2014 Ukrainian Maidan Revolt: News, Views, Photos & Videos

Implausible reality
By M K Bhadrakumar, March 5, 2014


Without much ado, China’s first and only aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, left its homeport of Qingdao in east China’s Shandong Province on Sunday for conducting tests and training missions.



How far deep into the blue sea it will sail and how long will its mission continue remains unclear. But what is clear is that unlike during its 37-day voyage in the South China Sea last December, when the guided missile cruiser USS Cowpens conducted surveillance of the Liaoning, no such provocative intelligence-gathering operation by the Americans is likely.
The Asia-Pacific is no more the same. The Associated Press reported that the emergent preoccupations on the European theatre have become “a renewed reality that may force president Barack Obama’s administration to give up its intended foreign policy shift to Asia indefinitely”.


Indeed, the looming crisis in Ukraine threatens to impact the power dynamic all across East Asia as well as the regions of Central Asia and Afghanistan and West Asia, the wide swathe of land American strategists would call the Greater Middle East. To be sure, the new government in New Delhi after the parliamentary poll on April-May can expect an external environment of great fluidity surrounding India.

The locus of the US foreign policy has shifted back to Europe. Europe has been receiving only glancing mention as a foreign-policy priority for the Obama administration, but the first sign of a reshuffling of priorities appeared at the annual Munich security conference two months ago in the speech by the US secretary of state John Kerry.

He all but admitted Washington’s realisation that the weakening of the US’ transatlantic leadership through the last decade or so, coupled with the administration’s plan to roll back military spending and shrink armed forces, steadily undercut the US’ capacity to lead from the front in global politics. Suffice to say, the US is rediscovering the core value of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) and this is being put to test in Ukraine.

The US hopes to rally the world to push back resurgent Russia, whereas the approach so far has been to selectively engage Russia on areas of vital American interests and to use Moscow’s considerable leverage to help solve world problems. The Ukraine problem at its core is related to Moscow’s attempt to integrate the former Soviet republics under the Eurasian Union. The Eurasian Union challenges the US’ project to present the Nato as the provider of security for Central Asia.

From the Russian perspective, on the other hand, NATO’s expansion and the deployment of the US missile defence system on its border regions would transform the global strategic balance in Washington’s favour and divest Moscow of its nuclear deterrence capabilities.

Impact on India

India may face negative fallouts of these big-power rivalries that can be expected to erupt in Central Asia, especially if the US reverts to its Cold War strategy to use the ‘jihad’ as instrument of policy to overthrow the pro-Russian regimes in that region. The recent visit by the Saudi Crown Prince Salman bin Al-Saud to Pakistan and the forthcoming visit by Obama to Saudi Arabia suggest that new templates are appearing in regional politics.

Clearly, the US sees the military bases in Afghanistan as invaluable strategic assets to project power into Central Asia. On the other hand, the open-ended western occupation of Afghanistan will fuel the ‘jihadi’ elements, and the implications are serious for regional security. Syria is a telling example of the danger of the ascendancy of extremists. Any rupture in the US-Russia cooperation will only complicate further the situation in Syria and make it more difficult to find a political solution.

The big question is whether the US imposes ‘sanctions’ on Russia. Any such move would have huge consequences for the world energy market and would, most certainly, draw forth retaliation by Russia. The result could well be a showdown over the situation surrounding Iran where Moscow has so far cooperated with Washington. Obama insists that 95 percent of the US sanctions against Iran will remain in place until a nuclear deal is concluded. But Russia is under no obligation to observe the US’ sanction regime against Iran. Iran’s integration with the international community can no longer be on American terms and the implications are profound for the security of the Persian Gulf.

Over and above, the understanding shown by Beijing to Moscow’s stance in the Ukraine crisis enriches the China-Russia strategic partnership. In comparison, Japan caved in to the US pressure to toe the G7 line and the Russia-Japan normalization process would get delayed. Thus, China becomes a crucial partner for Russia in its upcoming struggle to break out of the ring of political and economic isolation that the US threatens to impose on it. In the emergent scenario, Washington would be exceedingly foolish to cause any annoyance to Beijing.
In sum, the US’ capacity to push its ‘rebalance’ strategy in Asia becomes more doubtful than ever before. How these incipient tendencies in big power politics would crystallize remains to be seen, but the Ukraine crisis holds the potential to become a ‘game changer’ in the politics of the Asia-Pacific. India, in retrospect, did well by eschewing ‘bloc mentality’, which would have proved delusional, and instead opted for a process of normalisation with China.

Of course, implausible as it may seem, the new reality is also that the Liaoning could well choose to head northward to the East China Sea to test its prowess in the vicinity of the Diaoyu Islands – even by sailing by it and putting it on a navigation chart. If that were to happen, would Japan resist or retreat? Put simply, China is the winner in the US’s confrontation with Russia.

Click to expand...

kroko said:

CNN report of china´s position on the ukraine crisis:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Beijing and Moscow Part Ways Over Ukraine

Days after Ukraine's deposed President Viktor Yanukovych fled his Kiev palace, an unassuming, mid-level Chinese diplomat appeared before the United Nations Security Council to highlight Beijing's support for the new pro-Western government, marking a rare diplomatic split from Moscow.

"We respect the choice made by the Ukrainian people on the basis of national conditions," Shen Bo, a counselor at China's U.N. mission said in a Feb. 24 statement that went largely unnoticed by the international press.

China and U.N. watchers say Beijing's refusal to blindly follow Moscow's lead during the Ukrainian crisis reflects a deep-seated anxiety about the path that Russian President Vladimir Putin has chosen to pursue.

"China has a pathological fear of other countries meddling in its internal affairs, and to witness Russia so blatantly intervening in Ukraine has to be a source of consternation," Elizabeth Economy, a China specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Foreign Policy in an email exchange. "Russia's actions clearly run up against China's central foreign policy tenet of non-interference in others' internal affairs. It is a policy that has guided Chinese policy in North Korea, Sudan, Iran and Syria. If it were to upend this principle, it would reflect a seminal change in Chinese foreign policy and leave China much weaker in defense of its inaction in other crisis situations."

Still, Shen's comments about Ukraine reflect a significant shift for Beijing. China and Russia have been among the Security Council's steadiest of allies, standing shoulder to shoulder as a counterbalance to the West's big three -- the United States, Britain, and France -- who have dominated Security Council business for much of the past two decades. Moscow and Beijing share a suspicion that the West's big powers seek to use the Security Council to promote their own interests in foreign countries under the guise of promoting democracy and human rights.

Together, Beijing and Moscow have cast their vetoes to quash efforts by George W. Bush's administration to condemn human rights violations by governments in Myanmar and Zimbabwe. More recently, China risked the ire of the Arab world by joining Russia in vetoing three resolutions aimed at curtailing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's brutal campaign of violence.

But the Russian intervention in Crimea has not sat well with a country that has significant commercial interests in Ukraine, and which has long been uneasy about Russia's propensity for using military force to pressure its neighbors. Beijing fears that the use of military force against a sovereign nation sets a precedent that could one day be used against China.

In earlier eras, China objected to the Brezhnev Doctrine, which was used to justify Russian invasions of Czechoslovakia in 1968 and Afghanistan in 1979, on the grounds that it constituted unwarranted interference in the affairs of a sovereign nation. China also broke with Russia after it intervened in neighboring Georgia in 2008 and stripped the pro-Western government of its provinces of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In June 2009, Moscow vetoed a U.N. resolution authorizing the continued presence of nearly 150 U.N. peacekeepers in Georgia, effectively killing off a U.N. effort to monitor Georgia's border with the separatist territory. China abstained from the vote.

