Posted on 03/14/2014 9:24:11 PM PDT by goldstategop
There will be a vote in Crimea on Sunday on whether to split from the Ukraine and join Russia. It is likely to pass. So there will not be a return to the status quo ante.
The best the United States and Western Europe can hope for would be an outcome in which Crimea is not formally detached from Ukraine, but has a very high degree of autonomy. This autonomy would include not just choices about domestic policies but about some aspects of foreign policy as well.
Ukraine would be a confederal state where at least one of the component parts would control some elements of foreign policy, rather than a federal state where only the central government has authority over international affairs. Crimea would formally remain a part of Ukraine. The scope of the issues that Crimean officials would be able to officially decide on their own — even if their Russian counterparts were looking over their shoulders — would have to be negotiated between Simferopol and Kiev, or at least accepted by Kiev.
The United States and the European Union should not oppose such negotiations, even though they will be hard for Kiev to swallow. The alternative would be the de jure, not just de facto, incorporation of Crimea into the Russian Federation. Which would demonstrate, yet again, the ineffectuality of American policy.
...
A confederal Ukraine of which Crimea was still de jure a part, is the only off-ramp available for the immediate crisis.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.reuters.com ...
3/15/2014 12:24:11 AM · by goldenstategoopstompers
Reuters DF^
| 03/14/2014 | St. Even E. Krabapple
There will be a vote [including illegal aliens allowed to vote in all US elections by Obama administration] in California on Sunday on whether to split from the USA and join Mexico. It is likely to pass, because there are millions of Spanish-speaking only people there and they naturally like Mexico more than USA.
So there will not be a return to the status quo ante. The best the United States and Mexico can hope for would be an outcome in which California is not formally detached from USA, but has a very high degree of autonomy. This autonomy would include not just choices about domestic policies but about some aspects of foreign policy as well, such as declaring war on the Ukraine.
Bye Kommiefornia.
If liberal California wanted to leave the Union, I would be all for it.
We don’t need to have a bone of contention with them about where they want to take this country.
Self-determination is wonderful, yes? I think we’re going to see more countries carved out of existing ones than you can shake a stick at.
Its the wave of the future.
They don’t want to leave, the fascists in our Federal Government and in liberal circles WANT TO CONTROLL what you do and how you, and your family members think!
Unfortunately, that’s true.
I have a soft spot for the Crimeans. F*ck the two Ks. Khruschev and Kerry!
I hope they send the shot heard around the world on Sunday.
According to Obama and Kerry, our independence from the British was illegal! I’m glad they weren’t around in 1776.
I really don't comprehend this mode of thinking. The Prime Minister of Crimea was, not too long ago, the member of a fringe party with only three seats in their parliament, and was formerly a member of the Russian mafia who went by the name "Goblin" (and, considering Moscow's involvement with the Russian mob, is also likely an FSB agent). He came into power by marching into parliament accompanied by men wielding grenade launchers and machine guns, and declared a quorum and then, himself, prime minister, with many of the parlaimentry members being counted as "present" and voting in favor, when, later, they say they were never there at all.
Right now the Russians have total control of the local media in Crimea, and are occupying the entire area with armed soldiers and bandits. Why is it that we assume that the popular will of Crimea, which isn't even all ethnic Russiam (Tatars make up about 30 percent, and are anti-communist), will take up with the Russkies? Is every ethnic Russian a slave-born Muscovite first, and a Ukrainian second? I don't believe it, and I consider it stupid to assume this.
Oops, I said the Tatars were 30 percent. They are 13 percent actually. I inflated the numbers some how in my mind.
You realize you’re defending Nikita Khruschev, right? His word was law and he transferred Crimea from Russia to Ukraine without the Crimea being given a say in the decision at the time. Before that, it was always part of Russia.
You and the rest of the West are defending the edict of a long-dead Communist dictator. And when Crimea seeks to overturn it in a democratic vote, you reflexively denounce it as “illegal.”
And the circumstances by which the new Crimean government took isn’t all that different from how the new Ukrainian government took office. Yet the West has an oddly selective idea of democracy.
Just wondering since neither the US nor the West have a real stake in Crimea but its of great importance to Russia.
The stupidity of this statement is that the apparent solution is to, again, manipulate Crimea back into a reborn Soviet Union without the free choice of their will being respected. Though, I do not deny that there are many Crimeans who are Pro-Soviet (not to be confused with Pro-Russian).
People in the West are dreaming.
Putin will be in Kiev before you can say Gosudarsvenoy Bezopasnosti. And the Baltics. And then he’ll be issuing ultimata to Poland and the other former satellites.
He’s still fairly young. He has time to march all the way to the Atlantic. And no one will commit suicide trying to stop him anywhere along the way.
Bump
The Baltics are NATO members. Bad stuff will happen if Russia invades the Baltics.
WW2 started over Poland.
Most are pro-Russian. So yes, this is their choice, fully consonant with international law and European values.
They’re deciding their own fate, not Moscow, Kiev, Brussels or Washington.
No one else has the right to make that decision for them. Whatever they decide, I respect their choice on democratic and human rights grounds.
No one is denying Ukrainians the right to decide the fate of their country. But they have no more right to deny that choice to the Crimeans than the British had the right to deny it to Americans in 1776.
After all, self determination is a universal principle, even if its one imperfectly realized in our world.
Yup. I don’t see why Russia wants to get into a military confrontation with NATO. A war would serve no one’s interests.
We all remember what happened exactly a century ago. We must do all in our power to avert it.
I bet you also believe that there isn't something like 10,000 Russian soldiers massing in Crimea right now too? And that an invasion of Eastern Ukraine from 3 or 4 directions with an army of 80,000+ soldiers and advanced equipment isn't likely to happen?
After all, self determination is a universal principle, even if its one imperfectly realized in our world.
Are you Russian? Contrary what the average Muscovite has been led to believe by Putin, you cannot have self-determination when you're on the wrong end of a barrel. The Russians must pull back, the Mafioso Prime Minister must be banished, the freedom of the press restored, and proper elections held, before we can claim that there is 'free determination" going on in Crimea.
What war, goldstategop?
Going to go nuclear over Estonia?
Just as dead as stopping Putin now.
Only if they take Massachusetts and New York with them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.