WTF is going on with Galloway’s accent? Is he trying to be Russian??

Interesting article in the New York Times today

London’s Laundry Business

max has been tilting at that particular windmill for a long time

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFtFddb5fpk[/video]

Well, March 16th is the day the Crimea decides it’s future. Trouble is the rest of Ukraine is taking the view of the West and already calling it illegal . So I can see it all kicking off as we already know Crimea will vote to be Russian.
There may be (more) trouble ahead…..

I’ve heard it’s going to split into 2 .

One country will be called Raine.

The other will become UK because that’s where Russian billionaires like to live. 🙂

rossi46 – Member
Well, March 16th is the day the Crimea decides it’s future. Trouble is the rest of Ukraine is taking the view of the West and already calling it illegal . So I can see it all kicking off as we already know Crimea will vote to be Russian.
There may be (more) trouble ahead…..

the problem is that crimea is only just majority russian 45% of the population are ukranian, will they be forced to leave their homes if they dont want to become russian?

The russian embassy on Notting Hill always has some coppers outside and there are often demos over the road; syria, pussy riot, gay rights, ukraine etc

but theres a house further down Notting Hill that I assume is the ambassadors house has had police outside lately and this morning there were 2 police both with submachine guns.

will they be forced to leave their homes if they dont want to become russian?

Serbians in Kosovo? Brits in Scotland?

I’m afraid that the right to self determination and democracy work that way, Crimea has long been an Autonomous republic and as such its pretty difficult to argue that they should not now be allowed to exercise that autonomy – we can’t just pick and choose because we think that the West/Europe is somehow inherently ‘right’.

As a slight aside, have you seen Putins approval ratings this week?

70%. So I guess the people who are going to be voting at the election are giving him a resounding thumbs for whats gone on. I wonder if any of the western leaders presently trying not to look too pathetically impotent, would poll even half that with their electorates. Did you see Obama’s vague, none-specific ‘threats’ of ‘a price to pay’ this morning? All just hot air. He’s not fooling anyone. Not even himself.

Its just reinforces the opinion that the Lion-wrestler is the shrewdest politician out there by a country mile, and there really is only one person in a position to be issuing high-handed decrees. Though he isn’t. He’s just letting the ‘facts on the ground’ speak for themselves

The best review of the situation I’ve seen is this one, which seems fair to both sides and is written by a Ukrainian :
Grauniad

That nytimes article

Britain, open for business, no longer has a “mission.” Any moralizing remnant of the British Empire is gone;

Pretty sure he should broaden his historical knowledge a bit, iirc John Company was quite keen on making a few bob at the expense of others.

Seems more like business as usual.

good link Moses

have you seen Putins approval ratings this week?

70%.

The lowest approval rating Putin has ever had since 2000 is 61%, almost twice the approval rating that Cameron can expect to get.

However unpalatable it might be Putin is popular with a clear majority of Russians, he doesn’t really need to boost his ratings.

On the other hand Cameron, Obama, Hollande, etc, could do with a substantial boost to their approval ratings from their electorate.

ok ill readjust that from ernies data- 41.5% of crimeans arent russian!

Im going on what a ukranian facebook friend and ex-coleague told me!

Good article that Moses. The usual hypocrisy from the west. We’ll champion the cause of democracy as long as democracy delivers the leaders we want in power. If not, then anything that does is fair game really.

41.5% of crimeans arent russian!

And over a third of Londoners are foreign born.

And if my auntie had bollox……

ninfan – Member

I’m afraid that the right to self determination and democracy work that way, Crimea has long been an Autonomous republic and as such its pretty difficult to argue that they should not now be allowed to exercise that autonomy – we can’t just pick and choose because we think that the West/Europe is somehow inherently ‘right’.

Yes it is that simple, and when you kick someone off their land you have the unchallenged right to exercise self determination in “your” country.

The majority may speak Russian but the Russian nationalist movement in Crimea peaked in the early mid 1990s.

Having said that it is probably one of the most ethnically and politically contested and complicated regions in that area. Not surprising when you were invaded by the nazis in ww2, Stalin deports the entire Tartar pop in ’44 and then you are given away ten years later by Kruschev. Then 91 complicates matters all over again. Hard to see how you make complete sense of all this.

I wish the press/media would give less attention to UK and US views and more to the relationship that is key here ie, Russia and Germany. Any German STWers who can give the local insight?

As a slight aside, have you seen Putins approval ratings this week?

You can’t believe those figures.

Yes it is that simple, and when you kick someone off their land you have the unchallenged right to exercise self determination in “your” country.

If there had been a recent programme of ‘ethnic cleansing’ you might have a point, but the sins of the Stalinist era are a long time ago under a now collapsed regime – ‘we are where we are’ for want of a better expression, and its perfectly reasonable to now allow democracy to take its course.

The ‘sins of the past’ are rarely a good basis to limit the democratic course of the future – otherwise you’d have to take a long hard look at voting rights everywhere from Bradford to Mexico.

“Sins of the past” do however shape the lenses through which we view the present.

ninfan – Member

If there had been a recent programme of ‘ethnic cleansing’ you might have a point, but the sins of the Stalinist era are a long time ago under a now collapsed regime

Hardly time-expired, there’s plenty of people who remember it- people living elsewhere who get no vote in this, but who would still be living in the Crimea had they not been run off. The russian majority was engineered, in living memory, at the cost of others who now have no voice in this.

But this is beside the point- you asserted that the reason “the west” is unhappy with this is purely because they don’t like the results that democracy is delivering, what I’m pointing out is that there are legitimate grounds to quetion the “rightness” of that democratic process.

How about the fact that the west gave assurances to Moscow in 1991 that it had no intention of encircling it by expanding NATO to include countries on Russia’s borders. And in effect, what has happened?

The russian majority was engineered, in living memory, at the cost of others who now have no voice in this.

I think you’ll find that ethic Russians formed a majority in Crimea even in 1944. The Russian tsars ruthlessly suppressed Ukrainian nationalism, that’s one of the reasons why so few speak Ukrainian in eastern Ukraine (western Ukraine wasn’t part of imperial Russia)

Indeed the whole of Ukraine has been the subject of continual ethnic cleansing and engineering. Ukraine was the birthplace of the Russian nation and Kiev was the capital of Russia hundreds of years before Moscow was.

The reason Ukraine has turned out ethically different to the rest of the Russian hinterland is because its geographical position has meant that it provided the territory for the clash of empires/civilizations/cultures/religions, including muslims, catholic, and eastern orthodox. I believe that Ukraine means “borderland” presumably alluding to the fact that it it represents the division between east and west, even today ?

But whilst there is clearly a sectarian dimension to the present crises in Ukraine today, after all one of the first things the coup leaders did after seizing power was to repeal the law on regional languages and made Ukraine the sole official language (they later backed down under strong pressure from their EU backers) I suspect that it would be over simplistic to put it all down to narrow sectarianism.

It is perfectly feasible for someone who is not an ethnic Russian to feel that there are more advantages in close ties with Russia than with the EU. For example most of eastern Ukraine’s trade is with Russia, Moscow pays very large sums of money for its Black Sea Fleet Crimean facilities, Russia provides gas well below global market prices, all of which would be at risk if links with Russia were significantly severed.

Furthermore as a BRIC nation Russia is widely seen as an emerging economic superpower. Today Russia has half the unemployment level that the EU has and twice the growth. Plus Europe is probably doomed to a long slow period of economic decline as the technological advantages it once had over underdeveloped world disappear due to modern easily transferred technologies – third world counties can now challenge Europe on the quality and quantity of manufactured goods.

As a slight aside, have you seen Putins approval ratings this week?

You can’t believe those figures.

And yet the western press such as the Washington Post, which is unlikely to want to over emphasis Putin’s popularity at home as they continue to portray him as some sort of strong man/near dictator, are perfectly prepared to ‘believe those figures’.

Quote :

In a poll conducted by the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM) last week, Putin’s popularity level in Russia has reached 71.6 percent. That’s a 9.7 percent since mid-February, which seems quite obviously linked to the Russian president’s handling of Ukraine and the Sochi Olympics. As Ria Novosti notes, it means that Putin’s popularity levels are now at a three-year high.

