Tag: Ukraine
Peace Picks March 3 –7
The weather prediction suggests a good deal of this may not happen, especially Monday and Tuesday, but here are our picks for DC events if that turns out to be a false alarm:
1. Growing Opposition to President Hassan Rouhani: Is the Honeymoon Ending?
Monday, March 3 | 9:30am – 11am
12th Floor, The Stimson Center; 1111 19th Street NW
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani is seeing escalating public criticism from Iran’s conservative factions, once seemingly stifled by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Will Rouhani’s presidency follow in the footsteps of the Mohammad Khatami era?
The Stimson Center and the Heinrich Boll Foundation North America invite you to join us for a discussion on the shifting internal political dynamics in Iran and how these events will shape the future of Iran’s relations with the West.
Panelists:
Mohammad Ayatollah Tabaar, Assistant Professor, Texas A&M University
Mehdi Arabshahi, Former President of the Office for Consolidating Unity, the largest student union for democracy and human rights in Iran
Moderator:
Geneive Abdo, Fellow, Stimson’s Middle East Program Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Putin has put Obama on the spot
Though events have moved quickly, it is already apparent that there is little the United States can do to get Russia to leave Crimea any time soon. The proposals from left and right for action are nowhere near sufficient to get Vladimir Putin to reverse his successful military seizure of the province’s vital security and governance installations. American military action is not in the cards. While the West notes Russia’s inconsistency in violating the principle of sovereignty, Putin even claims legal justification: the province’s prime minister asked for help, which he says is permissible under Russia’s security agreements with Kiev.
The most immediate requirement is not to push Russia out of Crimea, which may take a decade or more. Washington lacks non-military means capable of doing it, and no one is advocating war with Russia over Ukraine. But Moscow, successful in Crimea, may well be thinking of similar takeovers in other southern and eastern provinces with large Russian-speaking populations that voted for Viktor Yanukovich: Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Left and right are shooting blanks
Hayes Brown over at ThinkProgress suggests five ways the US can respond to Russia invading Ukraine without going to war.
It’s a brave attempt. But nothing he cites will suffice to get the Russians out of Crimea:
- Suspending Russia’s membership in the G-8 would be a pinprick to Moscow. It has never cared as much about the G-8 as we would have like it to. In any event, the G-8 has yielded economic leadership to the G-20 and hasn’t produced much in the 8 years since it first met in Russia. President Putin boycotted the 2012 meeting at Camp David. He cares that much.
- Placing travel bans on Putin and his family is symbolic, not substantial. The Europeans likely won’t go along. The man doesn’t vacation a lot in the US.
- Trade (and I would say financial) sanctions are a serious proposition, but there are real limits to what we are permitted to do by our World Trade Organization obligations and by our concern about damage to the global financial structure. Trade and financial sanctions won’t have much impact unless a good part of the rest of the world goes along with them, which isn’t likely.
- Suspension of NATO cooperation and participation. The Russians have never much appreciated their post-Cold War relationship with NATO. Few in Moscow would cry over this spilled milk.
- Accelerate missile defense. This would require a dramatic turnaround both in the US and Europe in favor of missile defenses few think are terribly important or will work. And it would cost a bundle. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
It’s all over but the shouting
1. Former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich held his first press conference yesterday since fleeing Kiev in Rostov on Don, in southern Russia not far from the Sea of Azov (and Crimea). He was not in Moscow and has only talked to Russian President Putin by phone. Putin has not committed to back Yanukovich’s claim to still being President, or his insistence on Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
2. President Obama went to the briefing room to warn Russia
the United States will stand with the international community in affirming that there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine.
What those costs might be is not clear. There are rumors of canceling a G-8 meeting, which won’t bring tears to Russian eyes.
3. The Prime Minister of Crimea has asked Putin for help. Security contractors who work for the Russian military have taken over Crimea’s airports and pro-Russian paramilitaries have taken over government buildings in the province. Russian helicopters have flown into Crimea. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The global chessboard
Barack Obama may not think he is playing on “some global chessboard,” but it is pretty clear Vladimir Putin does. The contest is no longer an ideological one between the “free world” and Communism. It is a pragmatic one between democracy and authoritarianism. Which one can satisfy stakeholders sufficiently to survive the long run? There is nothing inevitable about the triumph of democracy, though associated with wise economic management it is difficult to beat on the merits.
Authoritarians tend to abuse their political power for economic benefit. There can be no clearer illustration of this phenomenon than erstwhile Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich, whose palatial abode and documented graft are now open for all to see, even if the man himself has disappeared. It isn’t pretty. He seems to have lost even Russia’s backing, which has now been reduced from a $15 billion loan to a few fulminations from Prime Minister Medvedev.
If Moscow is going to act against the parliamentary takeover that Ukraine has witnessed, it won’t be to put Yanukovich back on his gold-plated toilet seat but rather to seize control of Crimea and perhaps a few provinces of eastern Ukraine. The precedents are clear: Trans-Dniester in Moldova as well as South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia host Russian troops, supposedly to protect them from their Russian-speaking inhabitants from the depredations of the authorities elected to serve in their capitals. Moscow could easily trump up that scenario in Crimea, where most of the population is Russian-speaking and loyal to Moscow rather than Kiev, which has been their capital only since 1954. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Wait and see
Secretary of State Kerry today urged Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov to accept the Ukrainian parliament’s dismissal of President Yanukovich and its appointment of an acting president and prime minister. This follows on Susan Rice’s warning yesterday against Russian military intervention. There is a great deal riding on Moscow’s responses.
Judging from past performance–something our stock brokers warn us not to do–Russia will be deaf to American pleas. When and where pro-Russian populations have managed to carve out an area of territorial autonomy in former Soviet republics, Moscow has been unwavering in its support: witness Trans-Dniester in Moldova as well as Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia. If some of the eastern provinces of Ukraine were to resist the new authorities in Kiev and declare themselves autonomous or even independent, Moscow would be tempted to provide what support they require, including troops. They wouldn’t invade. That’s so twentieth century. They could respond to a request for assistance to prevent atrocities. Read more
RSS - Posts
