Ten reasons to be very worried about Putins next move

[Prospero]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...invade_ukraine

A long read, but worth the effort.

Ps a leading astrologist has warned that April will be a month of quite catastrophic events.

I don't believe in astrology but for those who do it might be time to head for the hills

[robertlouis]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...invade_ukraine

A long read, but worth the effort.

Ps a leading astrologist has warned that April will be a month of quite catastrophic events.

I don't believe in astrology but for those who do it might be time to head for the hills

Is a "leading astrologist" one who has a good record of accurate forecasting or simply one who makes lots of money out of fleecing the gullible?

Just asking.....

[Prospero]

Dunno. Read it in Time magazine

[Stavros]

Michael Weiss is Research Director of the Henry Jackson Society founded in the UK in 2005 and which claims to be 'cross-partisan' but is in reality conservative, as implied by this vignette of Henry Jackson:

At first, Jackson was very much within the mainstream of the Cold War liberal Democratic Party. He was later marginalised as the party moved to the left after 1968, especially on foreign policy. A strong supporter of Lyndon Johnson’s war to contain communism in Vietnam, Jackson became a highly effective critic of Détente with the Soviet Union, which he felt sold out human rights and compromised the security of the free world. Very occasionally, Jackson was prepared to put strategic concerns ahead of human rights – for example in his support for an opening to Peking to balance Moscow – but he was a supporter of sanctions on the apartheid regime in South Africa, even when some thought this inopportune.
http://henryjacksonsociety.org/about...henry-jackson/

Michael Weiss is not as interested in the foreign policy of Russia or the career of Vladimir Putin as he is in the critique of Barack Obama and the Democrat Party as being weak, indecisive, and incoherent in its foreign policy.

Here are some things Weiss might want to consider, as a riposte to the contentious article in the link posted by Prospero:

1. He attacks the foreign policy of Russia without seeing it in a comparative context in which Russian actions and set against those of NATO or the US and its allies in Europe, acting together or on their own - for example, both Tony Blair and the US Govt claimed at the time that the intervention in Iraq in 2003 was justified by UN Security Council Resolutions yet, after the war freely confessed it was regime change pure and simple. The intervention in Libya by NATO air forces was considered crucial in the collapse of the government there. Russia has not overlooked these examples of ‘western powers’ interfering in the politics of foreign countries. And then there is NATO in Afghanistan....but let's not expect Michael Weiss to contrast the Russian/Soviet experience with NATO.

2. Russia has ‘little green men’ in Ukraine -the US has Special Forces in Syria (and Jordan, and Lebanon, and Kuwait...). Syria has never been part of the USA, Crimea was part of the Russian Empire for over 200 years before 1954; Kieven Rus is the foundation of both Russia and the Ukraine but Weiss does not explore how the incestuous relationship between Russia and the Ukraine has produced such mutual hostility, nor does he consider why the transition from dictatorship to democracy in both countries has been so difficult, and different from, say, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Probably because he isn't that interested.

3. Are international borders impossible to change? Europe 100 years ago was divided into empires and states which do not exist today, so our own borders have changed as have the names and the geographical shape of those places. As the father of an American geographer, born in Europe once asked after seeing a map of post 1945 Europe: ‘Where’s Danzig?’

4. What Michael Weiss does not want to discuss is the vexing problem of national identity and the state, and the way in which states emerge which on the one hand claim to ‘express’ a national identity yet on the other hand have often achieved this by crushing, or subduing 'local' 'sub-state' identities which for some minorities retain a singular ‘national’ character -the Bretons in France; the Flemings and the Walloons of Belgium; Kashubians in Poland, and so on.

5. Russia is presenting an image of itself that many among its population want to see, and Putin understands this as a source of power. Russia in reality is a huge country with a small economy, and what Putin wants is the restoration of the global power status that was once enjoyed by the USSR. Russia’s nuclear status and its seat on the Security Council of the UN gives it international prestige, but what Putin is doing is in reality not much more than has been done by the USA, NATO or individual European states -Putin's position in Russia is bolstered by those who see the 'West' as hypocrites.
For example, France has intervened in African affairs more than 50 times since 1960 yet little concern is raised by France's activities, which you can read about here:
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2013/0..._expiration=30

6. Russian intervention, American intervention, French intervention -if Michael Weiss wants to he can look at this issue in broader terms and ask if intervention ever works, why it works in some places but not others; but the simple truth is that he and the Henry Jackson Society have a conservative agenda to follow, which means Weiss and the others can go cherry-picking their way through history to ‘prove’ what a menace Putin is, and how feeble and useless Obama is.
Obama’s craven support for dictatorship in Saudi Arabia doesn’t merit a comment from Weiss, yet follows a policy established by FD Roosevelt and maintained by most Presidents since then with no thought to what happens when Saudi Arabia implodes, neither for Saudi Arabia and the wider Middle East, nor the the USA and its interests in the region.

But what more can one expect of the Henry Jackson Society?

[martin48]

I would have thought the conjunction with Uranus would be of great interest to you!

Ps a leading astrologist has warned that April will be a month of quite catastrophic events.

I don't believe in astrology but for those who do it might be time to head for the hills

[Ben]

Another question: Will the U.S. government ever pull out of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba???
I'm sure Putin is thinking the same thing --

[admires69]

not sure how honest you can be about opinions on Putin etc... clearly a little unhinged.. walking in like the big man after Crimea... even he must baulk a little at invading the rest of Ukraine?!

Having said that the interim Government aren't exactly Einsteins are they... banning Russian as a state language... way to get the Russian speaking people onside morons.

the consequences would be far too serious to actually contemplate invasion of the rest of Ukraine? They have a defence alliance with NATO and if they dont support them it undermines the whole alliance. Putin and NATO must realise this.

Its just a game of Brinksmanship (I hope!) otherwise... I hear that India is nice this time of year... or perhaps Brazil... more interesting ladies out there

[Stavros]

the consequences would be far too serious to actually contemplate invasion of the rest of Ukraine? They have a defence alliance with NATO and if they dont support them it undermines the whole alliance. Putin and NATO must realise this.

Ukraine was a 'candidate member' of NATO in 2008 until 2010 when Parliament failed to ratify NATO membership as part of its national security policy, although it may still have some agreements with NATO. I think it is now clear that Putin does not want Ukraine to be either in NATO or even non-aligned, but part of a broad Russian defence strategy; it follows that Putin would be opposed to Ukraine becoming a member of the EU for the same reasons.

There was an argument I heard on the radio a dew days ago that Putin does not have a long-term plan but has been responding to events, or that if there is a plan, it is to prevent Ukraine becoming a member of NATO and the EU. He may not need to invade Ukraine if, as today's reports suggest the government in Kiev opts for a more federal system since that would strengthen Russia's support in the east of the Ukraine without the need for a physical presence; and it might also resolve the issue of gas supplies.
But who knows what will happen next?

[Ben]

Obama: 'We Don't Need a War' With Russia: