself was killed and beheaded, his head presented to Batu Khan, Vladimir, Moscow and most of the rest of his principality promptly razed to the ground, and thereby after dominated by the Mongols and their successor states for the next 200 years. The end.

Kyiv was plundered and burned in 1240. At that period Moscow was a tine outpost in Vladimir-Suzdal. This Principality didn't consider itself as a part of Kyivan Rus and didn't fight against Mongols but became their vassal.

Is that why then Moscow was burnt to the ground along with all of its inhabitants by the Mongol Horde in 1237-38 and what was left was pillaged again 5 years later? Man, those Moscovites must have really pissed off the Mongols somehow in the process of their cowardice & submission. Maybe they didn't bow down low enough and the Mongols took it as an insult.

Basically, the present day Russia originates from the Grand Duchy of Moscow (1328-1547), which at its turn originates from Principality of Vladimir-Suzdal.

And the Principality of Vladimir-Suzdal originates from where?

Russia always claimed its right for Kyivan Rus historical heritage. While Ukraine and Belarus were conquered by Russia,

Maybe I just don't know history too well, but I don't remember Russians ever fighting Belarussians or Ukrainians (other than against Ukrainian Nazis in WW2).

only Russians could write the history of Kyivan Rus and they twisted it in the way that the whole world believed that Russia is its descendent.

So Russia wasn't the descendent of Kieven Rus' then? What was it a descendant of? Why was every Russian city in the Medieval period part of Kieven Rus'? Where did the name 'Rossiya'/Russia actually come from?

PS. I wrote the name of Grand Prince of Kyiv as Volodymyr Sviatoslavych and not as it is accepted in English or French as Vladimir, because his name is actually Volodymyr. Those among you who can read the Cyrillic letters will agree with me. Even here Russians propagandized the writing of his name in Russian way as Vladimir (Владимир) and not in its original Kyivan Rus or Ukrainian way as Volodymyr (Володимѣръ - Володимир).

Not even going to comment. Wait - just did.

Nice find Python.

I think it confirms what we all thought- this guy is a professional UKRAINE STRONGGGGG troll.
Notice how they always need to bring up Russia to compare to Ukraine- clearest inferiority complex masquerading as superiority complex I have ever seen.

Oh and since we are slinging dirt at each other - Ukrainian sounds like the Russian languages retarded cousin. Come at me Kiyev.

EDIT: Should be honest though, there are some Russianstrong tards who base their whole identity on being better than Ukraine as well. Whatcha gonna do...

TR1 wrote:Pretty much.

Some Ukrainians have an overinflated sense of importance when it comes to Russia.

X2

Ukrainians seems to think they are entitled when it comes to Russia , i mean stories about "land bridge between West and Russia" and "Russia cannot be superpower without Ukraine" etc. Russia pretty much made to world top powers without them , and has way more political , economic , industrial connections and cooperation with Western countries then they have.

While i can understand some of their fears , it seems these fears make them irrational. I can`t understand how they allowed themselves to drop to the floor litteraly , Soviet Ukraine had economy size of France , now their economy is comparable with Romania with twice of population. I mean there is simply no rational thinking about these processes , perhaps the answer is one they don`t like so it`s better not to think about it.

zg18 wrote:

TR1 wrote:Pretty much.

Some Ukrainians have an overinflated sense of importance when it comes to Russia.

X2

Ukrainians seems to think they are entitled when it comes to Russia , i mean stories about "land bridge between West and Russia" and "Russia cannot be superpower without Ukraine" etc. Russia pretty much made to world top powers without them , and has way more political , economic , industrial connections and cooperation with Western countries then they have.

While i can understand some of their fears , it seems these fears make them irrational. I can`t understand how they allowed themselves  to drop to the floor litteraly , Soviet Ukraine had economy size of France , now their economy is comparable with Romania with twice of population. I mean there is simply no rational thinking about these processes , perhaps the answer is one they don`t like so it`s better not to think about it.

Fuck it - they made their choice now; EU and everything.
Let's see how it goes.

you would think all these countries wanting to join the EU would open their eyes and see whats happened to other countries who have joined. its ruined them (Spain, Portugal, Italy, Cyprus, Rep. Ireland, to name a few). I think Ukraine and other CIS countries would benefit from having closer ties with Russia. The EU is doomed. The people of the UK want to leave, and it looks like they are going the get the vote possibly next year or 2015. If you think about it if CIS countries and Russia along with ties to the BRICS countries they would be a union to be reckoned with, not even USA wouldnt be able to push them around.

d_taddei2 wrote:you would think all these countries wanting to join the EU would open their eyes and see whats happened to other countries who have joined. its ruined them (Spain, Portugal, Italy, Cyprus, Rep. Ireland, to name a few). I think Ukraine and other CIS countries would benefit from having closer ties with Russia. The EU is doomed. The people of the UK want to leave, and it looks like they are going the get the vote possibly next year or 2015. If you think about it if CIS countries and Russia along with ties to the BRICS countries they would be a union to be reckoned with, not even USA wouldnt be able to push them around.

It's very simple, the Ukrainian elite want EU citizenship so that they can come and go without issues, easily own property in Europe, have their kids grow up there or whatever.
The political class want the EU's structural funds/money. Poland gets something like $12 billion a year right now from the EU; this is the balance after all of its individual contributions to the EU budget are deducted. The Ukraine looks at this and decides that it wants something similar. Of course - it's just not going to happen; no-one will be willing to handle the strain that a massive poor country like the Ukraine will put on the EU's social support system and programs; the Ukraine will have to be fed two dozen billion dollars a year in order to maintain economic and living standards progress; if not more if Russia decides to hedge its bets and pull its investments from the Ukraine.
And ordinary people are simply deluded by their leaders; they are either nationalistic with an irrational phobia towards Russia that leads to them making irrational decisions as zg18 pointed out (although actually there aren't so many of these people), or they just want to believe that the EU will find the money to fund them. But at the end of the day every public sentiment is based on some selfish self-interest or the other - in the Ukrainians case it's the possibility of travelling and working in the EU - where they don't have to worry about the fate of their country.

zg18 wrote:
X2

Ukrainians seems to think they are entitled when it comes to Russia , i mean stories about "land bridge between West and Russia" and "Russia cannot be superpower without Ukraine" etc. Russia pretty much made to world top powers without them , and has way more political , economic , industrial connections and cooperation with Western countries then they have.

C'mon man, you're Croatian FFS, I know you can understand this...You know how it works - You hate the one closest to you. It's not the most rational of emotions, just look how Slovenians feel about Croats, or the way most Croats act toward Serbs, but they both seem to like us Macedonians (while we have a beef with the Bulgarians and the Serbs)...it doesn't make any sense if you don't put things in perspective.
...and...
Oh...the magnificent EU...
It's all about whomever 's willing to bend-over more (when 'real' power isn't there for one to make a stand), in my opinion...
And there isn't 'bendover mentality' lacking (nor has there been in the past).

zg18 wrote:While i can understand some of their fears , it seems these fears make them irrational.

Fears ALWAYS make people irrational, just read the comments on Jutarnji, and see how many Croats are acting rational when a Serb makes a sensible comment (or indeed see just how many Serbs ACTUALLY MAKE rational comments there)
You get the same when you read comments in Serb media.

zg18 wrote:I can`t understand how they allowed themselves  to drop to the floor litteraly , Soviet Ukraine had economy size of France , now their economy is comparable with Romania with twice of population. I mean there is simply no rational thinking about these processes , perhaps the answer is one they don`t like so it`s better not to think about it.

Rational and Slavic shouldn't be used in a same sentence if you ask me...
And same goes for the Russians too. If there wasn't the oil, and if they hadn't have Putin come to power, you'd see the same mentality we saw when they were under Yeltsin...which would make them the same as the rest of us...You remember the times when Russians and Poles were coming over to Yugoslavia to sell stuff (or as much as it pains me to say: When Russian/Ukrainian girls were selling themselves for the smallest amount of cash). 
To be honest, I'm really glad these things have happened for the Russians. Gives hope to the rest of us.
Perhaps we can get rid of our Gligorovs and Tugjmans and Miloshevichs...and have a REAL leader(s) for a change.

As for the Ukrainian economy during Soviet times:
What was the Croatian economy in Yugoslavia?!
What was the Serb economy?!
What was ours?!
It's the same with the Ukrainians, same parallel applies.

