posted
I feel like there's such a fundamental miscommunication that its actually impossible to resolve.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jake: That exact thing--a lack of a word for "no", but a negating word that effectively means "not" is exactly what I was talking about with Thai.
That's so funny. Slavic languages (and Slavic people in generally), are extremely comfortable with saying no. Sometimes they say no even when they mean yes.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar: I feel like there's such a fundamental miscommunication that its actually impossible to resolve.
You appeared to be suggesting that there was, at some point, a serious possibility that Japan would be admitted to the United States as a full state in its own right. That seems...unlikely is understating things, but if that's not what you meant, I don't know what you did mean.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think he meant it was an actual possibility. I think he meant it might have been better for them, and that for a brief period, the Japanese people themselves might have considered it, which leaves the American side of the equation out of it. I don't know enough about Japanese history to know if they really would have considered it, but that's a more limited statement.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
a guy like putin being the ruler of russia is kind of a perfect demonstration of how much it has descended into a goonish kleptocracy
it's just so amazing. russia was going to have crimea no matter what, but putin can't do it in a way which doesn't do a number on their already tenuous international standing.
with luck though maybe the G7 will stop pretending it's the G8
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
see, right there. AND russia's going to spend a few years finding out what it's like to be a corrupt petro state that has spooked its primary markets (europe, etc) out of trusting them to hold the energy reins.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Surprised this thread hasn't had much more posting given whats going on in Eastern Ukraine.
Anyways, updating the scoreboard since I made some claims and should own up to them:
-Wrong w.r.t G8, although one could argue its important functions are superseded by the G20.
-Wrong on Russian expanding into Ukraine, this one actually baffles me as taking Crimea was risky enough and generally an all around "win", while the insertion into Ukraine appears to have been "lessons learned" and better executed this makes me feel like its crossing the line for what Russia can get away with. Its not what I'ld do when playing Hearts of Iron. :colbert:
-Currently though there is still no significant effort to economically relieve Ukraine on the order of the 80 billion$ it needs, it maybe has about 10 billion possibly going its way. The IMF are still being austeritarian dicks. Same as below I'll consider this one a draw as who knows what'll happen.
-Sanctions are currently still pisspoor and don't amount to anything, and wouldn't have amounted to anything with just Crimea, at this point anything is possible. But the economics are not making the situation favorable for hard action by EU/NATO. I consider this one a draw.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
russia taking crimea in the way that they did was not an all around 'win' - as i mentioned before
quote:IMF are still being austeritarian dicks
how do you define austeritarian, and do you think the imf's strategy here is driven by an attempt to put ukraine through austerity politics
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
The IMF, from what I've read, isn't interested in handing out funds to countries that they believe aren't "serious" in cutting their debts, so they insist on deep cuts to essential spending (such as pensions for old people), spending that has an important role in maintaining employment and economic growth; essentially Shock Therapy 2.0. For Ukraine this is political suicide, if they force it, they'll just get toppled again. Stability is what Ukraine needs, not further austerity measures.
There are some politicians and people who seem important within the IMF, EU and US administrations that seem willing to simply provide Ukraine the funds it needs without preconditions but I haven't seen movement in that regards.
As for The Hero City of Sevastopol, where I remind you, except for maybe the Rzhev meatgrinder probably some one of the highest concentrations of dead Russians defending the glorious motherland from the Hiterlites who were seeking to exterminate the sacred Russian people (this is for illustrative purposes of Russian thinking) that was illegally given to Ukraine with all of its Russian peoples by a drunk idiot; where now the Baltic Fleet, famous for its history of excellent service to the motherland, for their bravery in battle is currently berthed, and in which there isn't any other naval bases in the black sea in which they could dock if denied Sevastopol...
It was clearly in the Russian interest, to ensure that in the face of a clearly hostile government in Kiev to insure that there was no strategic danger to the Black Sea fleet.
So now the current situation is that the Black Sea Fleet will never be in danger, was taken without firing a shot and no longer need to give blackmail money to the corrupt and illegitimate government in Kiev.
From this prism/perspective how was taking Crimea and securing THE HERO CITY OF SEVASTOPOL not a clear "win"? The sanctions at the time were negligible and the rubble stabilized, there was to be no serious consequences.
