I want to expand upon my suggestion in this week's Taki's Magazine that there's a potential negotiated solution for the Crimea crisis.
Both sides of the issue are essentially symbolic:
-- Russia wants Crimea as a symbol that Russia can't be pushed around as shamefully as it was in the 1990s.
-- The world in general doesn't like the symbolism of one country changing another country's borders by military might.
The good news is that since Crimea was seized without much violence, then there's a decent chance that a lot of this trouble can be worked out with money rather than blood. (By the way, if you compare the lack of bloodshed over Crimea -- so far at least, knock on wood -- versus the staggering amount of killing by Chechens and Russians whenever Chechen raiders would seize Russian hostages in the 1990s and 2000s, it would seem like talk of Slavic fraternity isn't wholly delusionary.)
My beach house divorce analogy is a useful template for thinking: the ex-husband (Russia) has gotten back on his feet financially, so he's particularly shocked that his ex-wife (Ukraine) has announced she's going to marry somebody else (EU). He breaks into their former beach house (Crimea) that she got, perhaps unfairly, in the divorce settlement, and has barricaded himself inside.
One response would be for the ex-wife to call in the SWAT team (NATO) and go all Janet Reno at Waco on the ex-husband in the beach house.
Another option would be for the ex-wife to let the ex-husband have an opportunity to extricate himself from the legal jam he's gotten himself into by letting him try to buy the beach house, although at a hefty price, to retroactively regularize what just happened through a negotiated contract.
After all, he seems to want the beach house more than she does. And they do have residual interests in common, such as their children, so it's in her interest to see him put this behind him and go back to work rather than for him to hole up from the law in the beach house, bleeding cash rather than paying their children's tuition bills. And, his male ego might mean he's in the mood to agree to pay her a big price to show he's a man of means again.
An interesting question is: What would be the ex-wife's new fiance's view of this potential transaction?
On the one hand, she has a lot of credit card debt that he's not looking forward to paying off when they marry. So, if she can bring in a lot of cash by selling this stupid beach house to her stupid ex, that's less cash he'll have come up with to bail her out.
On the other hand, the fiance might try to sabotage any deal between the exes out of a belief that continuing bad blood between them over the unresolved beach house crisis will keep them from ever getting back together again, which is what he really worries about, that, deep down, he's Ralph Bellamy while in their eyes they're Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell.
Posts
32 comments:
The Right Sector demonstrated today in Kiev demanding resignation of the Interior Minister who authorized a hit on one of their guys. They said they will come back tomorrow. Ms. Nuland is not expected to give them any more cookies though. Unless she can get her hands on some radioactive ones of course.
China is the wealthy divorcee....hot in the correct candle light, as Tom Wolfe memorably wrote near the beginning of A Man in Full.
China in Africa is the hot daughter of this divorcee.
Russia, the divorced man, eyes them both with lust.
Or the ex-husband can just stay there long enough and claim adverse possession.
It was obvious from the start of this crisis that neither the Russian nor Ukrainian soldiers had any real stomach for shooting each other, which I found rather cheering. (I hope this won't later be filed under "famous last words").
Chicken Kiev said: It was obvious from the start of this crisis that neither the Russian nor Ukrainian soldiers had any real stomach for shooting each other, which I found rather cheering. (I hope this won't later be filed under "famous last words").
Hunsdon said: Interestingly enough, about half the Crimean-based Ukrainian troops defected to the Russian side. You won't find it on ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN, and when you dig it up in Western sources the lede is frequently buried under rote denunciations against wreckers, revanchists and Putin----but it can be teased out.
Up to a point, Lord Sailer. It helps to remember that Crimea is home to the sole warm weather Russian port, and to the Black Sea Fleet, which takes it somewhat out of the beach house category. (Unless Naval Base San Diego qualifies as a beach house.)
I think it took a while for the Scots-Irish of North and South to warm to the killing of cousins, in the American Civil War. Quite a bit of posturing on the Potomac.
