[ExI] putin and the three pirates problem

Tue Mar 4 16:43:07 UTC 2014

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:40:55PM +0000, BillK wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> > Putin is an excellent tactician but a lousy strategist. He got 
> > everything he wanted: Crimea (symbolically important), a 'war' to 
> > unify his nation, a chance to look buff, putting Ukraine and 
> > democrats in their place and so on. He does not care about foreign 
> > opinion, so it is not a problem. But indeed, this will make every 
> > state around Russia start to look towards NATO and EU, it produces a 
> > new source of unrest inside Russia, it breaks off international 
> > links, it makes it even harder to transition away from a raw 
> > materials based economy in the face of demographic winter, it loses 
> > Russia potential allies and any chance at claiming to not be a rogue 
> > state. So from a longer perspective it makes all of the Russian 
> > problems worse in the future. Putin may be fine with that, since he 
> > doesn't seem to aim for a political dynasty. He (and presumably his 
> > clique of core allies) just wants to stay ahead personally.
> >
> > He has read his Machiavelli, but skipped the chapters on making a 
> > viable dynasty. Sometimes the long game matters.
> >
> >
> 
> Foreign opinion might not matter too much. The idea that only the US 
> and UK have the right to invade other countries for made-up reasons is 
> rapidly alienating the rest of the world. Only the US dollar and fear 
> of their military is keeping the rest of the world 'friendly'.

You mean, there are no ideals on our side that we would find worthy 
enough to unite around them? You make me feel so shallow!

If yes, do you mean the other side is actually better in this regard?

Explain both answers, please.

> Crimea speaks Russian and *was* Russian until quite recently,

And before that it belonged to Tatars. And before that, to Greeks. And 
before that...

And in between those times, it belonged to many others (or remained 
inside their sphere of influence), like Ottomans, Genoans, etc etc.

And one could argue there would have been more, say, Tatars living there 
if they weren't all packed into trains and exported to eastern Soviet 
Union (with half of them dead as a result). Their posessions taken over 
by Russians (and Ukrainians, I can only guess). Actually, it looks like 
Tatar population was "worked upon" on various times while they remained 
Russian subjects.

Crimea has been given to Ukraine in 1954 by Russia, voluntarily, roughly 
hundred years after it could be called truly Russian (i.e. after Crimean 
War ended in 1856). In 1994 Russia signed Budapest Memorandum along with 
USA and UK. In it, among other things, integrity of Ukrainian territory 
had been guaranteed, with all sides mentioned taking the role of 
guarantors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

According to wikipedia, Crimea already _is_ The Autonomous Republic of 
Crimea, "an autonomous parliamentary republic within Ukraine" - created 
in 1917, abolished in 1921 by Soviet Union, restored in 1992. On 6th May 
1992 Crimean Parliament itself declared that Crimea was part of Ukraine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea

Which is why we can have news about some guys issuing their messages 
from Crimean Parliament. This Parliament was there for the last twenty 
years, have not constituted itself out of the air last month or week.

> so Putin is protecting his people against the neo-Nazis taking over in 
> Kiev. Look

AFAIK this statement is a summary of Russian medial campaign, repeated 
by some Western newspapers. BTW, what are the names of neonazi leaders? If 
they are taking over, they certainly have nonanonymous leaders?

I have also heard Russian media make very nasty noises about West itself. 
Will have to investigate if time permits. So far, the allegations that 
European Union is just some gay conspiracy promoting homogenic marriages 
are probably the least nasty of their brainwashing content.

> at the way Crimea has welcomed the Russian troops.

Yes?

I heard "Crimea" watches very carefully to avoid any violence. Other 
than Russian bases, there are no Russian troops there - according to 
president Putin himself. Those are just some self-defence groups. This 
is what he said to journalists few hours ago. Of course, one could 
wonder how those self-defence groups managed to get hold of machine guns 
and armoured vehicles, but apparently they are very creative.

So I'm not sure where you got this idea that civilians are welcoming 
Russian troops. Which means, why do you think they like Russians at all?

Also, at least some Crimeans are keeping their ground and don't give up 
to pressure of anonymous self-defence groups. And I am not going to bet 
which side fares better in case pushing around turns into shooting.

BTW, self-defence against what? As far as I can tell, self defence is 
wait for attack and then organise to defend against next one. Not before 
the first one, which is yet to happen, which is why there is no 
violence. At least not yet. I mean, I haven't heard about anything 
justifying this taking your machine gun and going to the street (I mean, 
on the peninsula at least). Normal people, one expects, make a civil 
protest first.

BTW2, since president Putin declared that Ukrainian and Russian troops 
will stand on the same side, it means he wants to help against this 
self-defence. Their prospects now look so bad. Not only they are not 
Russians, they are going to be purged by collective effort of Ukrainian 
and Russian military. This is deduction I make from official Russian 
statements.

I am now watching Ukrainian soldiers armed with just two flags march 
against self-defence to take their base back from them. Self-defence 
shoots in the air, Ukrainians sing their anthem. Negotiations.

> China has supported Putin and I wouldn't be surprised if more 
> countries support him as well.

I've heard China is cutting itself off all this and won't support Putin.

> Europe will probably refuse to implement sanctions, as they object to 
> cutting their own throats. (Russia supplies energy to Europe).

Unfortunately, I have to agree. West is notoriously undecided whether it 
wants to live or to die - and plan accordingly. If not all of the "West" 
then at least some well visible parts of it. And there are plenty of 
particular interests, self promotion at the cost of pushing others into 
the abyss, all very short term and stupid. If you feed the abyss like 
some ordinary hole, it grows rather than being filled with dead bodies, 
because it's not just some ordinary hole. And finally it comes to your 
doors. I say, it happens sooner and always surprises those who treat it 
like a hole. This is the abyss' way.

I also agree with Anders. So far it looks like Putin is playing his own 
(more or less) personal game, which is going to cost Russia (Russians) 
quite a lot. But it's not some ad hoc caprice of his. There was many 
months of preparations. I am far from decided if this is just about 
Crimea cooming back to Russia. Maybe it'a about something else which is 
yet to show up. Wrt to making dynasty, there are no dynasties in 
corporations so far as I can tell. Perhaps Russia is something else it 
poses to be, i.e. not nation-state.

Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.      **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home    **           
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...      **           
**                                                                 **           
** Tomasz Rola          mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com             **