Posted on 02/13/2010 4:24:53 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Viktor Yanukovych, the expected next Ukrainian president, says he cannot rule out Russia's Black Sea Fleet remaining in Ukraine after its lease on the Sevastopol naval base expires in 2017.
Preliminary results showed Yanukovych narrowly winning Ukraine's presidential election, and although the official count has not been released he has been congratulated by world leaders including the Russian and U.S. presidents.
The Party of Regions leader is expected to move Ukraine away from the determinedly pro-Western stance of President Viktor Yushchenko, who vowed that Russia would have to find a new main base for its Black Sea Fleet once the current deal expires.
"I do not rule it out," Yanukovych said in an interview with the Russia 24 TV news channel when asked if the Black Sea Fleet could remain in the Crimean port of Sevastopol after 2017.
"We will discuss this issue in the near future. This matter will not be decided at Russia's expense, it will be decided in the national interests of Ukraine. We will find a solution," Yanukovych said, noting that there were many issues involved that needed addressing.
He added that Ukraine's relations with NATO are currently well-defined, and said they would not be expanded. Yushchenko stoked Russia's ire with his pursuit of NATO membership, but despite strong U.S. support many alliance members were lukewarm on the idea.
NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen on Friday congratulated Yanukovych on his election as president and said the alliance was "committed to deepening our strategic partnership with Ukraine."
(Excerpt) Read more at en.rian.ru ...
He cannot rule it out because Russia might not want to leave.
No. He can’t rule out that the territory in question might belong actually belong to Russia instead of just being in its sphere of influence while nominally being Ukrainian.
The Crimea “belongs” to Russia the way California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas “belong” to Mexico. Now stop your silly prattle.
My silly prattle? There are factions withing the Russian and Ukrainian power structures that want the old ways (soviet union) to return in a newer stronger form. It is a good thing we have a strong leader like Obama to stand up for freedom in East Europe right?
Your comparison is not fair. Being of Ukrainian origin I still admit Crimea was never Ukrainian before Soviet leader Khruschev who was Ukrainian either who took it from Russia to incorporate into Ukraine back to 1960s. So, historically it is as Ukrainian as Eastern Germany or Poland back to the 1980s. It wasn’t a place Ukrainians used to live before or won it militarily. It just turned Ukrainian as an act of communist leader. It was Russian for centuries before and it was Turkish before Russian and it is all the reason why it still populated by Russian and Turkish people.
Anyway I believe it is Ukrainian now, but Russians still have some rights. As for pro-Russian Crimeans it is pure economy while they are using their roots as an excuse. Ukrainian poverty is a problem. In Russia their average annual income is about US$15,000 and it is only $3,000 for Ukraine. As soon as Ukraine will be wealthier there won’t be Russian issue.
I know. Where their claims to territory are concerned Russia, like China, picks the date when history begins.
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.