Neil Templeton
Russia’s prospects of being a great power will greatly diminish if Ukraine joins NATO. The problem is that even in the age of ICBMs distance does matter. Already with the dismantling of the USSR the Soviet radar installations in Azerbaijan and Latvia etc. were lost (the Azerbaijani one was reopened and is now being operated by Russia under a lease agreement), and in the meantime with the NATO expansion NATO radars and potentially NATO missiles got closer to Russian missile sites.
This gives the potential to NATO to create a missile shield and a very strong first strike capability from Ukraine (even much better than the previous Turkish sites). The Russians might counterbalance it by creating a huge nuclear missile base in Cuba (last time this happened, they were threatened with a full-scale nuclear war), but such a missile base could easily be attacked (Cuba being smaller than Ukraine, or rather Ukraine and Baltic states combined).
Russia might be the biggest country in the world, but much smaller than the American Empire containing all of North America and most of Europe and also huge outposts in Asia.
Thanks to Putin, Russia has A) borders, and B) a native birthrate that has recovered up to replacement levels, neither condition obtains in America. A victory for Putin and Russia is a defeat for the Globalists, and hence a victory for us.
The ex-wife will likely just walk away and be contented with what she's got thus far. It's not California, so there won't be a 50/50 split of assets ;)
Russia has p0n3d the Black Sea for a long time, so I don't see the problem here.
And Hundson, what of Kaliningrad (die unvergessene Heimat)? That's a "warm" port too, no? Achtung!
Ah, His Girl Friday.. Truly one of the greatest films of Hollywood's Golden Age. A viciously funny satire of sleezy big city politics, inept law enforcement, and the hopelessly jaded newspapermen that cover them, cleverly disguised as a 1930s screwball comedy.
I urge those of you in the Stevosphere who haven't seen this brilliant movie to seek it out and watch it as soon as you can (likewise, if you have watched it, but too long ago to recognize how much the thoroughly corrupt society it reflected can be seen all around us today). I managed to find a cheap DVD of it some 15 years ago and still enjoy it often.
What if the husband has his own swat team......and nuclear weapons? Puts him in a strong negotiating position - he doesn't even have to mention them. Everybody knows.
Rosalind Russell would be worth fighting over. But the Ukraine?
Awesome analogy, but a very important player is missing. Where is the nebbish man who, when they were kids, was given a wedgie by Russia and has been waiting years for just the right moment for revenge?
It was never a particularly illuminating comparison, and it has long since expired under all this flogging.
I wouldn't be surprised to find that much of the Ukraine military would defect.
Russia’s prospects of being a great power will greatly diminish if Ukraine joins NATO. The problem is that even in the age of ICBMs distance does matter. Already with the dismantling of the USSR the Soviet radar installations in Azerbaijan and Latvia etc. were lost (the Azerbaijani one was reopened and is now being operated by Russia under a lease agreement), and in the meantime with the NATO expansion NATO radars and potentially NATO missiles got closer to Russian missile sites.
This gives the potential to NATO to create a missile shield and a very strong first strike capability from Ukraine (even much better than the previous Turkish sites). The Russians might counterbalance it by creating a huge nuclear missile base in Cuba (last time this happened, they were threatened with a full-scale nuclear war), but such a missile base could easily be attacked (Cuba being smaller than Ukraine, or rather Ukraine and Baltic states combined).
Russia might be the biggest country in the world, but much smaller than the American Empire containing all of North America and most of Europe and also huge outposts in Asia.
This is a comment that first appeared at a Counter Currents article. However, using my clairvoyant powers I can assure you that the writer of that passage retroactively makes this comment part of the public domain. Feel free to use it anywhere.
The more I think about this, the more obvious it seems that there is no reasonable course of action other than deals.
First, Ukraine owes Russia. As far as I can tell, roughly $2 billion balance on their gas bill to Gazprom.
They also owe $3 billion in Eurobond debt issued as the first payment on the $15 billion deal that started this mess.
There is probably other debt ... who knows.
But both countries have leverage. Obviously, Ukraine owes money and needs gas from Russia. but Russia can't simply shut off gas since it uses Ukrainian pipelines. And Russia also needs utilities for its new prize, Crimea.