On Tuesday, Putin briefed his Chinese counterpart, President Xi Jinping, on events unfolding in Ukraine. Xi spared Putin the kinds of public scolding and threats of repercussions issued in recent weeks by American and European officials. But he didn't take Putin's side. On the contrary, Xi urged Putin not to go it alone, hinting that Moscow should look more favorably on international mediation efforts, according to a statement.

"At present, the situation in Ukraine is highly complicated and sensitive and has regional and global impact," Xi told him, according to a read out of the conversation published by Xinhua, the state-run news agency. "China believes that Russia can coordinate with other parties to push for the political settlement of the issue so as to safeguard regional and world peace and stability. China supports proposals and mediation efforts of the international community that are conducive to reduction of tension."

Edward Luck, a historian of U.N. affairs who began his scholarly career as a Soviet specialist, said the Ukraine crisis underscores the limits of the partnership between Russia and China. As China emerges as a true global powerhouse, its interests have grown more complex, he said, requiring it to act more nimbly in a world where its allies come into conflict. Russia, meanwhile, remains primarily focused on its stature in its own neighborhood.

"I don't think that China sees its position in the world as fundamentally depending on Russian support," Luck told FP. "It's playing a game on a much higher plane, a really global game. Russia is still stuck very much within its own borders and periphery; and that is what matters first and foremost to Russia. China is a dominant power and Russia is a secondary one, and why should China have to bend over backward again to cover the Russian flank? What do they get from it?"

Indeed, China has invested heavily in Ukraine, reportedly signing a deal in the fall of 2012 guaranteeing Kiev would export 300 million tons of corn each year to China in exchange for access to more than $3 billion in loans. Another more recent report indicates that two Chinese state-owned companies will operate a massive swath of farmland the size of Belgium in the eastern region of Dnipropetrovsk, planting crops and raising pigs for consumption back home.

"I think it is easy to exaggerate the importance of the Chinese-Russian alliance; I don't think they have a relationship that you could describe as strategic," Luck said. "It veers from one case to another. We should remember the Soviet-Chinese competition has some legacy and some hangover."

Click to expand...

SampanViking said:

No doubt some people would interpret this as the preamble to a Chinese Invasion of Siberia

Click to expand...

6 March 2014 Last updated at 16:21 ET
Ukraine crisis: 'Illegal' Crimean referendum condemned
The EU and US have joined Ukraine's government in condemning as "illegal" a move by the Crimea region to set up a referendum to endorse joining Russia.
The EU, meeting in Brussels, threatened "serious consequences" if Russia did not act to de-escalate the crisis.
Crimean MPs earlier set a date of 16 March for a vote on the referendum.
Russian troops took de facto control of Crimea, whose population is mostly ethnic Russian, in the wake of the fall of Ukraine's pro-Moscow president.
The Crimean parliament on Thursday said it had decided "to enter into the Russian Federation with the rights of a subject of the Russian Federation".
It said it had asked Russian President Vladimir Putin "to start the procedure".
'Highly precarious'
Before the Brussels summit, some EU members - led by Germany - had indicated they preferred mediation with Russia to try to solve the crisis, rather than any stronger measures.
But correspondents say the Crimean MPs' move has clearly toughened the line taken by the EU.
In press conferences after the talks, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and EU Council President Herman Van Rompuy both said the Crimean referendum was contrary to the Ukrainian constitution and therefore illegal.
The EU said it was suspending talks with Moscow on easing travel restrictions on Russians entering the EU.
It said that if Russia did not move to de-escalate the situation quickly, it would "decide on additional measures, such as travel bans, asset freezes and the cancellation of the EU-Russia summit".
The EU statement said that "any further steps by the Russian Federation to destabilise the situation in Ukraine would lead to severe and far-reaching consequences... which will include a broad range of economic areas".
US President Barack Obama said the Crimea referendum would "violate the Ukrainian constitution and international law".
He said there was a way to resolve the crisis with Russia through diplomacy but that "if the violation continues, the resolve of the US and its allies will remain firm".
Mr Obama praised the "international unity on display at this moment".
The US had earlier issued visa restrictions on a number of unnamed Ukrainian and Russian officials and individuals "to deny visas to those responsible for, or complicit in, threatening the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine".
UK Prime Minister David Cameron said the situation remained "highly precarious, the slightest miscalculation could see it spiral out of control".
He drew parallels with World War Two, saying: "It matters because we know from our history that turning a blind eye when nations are trampled all over and their independence trashed... that stores up far greater problems for the long run."
Speaking in Dublin, Ukrainian former premier Yulia Tymoshenko made an emotional appeal for greater European integration.
She said: "We are building a European nation - we are doing this and nobody can stop us. We owe this to those who died and to those who are living."
The BBC's Chris Morris in Brussels says it may still be difficult for the EU to agree on tougher sanctions.
He says that although some states, particularly those close to Russia's border, argue that Europe must take a stand, most member states are desperate to avoid a lengthy economic conflict with Russia.
In a televised address, Ukraine's Interim President Olexander Turchynov denounced the referendum as "illegitimate and unnecessary, it contradicts the will of the Ukrainian people".
He cited Article 73 of the Ukrainian constitution which says issues relating to borders must involve a "referendum across the whole of Ukraine".
Mr Turchynov said: "Ukraine's territory within the boundaries recognised by the whole world is inviolable and sovereign."
But Crimea's First Deputy PM Rustam Temirgaliev said Crimea viewed the new authorities in Kiev as illegitimate and that Crimea was now in Russia.
Speaking in Rome, US Secretary of State John Kerry said: "Crimea is part of the Ukraine. Crimea is Ukraine."
Pro-Russian gunmen had moved in to seize strategic sites in Crimea after Viktor Yanukovych was ousted as the president of Ukraine following months of protests in Kiev.
The demonstrations - by Ukrainians seeking closer ties with the West - turned violent in mid-February with more than 90 people killed in clashes with police.

Click to expand...

6 March 2014 Last updated at 15:17 ET
Ukraine crisis: Tense stand-off aboard blockaded ship
By Christian Fraser
BBC News, Sevastopol port
The Slavutych is one of the two Ukrainian warships blockaded in the port of Sevastopol. As loaves of bread were being ferried aboard this morning, we managed to to get a launch to take us access - the first camera allowed on this ship since the standoff began a week ago.
Through tense days and nights, more than 100 sailors and marines have manned the rails of the Slavutych, refusing to surrender. She is roped to the Ternopil, a corvette.
Both ships have been pushed off the dock to prevent the Russians boarding but from the bow we now had an elevated view of the odds that are stacked against them.
We counted six vessels from the Black Sea Fleet that are blocking the channel.
On board the men were running drills, the marines were darting backwards and forwards, around the missile batteries - as if the assault they anticipate was already under way.
There was one on Monday night. They said they had repelled it.
But the truth is their ammunition has been stashed. The magazines on the marines' rifles are all empty. The only defence they'll use are the hosepipes.
"We won't be drawn into an armed conflict," said the deputy commander, Alexander Goncharov.
"We have locked the ammunition away. We'll defend the ship as best we can. But we are not getting dragged into a war."
And so they dress the railings of the ship in mattresses. Would they really deter the hooks and lines of a determined Russian marine force?
It seems however the Russian fleet is content with the current situation, best described as containment. Though it could go on for some time.
There's enough food on board for two months and enough fuel to get to Turkey. They have electricity and water.
But the men worry. They worry about their country, they worry about where it will end, most of all they worry about their families who come to the dockside, bravely to show their support.
And the blockade is wearing.
This week, the crew say, Russian divers have been beneath the ship. Their own divers went down today to ensure there was nothing clinging to the hull.
"They come most nights," said Lieutenant Dmitry Schevchenko.
"We put extra guards on the rails at night. I think they hope we will tire. But we won't. We are patriotic. We love our country."
What if Crimea is annexed, I ask, what then?
"I don't know," he said. "It's the commander's decision. Maybe we go to Odessa? It's such a beautiful party of the country, Crimea. I hope it doesn't come to that."
There was a notable absence of Russian troops on the dockside today, at least, an absence of the "regular" troops.
Around mid-morning the word was spreading of our presence on the ship. And down the road to the quay came a squad of men dressed as Russian Cossacks.
Suddenly our only exit was cut off, our driver was being interrogated. And now we would have our own taste of what this Ukrainian crew has endured this past week.
The Cossacks in fairness may not have meant us any harm. But after two bruising encounters in recent days, each time confronted by pro-Russian supporters, we weren't about to test their charity.
Eventually a senior officer from the ship did venture ashore. The men, he said, were a self-defence unit, and their commander had promised us safe exit.
He was good to his word. It was a tense few hours. The Ukrainians have lived through it for days.
In the end the Cossacks escorted us back to the hotel - "for your protection", they said. "You never know," said the commander. "There are some here who might do you harm."

Click to expand...

asif iqbal said:

US is expanding Baltic patrols with Poland

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Commentary: The West's fiasco in Ukraine
by Xinhua writer Ming Jinwei

BEIJING, March 7 (Xinhua) -- For a brief moment, Western leaders might have stopped to congratulate themselves for their "accomplishments" in Ukraine.

With their backing, Ukrainian opposition protesters successfully toppled the pro-Russian government, forcing out the president they loathe and dealing a humiliating blow to the Kremlin.

The West might have scored a major victory in this latest round of goepolitical fight. But things turned out otherwise.

Shortly afterwards, Russia struck back. Now, with Russian military personnel deployed in eastern Ukraine to protect Russia's legitimate interests and pro-Russian regions clamoring for a secession from Kiev, Ukraine is teetering on the brink of total chaos and disintegration.

The West's strategy for installing a so-called democratic and pro-Western Ukrainian government did not get anywhere at all. On the contrary, they have created a mess they do not have the capacity or wisdom to clean.

Their ill-fated plan was fundamentally flawed from the very beginning. First of all, they were destined to shoot their own feet when they, under the cliche pretense of supporting democracy, interfered in Ukrainian domestic affairs by engaging in biased mediation.

Second, they underestimated Russia's will to protect its core interests in Ukraine. Russia may no longer be interested in competing for global preeminence with the West, but when it comes to cleaning a mess the West created in the country's backyard, Russian leaders once again proved their credibility and shrewdness in planning and executing effective counter moves.

Last but not least, Western leaders were delusional when they believed they, with dented moral authority and shrinking financial coffers, could still take up such a grand task of nation-building.

Unfortunately, Ukraine and its people have become a big victim in this grueling process.

The Ukrainian people do not get the democracy or prosperity the West promises. Instead, all they can see in their beloved country now is political confusion and economic depression.

The West itself also becomes a loser as the fiasco in Ukraine will surely erode its credibility.

For the rest of the world, once again, people see another great country torn apart because of a clumsy and selfish West that boasts too many lofty ideals but always comes up short of practical solutions.

But the world does not need to be too pessimistic. The game in Ukraine is far from over. The international community still has the opportunity to salvage the country by working together.

Major powers should set their animosity aside and start working for a compromise. The Ukrainians should abandon their political infighting and work to restore law and order in their country as soon as possible.

After all, an independent, complete and stable Ukraine best serves the interests of all, including China.

Click to expand...

Last but not least, Western leaders were delusional when they believed they, with dented moral authority and shrinking financial coffers, could still take up such a grand task of nation-building.

Click to expand...

Rutim said:

...France and UK preparing leaflets in the meanwhile...

Click to expand...