You might want to put that down to the fact that the VTsIOM is state-run, but that argument doesn’t really hold. The Levada Center, a well-respected independent polling center, has also found that Putin had a 72 percent approval rating, up 7 points from January and a recent record. To put that in context on a world stage, U.S. president Barack Obama is currently at 43 percent, according to Gallup, while 79 percent of the French say they don’t approve of Francois Hollande’s presidency. Putin isn’t just popular, he’s extraordinarily popular.

We treat him like he’s mad, but Vladimir Putin’s popularity has just hit a 3-year high

Do you know something which the Washington Post should also know ?

Well, the Beeb is reporting that one protester has been killed in clashes in eastern Ukraine – enough justification for Putin to move in to ‘protect’ ethnic Russians? Seems he’s moved all his troops there ready. Not that they’ll be going anywhere, I’m sure some local community figures will simply become very well equipped.

ernie_lynch – Member

I think you’ll find that ethic Russians formed a majority in Crimea even in 1944.

Mmm, that’s not the breakdown I’ve seen but I’d be daft to assume I’m right, what’s your source?

Nothing daft with thinking you’re right. I would stick with that.

I think I’m right; I’m just not going to assume I’m right 😉 Right?

The polls are in, here it is from the American viewpoint that is CNN.

Its obvious that Crimea will vote to be part of Russia once more, that will be illegal to everyone but Russia.
Could get messy from here on in…

Apologies, I’ve been too busy to post.

Why are we threatening war with Russia over the Crimea? can it ever be worth it.

The EU was at fault for stirring up trouble and the US thinks it is still the worlds judge, jury and policeman.

It ain’t great but nor is Tibet, Palestine, Sri Lanka, Sudan or frankly Cuba but we don’t risk everything to interfere in those disputes.

Will the Americans not learn that their 50 years of glory are over and go home. I’m just baffled.

Why are we threatening war with Russia over the Crimea?

Unless you’ve heard a piece of news I haven’t, we aren’t.

The whole exercise is limited to creating tensions with Russia for a variety of reasons. As examples, firstly it is important for global leaders to offer those they govern an enemy, a threat, something they should fear, real or imaginary. Secondly the West/US/EU wishes to expand their markets and political influence, pulling countries away from Russian influence and cooperation is obviously going to help them achieve that.

It’s about power and wealth.

Apologies, I was exaggerating with my ‘war’ reference but you got the gist. I’m not as cynical as you but I do follow your logic. The military industrial complex in US has a lot to answer for and so it would appear do Eurocrats who just want a bigger bureaucracy to sponge off.

You are correct ernie- it is about power and wealth. Should this escalate into a military situation we can add it to the list of conflicts that were about power and wealth. That’s all wars ever isn’t it?

Edit: just seen Sky news- it seems the first steps to conflict are upon us- a Ukrainian soldier has been killed after a military base in Simferopol was stormed by armed men. Probably Russian.
And so it begins…..

That’s all wars ever isn’t it?

And all politics. And all history. It’s all about power and wealth.

So, Crimea is a bit of land originally Russian, populated by a majority of Crimean Russians which is sitting of a bit of land that broke away from Russia, taking the mainly Russian populated Crimean region away from Russian.

There was a vote by people of the Crimea where over 80% of the population voted and they voted 93% to join Russia.

Where’s the problem?
If the people want it, let them join back up with Russia where they want to be.

On this one I feel our leaders should back away and live and let live

I have no problem with any of the above process, were that process to take place in peacetime. I feel a little uneasy when the referendum to join your neighbours is carried with overwhelming support and those neighbours’ troops are at the gate, and in some cases through the gate, performing operations wearing uniforms with no insignia.

All history is about power and wealth, Ernie? That implies no-one has ever tried to change the world for the better through self-sacrifice. I’m not sure I take such a cynical view.

That implies no-one has ever tried to change the world for the better through self-sacrifice.

Of course they have. Many have tried to change the world for the better through self-sacrifice, take Nelson Mandela as an example.

Nelson Mandela sought to increase the power and wealth of those he represented. To do so he had to challenge the power and wealth of others.

It was all about power and wealth. All history is about power and wealth