Throw in the IMF and -- and Ukraine failed to honor its 2008 and 2010 IMF deals. Austerity will quickly get old. Plus, the IMF removes the option of settling up with simple solutions like bribery.
Never underestimate the West's unwillingness to sacrifice for the common good, much less a matter of principle. The US has coughed up exactly $1 billion loan guarantee. Not much of a commitment to the sanctity of International Law (whatever that means). France wants to get paid for those 2 warships that are already built. Germany? UK? And if big money isn't enough -- Western politicians have to get reelected.
A lot of these clever sanction ideas have a decent chance of raising the price of oil. The US has no real experience with sanctions that have financial blowback. North Korea? Cuba?
Maybe all this is totally obvious.
Thanks to Putin, Russia has A) borders, and B) a native birthrate that has recovered up to replacement levels, neither condition obtains in America. A victory for Putin and Russia is a defeat for the Globalists, and hence a victory for us.
Maybe, maybe not
I tend to think not for 2 reasons. First because come whatever "the globalists" will use conflict with Russia to tighten their grip here at home. That's goal number one. Second because if they really do get "defeated", they are likely to take out their rage on someone who can't nuke them back ie their own domestic subjects.
The EU/USA now controls 90% of Ukraine now that the elected leader was violently tossed out. Russia moved to protect its naval base and diaspora. Perhaps we need to reconsider who owes who...
Kibernetica may have caught me: And Hundson, what of Kaliningrad (die unvergessene Heimat)? That's a "warm" port too, no? Achtung!
Hunsdon said: I mis-typed "warm weather" when I meant "warm water" port. Doesn't the Baltic Sea freeze? But you're right, I completely forgot about Kaliningrad/Кёнигсберг!
geschrei said: Ah, His Girl Friday.. Truly one of the greatest films of Hollywood's Golden Age.
Hunsdon said: Probably could not be made today, like so many of Hollywood's great films.
The Ukraine is Moe Greene: "Yeah, let's talk business, Mike. First of all, you're all done. The Corleone Family don't even have that kind of muscle anymore. The Godfather's sick, right? You're getting chased out of New York by Barzini and the other Families. What do you think is going on here? You think you can come to my hotel and take over? I talked to Barzini - I can make a deal with him, and still keep my hotel!"
Russia is Jack Woltz: "And then Johnny Fontaine comes along with his olive oil voice and guinea charm and she runs off. She threw it all away just to make me look ridiculous. And a man in my position can't afford to be made to look ridiculous."
Nuland is Sonny "No, no, no, not this time, Consigliary. No more meetin's, no more discussions, no more Sollozzo tricks. You give them a message from I want Solozzo if not it's all out war "
"Both sides of the issue are essentially symbolic:"
It's as symbolic as the Russians creating a coup/revolution in Hawaii threatening the loss of the US naval base there i.e. not remotely.
The speed with which the newly installed puppet govt. has signed up to an IMF bail-out is the final piece of the puzzle. Why didn't EUSUK wait a year for the elections?
An imminent default leading to another collapse of the western banking system would provide a plausible motive for the unnecessary hurry.
Peter Turchin thought in terms of an Islamic caliphate suplanting Russia. But basically he predicted something like this would happen to Russia. Turchin said if Russia loses part of it's traditional sphere of influence it would rapidly come apart. Russia can't afford to give back Crimea, not because of irrelevant warm water ports or the rusting junk of the black sea navy, but because it would make them look weak. That matters because they ARE in fact weak. The Russian ecomony is about the size of Italy's. The husband has been made to look like a fool, so he's acting along the lines of the 'unwritten law' to restore respect. Russia can not, will not, give it back.
Russia wants Crimea as a symbol that Russia can't be pushed around as shamefully as it was in the 1990s.