Now would it have been how I would have done it? I think if Putin was more concerned with Russian interest more then Putin's interest he would have occupied it, but not annexed it, and used it as a bargaining chip with Kiev to secure an indefinite lease and perhaps greater autonomy for Crimea and an agreement to not join NATO.
As it is now whelp, but that's more a result of seemingly wanting more.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, what a mess. Protesters overthrowing one government, other protesters overthrowing another government, both sides accusing each other of sending in agents to encourage uprisings, both sides denying it. One side's protesters are Nazis, the other side's protesters are terrorists ... I wish we could stay out of it.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:From this prism/perspective how was taking Crimea and securing THE HERO CITY OF SEVASTOPOL not a clear "win"?
like i said before:
quote:russia was going to have crimea no matter what, but putin can't do it in a way which doesn't do a number on their already tenuous international standing.
congratulations, russia gets their HERO CITY OF WHATEVER (and spook the petro sales base that tenuously floats that ridiculous corrupt mess of a has-been country) (which is not a win)
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But will Europe really cut down the amount of oil and gas they buy from Russia?
Here in Finland, refining Russian oil is currently the biggest standalone export industry we have (Since Nokia went down). I doubt we are going to sacrifice our own economical interests in order to honor international justice.
Posts: 273 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the short term: nah not really, and I would be flabbergasted if europe didn't purposefully move to weaken sanctions against russia.
In the long term: we already know that the international relations scenario has changed enough that Russia would NOT attempt what they did as recently as 2009, where Gazprom turned off Ukraine's subsidized cash flow to put some fire under the pants of the government of the time. There was a resulting shortage. But it hurt Gazprom too much for Russia to easily debate or even remotely consider a similar shutoff.
Between the two incidents, Russia has spooked its main export markets and hurt its image as a reliable, long term provider. You don't want to do that. The damage will not come in sanctions; it will come in that the Europeans will take this as incentive to treat Russia as a weaker bet for stable energy supply, and move towards a heavier diversification of oil and gas supply that isn't from russia, as well as enhancing alternate energy systems that wean Europe off the tap.
Wanna see how Russia makes hard times for itself for a decade? You're seeing it right now. Russia is so greatly dependent on its energy revenues that it is a classic petrostate. History shows that these are susceptible to corruption, autocracy and violent conflict, as well as bust contractions that hurt. Greatly.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also already we've seen hundreds of billions of dollars of capital flood out of Russia. Investors don't like uncertainty, and Russia is dishing out a lot of it.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Europe is already talking Ukrainian investment. They'll invest billions in Ukraine's gas market to get fracking up and running. It'll prop up Ukraine with a much needed influx of cash and it'll create a long term investment in freeing themselves from Russian gas exports. Ukraine has a huge amount of untapped natural gas. They just lack the funds and technical know-how to unlock it. The West will help with that.
It was something the West never needed or wanted to do before, but with Putin's latest moves, it's almost a done deal.
Putin made these moves for short term political reasons. Long term they are huge blunders.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ukrainian helicopters shot down during a raid in Eastern Ukraine against separatists.
The IMF is also saying they will have no choice but to restructure their loan to the Ukraine if they lose control of the East as that is where so much of their manufacturing is.
Man, this just gets worse and worse for Ukraine.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I think the Crimea only breaks away if Ukraine splits in two for real. If the West breaks away to form its own nation and seeks closer ties to the EU and the East goes to Russia, the East and Russia will get the Crimea.
But there's no way Russia will annex it outright.
Six months later ...
quote:Russian armored columns said to capture key Ukrainian towns
Russian soldiers, tanks and heavy artillery began rolling into southeastern Ukraine in earnest Thursday, the Ukrainian government said, as well-armed detachments captured key towns, burned buildings and sent the underequipped Ukrainian forces into full retreat — a show of military force that the United States now considers an invasion in all but name.
U.S. officials began saying privately for the first time Thursday that they consider the escalation of recent days tantamount to a Russian invasion, but President Obama stopped short of using the term at a news conference late in the afternoon. He said the United States would continue to rely on sanctions in an effort to deter Russia.
...