Now, don't go confusing me for a Yugo-nostalgicar, because I'm not one!
Just pointing out the similarities here, so that we can keep an open mind and see where the Ukrainians are coming from...


edit_________________

d_taddei2 wrote:you would think all these countries wanting to join the EU would open their eyes and see whats happened to other countries who have joined. its ruined them (Spain, Portugal, Italy, Cyprus, Rep. Ireland, to name a few). I think Ukraine and other CIS countries would benefit from having closer ties with Russia. The EU is doomed. The people of the UK want to leave, and it looks like they are going the get the vote possibly next year or 2015. If you think about it if CIS countries and Russia along with ties to the BRICS countries they would be a union to be reckoned with, not even USA wouldnt be able to push them around.

You think the actual people want to join the EU?!
Or NATO for that matter?!

Only the leaders and the ignorant wankers among the populace!
And the various media and NGO propaganda doesn't help things one bit.

If you ask me, we have a visa-free travel with the EU, and I'd be glad if things remained status quo, and we don't advance into full membership. But the politicos don't ask me. Nor do the Eurocrats for that matter. I honestly hope we NEVER join the EU.

TheRealist wrote:I see your point GarryB, given that Russia has major interest in Moldova and in Ukraine I do believe Moscow has major concerns. Correct me if I am wrong but a number of Russian vessels are still being powered by Ukrainian built engines and that the Russian military still rely upon Ukraine in some spare parts or sub-components, especially the ICBM like Voyevoda (SS-18) and some parts for aircraft. And in my view both Ukraine and Moldova serve as Russia's buffer zones, losing them will further complicate Russian security issues.

I also see the point on rationale of the Russian navy building a new naval base in Novorossiysk, so that to more independent and have the freedom to modernize the Black Sea Fleet.

I also know that not all of Ukrainians hate Russia. I think Yanukovych has some economic interests in the EU, hence the Associate Agreement.

Not quite. They created a plant to build Klimov engines in Russia. They also moved over the plant of building engines for cruise missiles in Russia as well, since majority of it did come from Ukraine. In other words, it was known quite a few years ago that the Western Ukrainians (Polish Ukrainians) gaining much popularity and strength (gaining power in Kiev), that Russia would be forced to start moving a lot of production over to Russia. Technically, they don't really produce much for Russia anymore other than spare parts for older systems that will be phased out anyway, and Ukraine imports a lot from Russia. Antonov is really the only one left and a lot of its production is in Russia too (Aviastar-SP).

Also noting, Crimea wasn't part of Ukraine until recent history. Majority of people in Crimea speak Russian, not Ukrainian. Actually, on a fair note, about 90% of the country speaks Russian and Ukrainian is really just either spoken by leadership/government and some households. Now the difference between the two languages is really about maybe the sense of Ukrainian being pretty old and using different dialects, while Russian has changed over the decades/centuries, but it really isn't hard for the two to understand each other. The problem with a lot of modern Ukrainians are that they still cling onto the former glory, where they believe that they were just trounced by Russia. Now mind you, Ukraine was treated like a little child in a lot of sense (hence being called little Russia at many points in History) but simple fact is, many Russian's hold same genetics to Ukrainians, even if many of these Ukrainians don't like it. Them denying it is simply trying to whitewash history for the Ukrainian/Polish in western Ukraine (Lviv area is pretty much dominant of this group) and it really is sad. But don't forget, for a very long time, Ukraine was split between east and west, and in this sense, you will get two divergent groups in the country, which is the case today in Ukraine.

As for politics, yes both sides are corrupt, but Ukraine is far worst off. Simply put, Ukraine has a GDP per capita lower than China, and Ukraine only has around 44M people. Pretty pathetic. And at that, majority of their sales of product are reliant on Russia's purchases. Agriculture, end products of, and military. Unfortunately for Ukraine though, many of this is changing with the massive push for agriculture development (we may see Russia as the agriculture power of Eastern world very soon) and localisation of all military development. What Ukraine will lose even more is the loans. Ukraine relies a lot of loans and investments from Russia, and if Russia pulls that and puts high tarrifs on Ukraine, well, kiss a lot of their sales goodbye (or just profits). EU is none-competitive for many of these small eastern countries, as Antonov would quickly either be absorbed or just destroyed by EADS and whatever agriculture industry they have will be gobbled up by foreign companies and Ukraine will see very little in terms of profit for themselves thanks to the free border trade. Pretty much, a lot of Ukrainian land is owned by British companies that pretty much take advantage of it and are rarely if ever taxed.