Sorry, but I think your premise is fundamentally flawed. This isn't just some publicity stunt. I just bought a book entitled Imperial Russian Navy: 1890s-1916, which showed up in the mail yesterday. An entire chapter is called "The Black Sea Fleet" and in flipping through the book my eyes fell on illustrations on p. 167, which show "Ships of the Black Sea Fleet in the Northern Bay of Sevastopol. 1902. The photos were done by lieutenant M.N. Bolshev from a hot air balloon." The two images show a number of ships tied up to what look to be quiet extensive naval facilities.
This is not some PR stunt. Sevastopol and the Crimea were fundamental, integral and strategically very significant regions of the Russia state itself, and the fact that Khrushchev gave the Crimea to the Ukraine sixty years ago was an act of meaningless stupidity. It was Russian territory and there's no good reason for it to be part of the Ukraine.
The blockheads in the State Department completely misunderstood Putin because of their almost willful refusal to consider things from his point of view. Maybe you're just joking with this shtick of yours of acting like it's some sort of squabble between Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner that Danny DeVito could mediate, but that's really no more realistic than that Nuland woman's take on it.
Ah, His Girl Friday.. Truly one of the greatest films of Hollywood's Golden Age. A viciously funny satire of sleezy big city politics, inept law enforcement, and the hopelessly jaded newspapermen that cover them, cleverly disguised as a 1930s screwball comedy.
I urge those of you in the Stevosphere who haven't seen this brilliant movie to seek it out and watch it as soon as you can
It is on Saturday night at 8pm ET on Turner Classic Movies.
Vlad Blandings Builds a Dream (beach) House
Khrushchev gave the Crimea to the Ukraine sixty years ago was an act of meaningless stupidity
Or an attempt to look like a good guy in the eyes of the West.
"Or an attempt to look like a good guy in the eyes of the West."
Unlikely. Remember "we will bury you"? Maybe he felt guilty about starving 7-odd million to death in the Holodomor.
btw, following what looks like the police murder of their leader, I see the heroes of Maidan are now neo-fascists - and the storming of Parliament isn't making BBC news here.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2591624/Fears-neo-fascist-uprising-Ukraine-far-right-group-storms-Kiev-parliament-ex-president-calls-independence-vote.html
"Hundreds of members of the ultra-nationalist Right Sector movement stormed the parliament (Rada) building in Kiev last night, smashing windows and breaking down doors.
The riot erupted just hours before Russia's foreign ministry today warned that ethnic minorities in Ukraine are 'living in fear' of the expanding power of the far-right across the divided nation."
In academic circles at the moment, people are comfortable expressing the opinion that dividing the Ukraine along ethnic lines is acceptable. Ethnic political divisions are more or less considered natural and necessary in Eastern Europe.
Meanwhile, the West is becoming every bit as ethnically divided, and yet no one seems to think that the same measures will be necessary here.
In case anyone didn't understand, the beach house divorce analogy was brilliant. I agree with the comment that the ex-wife might just walk away.
RE: Russia-Israel Alliance,
Andrew Sullivan has some thoughts:
"The vote in the UN yesterday was good, if not spectacular, in isolating Russia for its annexation of Crimea. 100 countries voted to condemn; 11 voted against; and 58 countries abstained. All of America’s key allies backed the US – except Israel, which abstained. There is a diplomatic strike in Israel at the moment, but casting a critical vote in concord with your closest ally should never be restrained by such a thing.
Maybe it’s because of the obvious similarities between Putin and Netanyahu’s foreign policies – intransigent nationalists annexing neighboring regions to restore a Greater Russia or create a Greater Israel. Maybe it’s because Russia is a potential patron if Israel continues to settle its near-abroad and becomes even more diplomatically isolated."
Anonydroid quoted Andrew Sullivan: Maybe it’s because of the obvious similarities between Putin and Netanyahu’s foreign policies. . . .
Hunsdon said: And here I thought I was the only one that noticed their similarities!
int'l laws, pacts, constitution, bible, quran....cannot be known--they can only be interpreted.
and when it comes to regional demands for independence, laws governing or [in]validating such demands appear a lot murkier than other laws.
so, there is no truth about crimea.
however, russia needs crimea more than EU/US. that settles the issue!!! bozhidar balkas
Post a Comment