Another U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe the behind-the-scenes diplomacy, said the purpose of Russia’s “armed intervention” may be to try to open a land route to Crimea, which Russia annexed from Ukraine earlier this year.
posted
I kinda want to be mad at Russia for waging a war without having the guts to declare war or admitting to anything, but it seems like they've been studying the American school of diplomacy/warfare quite well.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
*nods* Having actually taken part in similar military actions in the Philippines, I can say that the U.S. doesn't really have the moral high ground on this. Then again, we were acting in support of the Filipino government against rebels and terrorists with less than noble intentions (the bombing of a catholic school that dared to educate girls is something I remember rather vividly), but how many Americans even know that we have troops deployed in the Philippines? How many care? I mean, we've been involved in the fighting there since 2002, and while I read news reports of the conflicts there, they never seem to made the front page.
If the Ukraine was located in the Middle East or Africa or southeast Asia, I wonder if many people would even know this conflict was going on.
quote:Originally posted by Jake: In what respects are the US actions in the Philippines similar?
We provide them with the equipment, training, and logistical and intelligence support to help them fight an ongoing insurgency in the Philippines, as well as engaging in some limited combat operations. This article goes over the basics of our involvement there... I've been deployed to the Philippines on two occasions, and didn't really know the extent of what we were doing until I was there.
They're not exact situations - i.e, we're supporting the legitimate government, not the insurgency in this case - but they are similar in that we're effectively fighting a proxy war while retaining a level of anonymity and neutrality that we wouldn't be if, say, we straight up invaded the Philippines. We do this *all* the time, and are currently doing it in several countries, and most people don't notice and/or care.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
I am pleased that I am not so lost to empathy as to have lost the ability to feel schadenfreude. But, damn, I like that headline.
Posts: 185 | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
My favorite analysis thus far is that the only worse popular investment than the ruble this year was bitcoin. Russia don't need that, dog. Russia is worse off than Greece now. And it's going to be awful for the Russians.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Either Putin will lash out irrationally in an attempt to secure his hold on domestic power.
Or the people, faced with bread lines and inflation, will rise up and look for an alternative.
Running all 160 some nations on earth through those circumstances and seeing which ones choose Option B, I think you'll find Russia is nearly the last nation on Earth that would choose it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah in a way I appreciate the schadenfreude of big bad Russia getting its just deserts.
But an unstable Russia really isn't good for anybody. I certainly don't ever want to see Putin when he feels he has nothing left to lose.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Russia was already unstable independent of whether the economy was robust or not. Putin already acted with indignant abandon. This is not very likely to make his behavior more worrying, because for the reasons I almost prophetically detailed, the economic issues will make it more and more that he has to sit down and shut up if the international community wills it.
It had become a rapidly autocratizing, dysfunctional kleptocracy, drowning in corruption, increasingly reliant on nationalist propaganda and distracting pogroms (note the organized utilization of homophobia, as an example) to keep things smoothed over.
This last year, Russian state control over the media and the way it depicted events such as the downed plane incident went fully into the realm of insanity.
The Russians are likely to suffer for a long time and it's really not pretty.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Either Putin will lash out irrationally in an attempt to secure his hold on domestic power.
Or the people, faced with bread lines and inflation, will rise up and look for an alternative.
Running all 160 some nations on earth through those circumstances and seeing which ones choose Option B, I think you'll find Russia is nearly the last nation on Earth that would choose it.
I sort of disagree actually. The last time Russia expanded militarily, it was more or less goaded into it (annexing Poland), and then provoked into a war that quickly became a grab for targets of opportunity towards the end. Granted, the circumstances were *sort of* similar in 1936 to what they are today, but a big piece of that is missing- nobody is inviting them into Europe this time. They are even more diplomatically isolated than they were then.
And if you look at every other situation in which Russia has been faced with a similar crisis, it has collapsed in on itself relatively quickly. Nothing really changes, but the leaders do get put out to pasture, and new, differently corrupt leaders get put in their place.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Russia's rural economies have apparently been straight up sapped by unbelievable road-to-sochi style corruption and the level of suffering is starting to rise precipitously. Common good projects become giant sieves to vacuum up absurd amounts of cash into a few pockets.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting article written today, a day after the sizable collapse of the Russian stock market. It has a good overview of the Russian economy, and the massive problems they have.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
