Comments on: Markets already see a Putin win http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/ Sat, 03 Jan 2015 16:42:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: evoltan http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1901 Mon, 18 Aug 2014 02:40:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1901 Sure the United States and NATO has conventional superiority in armaments. However, to the imbeciles who beat the war drum: There are only LOSERS in a nuclear exchange. Think about that!

]]>
By: JohannesBouvier http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1900 Mon, 18 Aug 2014 02:13:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1900 As Machiavelli said, “Politics have no relations to morals,” and whether the West believes their actions are right or not, they are not functional. A full scale war with Russia might result in Crimea’s return to Kiev’s control, but short of that, all the west can do is cause mutual inconveniences with Russia. It all begs the question, why are we even involved? Ukraine is in no way an ally of the U.S. or E.U., and is not a N.A.T.O. member. Exercising self-determination is hardly a humanitarian crisis that the world stage should play a part in. The West has been reduced to a group of reactionary, self-righteous countries, where wishful thinking rules, and critical analysis is all but eradicated.

]]>
By: ThomasOne http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1891 Sun, 17 Aug 2014 16:04:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1891 The Russian of today is a modern day consumer and no comparison with Russians of the past; they will not accept the hardships in the long run.
The Russian economy will become more chaotic and will come around. Why is Crimea worth hardship. As for naturally Russian sounds like Hitler in 1930s’. There is also another aspect; Russian gas will be partly replaced by other energy sources and there will be a boycott of “all that is Russian” by citizens of the civilized world who do not welcome Putin’s early 20th aggression. Sochi will be boycotted by many and what a boondoggle- Russia is close to bankruptcy. Remember Mussolini, Hitler, Hussein and countless other set on expansion. And remember Stalin he was done in by his own. The criminal element in Russia are likely unhappy with the austerity that Putin expects and may well do him in. Putin is finished – what happened to term limits – Putin’s action are all about Putin and the longevity of his power.

]]>
By: TAAmerican http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1884 Sat, 16 Aug 2014 17:13:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1884 Lol. This author is the only fool with an opinion so off based that even Putin would laugh at. Wait until the Russian are tired of eating stale bread. We’ll see who get hanged in the red square.

]]>
By: boater805 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1631 Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:11:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1631 Solutions begin with a focus on how the parties can agree, not on how they disagree.
My framework for a solution is published at:

http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/661819 1-richard-berger/2756863-crimea-one-mans -idea-to-calm-the-waters-and-calm-the-ma rkets

]]>
By: Jeff98201 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1628 Sat, 15 Mar 2014 04:28:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1628 The article’s definition of “win” is overly simplistic. It seems inevitable that Russia will control the Crimea in a month, a year, or a decade. Neither NATO nor the EU will go to war to push Russia out of a nation that is not a member of either. The EU is not a military alliance. NATO is committed to mutual defense of other treaty members. Ukraine cannot possibly fight Russia. Russia will annex the Crimea. It is very unlikely that anything can change that.

But this victory will be Pyrrhic. Winning the Crimea may come at the cost of 1/6th of the Russian economy if the sanctions are sustained. And rather than allowing the entire Ukraine to slip into the pro-Western camp it forces the western part of the Ukraine to join the Baltic states in firmly aligning with the West as a bulwark against Russian imperialism. Perhaps more important in the long term, it forces NATO and the EU to consider Russia an actively hostile threat rather than merely a geopolitical rival.

While a year ago it seemed unthinkable that there could be another pan-european war, today this is no longer the case. European nations will increase the percentage of their GDP that is spent on the military, and there will be a cultural reorientation toward considering war with Russia a realistic possibility that has not previously existed in most of Europe. Even if this is not combined with sustained sanctions, this will ensure Russia’s long-term decline in relative strength on its Western border.

It didn’t have to be this way. Russia could have used its influence to agitate for succession in the Crimea, using the threat of civil war to destabilize the Ukraine in order to try to prevent Ukrainian membership in NATO, and failing that to push for a real civil war that would at least have given Russia the opportunity to plausibly move to protect the Russian populations in the Crimea without alarming its western neighbors and rousing them to action. Instead Putin was impatient, greedy and aggressive. The whole world now sees that Russia is a rogue state. Crimea ensures Russia is isolated from the West.

