Skip to comments.Ukraine to sign political aspects of EU pact on Friday
Posted on 03/19/2014 12:30:30 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
Ukraine will sign an agreement on closer political cooperation with the European Union on Friday, leaving the signature of a more far-reaching trade accord for later, the EU said on Monday.
EU foreign ministers said in a statement after meeting in Brussels that they looked forward to the signing of the political provisions of the so-called association agreement that Ukraine had negotiated with the 28-nation EU, on March 21.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
I wonder how binding a contract with putschists will be.
Wampum and whiskey would add luster to the sale.
Somehow, I just don’t think this is going to end the way Obama Radicals and the Soros Group NGO’s thought it would.
Somehow, I just dont think this is going to end the way Obama Radicals and the Soros Group NGOs thought it would.Not surprising considering your abundant support of the dictator Putin and his invasion of a sovereign country, that western democracies call illegal... you know... America, Europe, Canada, Australia, etc...
I think this is an appropriate response to Moscow’s move.
Ukraine has this unrealistic fantasy that keeping Crimea is worth more than working towards a future with the West and I hope with this decision, they’re reconsidering that approach.
Keeping Slavic brethren by force in a political union they do not want to be in is both immoral and undemocratic. Ukraine should offer to voluntarily relinquish Crimea to Russia in exchange for closer ties to the West.
Its no longer about the illegality of Russia’s actions. Its about doing what is right and a good civil divorce is always better than a bad civil war.
The Russian people of Crimea made their free choice. And now its time the Ukrainian people exercised theirs.
I don’t agree with Russia’s actions - but I do not believe it justifies Ukraine shedding the blood of a fraternal people to keep sovereignty over them that they have rejected.
Its time to let them go and they want to be with Russia to wish them the best. This is not something a country should do lightly. Its not about Russia, not about the fact that it took what it wanted, its about letting the Russians of Crimea have their own future.
Like Ukrainians want to have theirs with Europe. In the long run both sides will benefit.
That is a valid concern and we should reserve measures in the event Moscow breaks its pledge.
All we can do is hope that Crimea is a unique case and not a precedent for Russian actions elsewhere in Europe which should be treated as aggression by the West.
Let me tell you what the problem with that thinking is...
Ukraine was invaded by Russia while they were vulnerable because Putin decided he wanted Crimea. According to the Ukraine constitution the whole country has to vote for Crimea to leave.
By being soft and gifting Crimea to the illegal invasion of Putin, you are making a mockery of civilized international law of recognized national borders, rewarding a criminal dictator and setting a bad precedent for other jack-boot criminal thugs around the world.
That is a very small hope when you argue to rollover on Crimea.
We can argue legality all day long. But its also true no one in Ukraine voted for the restored 2006 Constitution.
The fact of the matter is the issue now is no longer whether Russia’s actions violate international law. The real issue is the Russian people in Crimea don’t want to be under Ukraine.
And using violence to overturn their expressed decision to join Russia would not serve any one’s interests. For Ukraine, joining the West should be far more important than insisting Crimeans submit to its will.
Doing what is right is more important than doing what is legal and its not about appeasing Putin. Its about respecting the wish of a fraternal people and breaking up with them as quickly as possible.
No country wants to lose part of itself under any circumstances and I can understand how Ukraine is feeling. But taking on Russia militarily would be political suicide. As I stressed before better a good civil divorce than a bad civil war.
With Crimea out of Ukraine, Ukraine now the chance to begin afresh and look forward to the future and not to the past. It should take full advantage of it.
Yes I know - I’m not saying this should be viewed a gift to Putin. It is not. The Russian people in Crimea should not be any one’s political football. They’re human beings and have their own opinion. Whether that is legal or not isn’t something for others to decide. If members of a family have conflicting views about the future, they need to do what is best for them. And we all know in life a divorce can be ugly with emotional scars and feelings of betrayal all around. But when there is no love among them, it is time to separate and do what is the right decision for the happiness of both peoples. That should be done irrespective of whether it benefits Putin and his regime.
With Obama your preferred outcome is all but assured (if your hope that emboldened Putin doesn’t invade the rest of Ukraine is true).
That however does not bode well for the future (as history shows).
The best way to handle this is to put Putin back in his USSR box with economic and political isolation until the Russian people had enough and turn on him like what happened to his gangster puppet in Ukraine.
Anything less than that is a defeat that we will pay for and the next generation will fault us on.
I’m sick of the I-told-you-so’s,
I wish we could do something right for once...
We’re not going to go to war over Crimea.
The Ukrainians know this is too and Obama is not a reliable ally.
What I am pointing out is one has to make the best of a bad situation. This is what Kiev is doing in signing the agreement with the EU.
And we’re not exactly in a position to save Ukraine, if Russia breaks its word but we can resist Russian adventurism elsewhere.