Ukraine will be sapped dry of whatever little it has, its enterprises that could be considered capable will be either absorbed or destroyed cause it is considered competition, and then Ukraine will end up very reliant on EU funding just to survive and so they end up as a pathetic satellite state. At least under USSR, Ukraine was quite powerful and developed.

sepheronx wrote:Not quite.  They created a plant to build Klimov engines in Russia.  They also moved over the plant of building engines for cruise missiles in Russia as well, since majority of it did come from Ukraine.  In other words, it was known quite a few years ago that the Western Ukrainians (Polish Ukrainians) gaining much popularity and strength (gaining power in Kiev), that Russia would be forced to start moving a lot of production over to Russia.  Technically, they don't really produce much for Russia anymore other than spare parts for older systems that will be phased out anyway, and Ukraine imports a lot from Russia.  Antonov is really the only one left and a lot of its production is in Russia too (Aviastar-SP).

Also noting, Crimea wasn't part of Ukraine until recent history.  Majority of people in Crimea speak Russian, not Ukrainian.  Actually, on a fair note, about 90% of the country speaks Russian and Ukrainian is really just either spoken by leadership/government and some households.  Now the difference between the two languages is really about maybe the sense of Ukrainian being pretty old and using different dialects, while Russian has changed over the decades/centuries, but it really isn't hard for the two to understand each other.  The problem with a lot of modern Ukrainians are that they still cling onto the former glory, where they believe that they were just trounced by Russia.  Now mind you, Ukraine was treated like a little child in a lot of sense (hence being called little Russia at many points in History) but simple fact is, many Russian's hold same genetics to Ukrainians, even if many of these Ukrainians don't like it.  Them denying it is simply trying to whitewash history for the Ukrainian/Polish in western Ukraine (Lviv area is pretty much dominant of this group) and it really is sad.  But don't forget, for a very long time, Ukraine was split between east and west, and in this sense, you will get two divergent groups in the country, which is the case today in Ukraine.

As for politics, yes both sides are corrupt, but Ukraine is far worst off.  Simply put, Ukraine has a GDP per capita lower than China, and Ukraine only has around 44M people.  Pretty pathetic.  And at that, majority of their sales of product are reliant on Russia's purchases.  Agriculture, end products of, and military.  Unfortunately for Ukraine though, many of this is changing with the massive push for agriculture development (we may see Russia as the agriculture power of Eastern world very soon) and localisation of all military development.  What Ukraine will lose even more is the loans.  Ukraine relies a lot of loans and investments from Russia, and if Russia pulls that and puts high tarrifs on Ukraine, well, kiss a lot of their sales goodbye (or just profits).  EU is none-competitive for many of these small eastern countries, as Antonov would quickly either be absorbed or just destroyed by EADS and whatever agriculture industry they have will be gobbled up by foreign companies and Ukraine will see very little in terms of profit for themselves thanks to the free border trade.  Pretty much, a lot of Ukrainian land is owned by British companies that pretty much take advantage of it and are rarely if ever taxed.

Ukraine will be sapped dry of whatever little it has, its enterprises that could be considered capable will be either absorbed or destroyed cause it is considered competition, and then Ukraine will end up very reliant on EU funding just to survive and so they end up as a pathetic satellite state.  At least under USSR, Ukraine was quite powerful and developed.

To give my very honest opinion (and I'm saying this as a Russophile) - you have a very Russo-centric view on things.
Try to be rational. You were right on many points when discussing with the Russian crowd on MP.net (yes, I've read that discussion), but you only view things from a certain angle.
It takes two to tango, and the Russians certainly haven't been the best of partners for the Ukrainians to tango with.
Hence, the look westward...
There is certainly more complex issues at hand here, but, basically what I'm saying is: keep a balanced approach on the matter...

Too lazy to type more...
no offense intended...etc