Meanwhile on its eastern border, China is its only ally with any real power. Yet China’s biggest reason to stay friendly with Russia so it can steal more Russian technology and Russia has no choice but to continue allowing it because the Chinese market for their weapons funds their development programs. And every year China gets closer to surpassing Russia in military technology, while having a far larger economy, population, and industrial base than Russia has. Does Russia even have a plan for what they will do once China doesn’t need them anymore?

I don’t see Crimea as a “win” for Russia.

]]>
By: matthewslyman http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1623 Sat, 08 Mar 2014 22:48:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1623 …My personal conclusion, until I hear better arguments by either side, or see more persuasive evidence: there isn’t a right or a wrong side in this dispute. Most factions are simply acting in what they consider to be their own various personal/national selfish strategic interests (even William Hague, UK’s foreign minister, admits that Russia has legitimate interests in the region — especially, I suppose, in their strategic defensive interests in Crimea). So we’re going to have to make do with Realpolitik, get off our high horses, and start understanding each other’s interests and seeing what we can do to help each other and work together more effectively: mutual assurances of security and fair trade (and mutually agreed definitions of what that means) would probably be a good start.

]]>
By: LevinY http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1622 Sat, 08 Mar 2014 18:46:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1622 market has forgotten about the Crimean Tatars.

]]>
By: matthewslyman http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1621 Sat, 08 Mar 2014 07:47:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1621 I think Kiev should also politely ask Tymoshenko to shut up and stop pretending to represent them. Even the BBC is reporting that they don’t want her back.

]]>
By: matthewslyman http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/03/06/markets-already-see-a-putin-win/#comment-1620 Sat, 08 Mar 2014 07:46:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=887#comment-1620 This seems to me to be a fairly accurate assessment of Russian attitudes and political moods, and Western misconceptions. For context, I have relatives in Russia and have visited Russia about five times: I think they’re mostly a tough, pragmatic and practical people (with a minority addicted to drugs or seduced by romantic conceptions of Western culture distorted by Western corporate-sponsored images of fantastic wealth and prosperity).

I’m skeptical that Obama is willing to go to war at all. His handling of the mission to kill or capture Osama bin Laden was a master-class in cool diversion (reputedly holding a social event and cracking jokes while he knew the special forces were already in transit); and was a triumph for the special forces themselves… But I sometimes doubt whether Obama is willing to take America to war under any circumstances at all. War is a horrific thing — many soldiers will tell you there is nothing more horrible than war at all — but sadly, I sometimes wonder whether Obama is reckoning with political calculations over his prematurely and manipulatively awarded Nobel Peace Prize.

The new authorities in Kiev, and the Americans/British, are also doing a poor job of persuading anyone of the moral correctness of their position. Putin has written copiously to persuade us over to his position — yet we get nothing but the usual ruminations of punitive “sanctions” from the West! The best argument I’ve read against Yanukovich, besides Russian admissions that he was corrupt, has come from a commenter on Reuters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/comments/ idUSBREA2007M20140301

PaulBradley wrote: @carlmartel – – How can Yanukovich be considered a valid President of Ukraine since he FLED threat of legal process – i.e. impeachment proceedings by the Ukraine’s Parliament representing 450 seats???

— Doesn’t this kind of pull the foundations out from under the feet of Putin’s whole argument?

This Kiev parliament might have made strategic errors (e.g. making it their priority to remove recognition for the Russian language — sending a very bad political signal to Russian constituents); but Putin’s argument that Kiev didn’t impeach Yanukovich seems hollow after we all saw the CCTV images of Yanukovich’s entourage fleeing his palace in Kiev; and after we have all heard Yanukovich agitating for war while at the same time stating he believes invasion would be wrong!

As for Yanukovich’s pretences that his palace grounds were “owned by dozens of people” and that he paid $3M to the Ukrainian state for that mansion… Why then, if everything was legitimate and above-board, did his people throw so many documents into the lake? What did they have to hide? I’m dumbfounded that no journalists are challenging him. Did the security guards at his press-conference not let them, or did they just fail to ask?

]]>