I didn’t mention fighting a war.
Going soft now and ignoring internationally recognized borders because Putin pretends to be scarey is the most likely path to fighting a war.
In the worst case scenario, Crimea will become Russia’s Northern Cyprus.
The only way Russia can get it what it wants is to negotiate with Kiev at some point. International legitimacy may not matter much to the Kremlin but having good relations with Europe does.
And he is correct. He did not say it in a mean way however. The speech itself was quite beautiful. Would that we had a president who was eloquent.
He did not say it as they posted it. He said he would not instigate the annexing of Crimea. It was reported incorrectly in the press apparently.
Except I noted the quotation marks in the link you posted.
And he is correct. He did not say it in a mean way however. The speech itself was quite beautiful. Would that we had a president who was eloquent.In his speech today, Putin invoked his favored tactic for criticizing the Kiev government, calling them "fascists, neo-Nazis and anti-Semites."
He said he would not instigate the annexing of Crimea.I'm not taking you seriously - LoL!
That would be our leader who willy wags.
Anyway it has been fairly widely reported that the translation was reported incorrectly. You can find it with google if you care about the truth.
What he said, and I still have a pretty decent amount of Russian on board too - is that he would not do it unless they asked him to come.
Problem most people have is that they think Obama is representing the US and it’s interests.
He isn’t. He is playing with the globalists. What is best for America itself isn’t going to happen. Victoria Nuland was over there installing another puppet government. Yes, the previous guy was no good, but the decision should have been made by the people, not the US State Dept under Obama. Poor Ukraine, neither side will be free.
Look, he is giving away the internet. Just yesterday he told latinos signing up for Obamacare to sign up themselves and their relatives and nobody would be deported. Weren’t we all told that illegals were not eligible?
This Crimean thing works well for Obama because it reignites some kind of fear and fools people into thinking he acts in US interests.
He doesn’t, and when he is supposed to be done in three years, it will be clear the US is nothing more than a weak sister in the Global community.
Our only hope would be for Americans to see what we are in for and react. Truth is Dinesh D’Souza was pretty spot on in his assessment of America’s future. We will be a land mass that used to have a name that meant something.
The EU will sign part of the Association Agreement tomorrow, but the Trade Agreement that was ready to be signed in November is suddenly off the table. Why?
For some reason Barroso, van Rompuy and Ashton decided to hand over the decision to the Russians: EU blamed for mishandling Ukraine trade pact agreement
This is really embarrassing for EU and therefore they have agreed to unilaterally lift tariffs on Ukrainian goods. However, this needs the approval of the Euro-"parliament" and the Council. It is not certain the EP will have time to deal with this before going into recess. Anyway, the toll-reductions are not thought to come in force until June and not last longer than until November.
Sadly, when doing business with EU never listen to their speeches, just read the bottom line.
(When doing business with the Russians, bring some heavy weaponry, just in case.)
PS: The Eu promises a loan of 1.6bn - but only if and when the new government signs a deal with the IMF; a deal that contains a clause that all energy subsidies must be cancelled - a sure vote winner if there ever was one. Why can't the West do anything right these days?
Russian Threat Re-Energizes Sweden's Push To Join NATO, Boost Spending
HELSINKI Swedens government is examining a proposal to boost military spending to defend its own territories and the strategic Baltic Sea area in the face of renewed Russian aggression in Ukraine. There is also a movement among high government officials to re-examine the long-running issue of joining NATO.
Any movement for Sweden to join NATO is significant. After all, they remained neutral during WWII and remained so during the Cold War.
Regarding Swedish NATO membership: No, that's off the table. The last poll, taken after the start of the Crimean crisis, showed a declining support for a Swedish membership (≈30%). No politician is going to start negotiations with NATO without a previous concensus in our Parliament or a popular referendum - which will result in a no.
Poor Swedes, no one is standing up for them, not the US nor the EU.
The Swedish, Baltic bilateral loan to Ukraine is also dependent on a deal with IMF. IMF has been soooo succesful in Greece, in former Yugoslavia, in Kosovo etc.
What could possibly go wrong?
No, that’s why we need a good defence. But it up to us to chose our politicans wisely. Can’t blame anyone else.
Sweden has a formidable and modern military, which is much more than a lot of the NATO members have. For too long, most of the other members of NATO have short-changed defense and relied on the US. I hate to be the one to break it to them, but under the current regime, I wouldn’t bet my life that 0bama would/could respond as expected.
Crimea was the low-hanging fruit for Russia.
Actually, it was speculated that some of them did it so that Sweden would be forced to join NATO. But then we would have been just like some of the other members you alluded to.
Sweden is a PfP-ntion and we still have troops in Afghanistan, though we have been much luckier in our choice of area (northern Afghanistan) than the Danes for instance.
Watching the goings on in Kiev the past months , it's possible Putin is right.