In the last few days, Russian military vessels have attacked and sunk Georgian naval vessels. However those Russian ships are based in Sevastapol- under the remit of an agreement with the host nation: Ukraine.
Ukraine does not support the use of its ports in a vicious war against a friendly country. It has indicated that it will not permit those ships that participated in the action to return to Ukrainian ports.
If Russia intends to break the blockade, then it will essentially be attacking Ukraine in the same way as it has already attacked Georgia.
This is playing with fire.
The rape of Georgia has already humiliated the West and killed tens of thousands.
Unless the Kremlin pulls back from the brink, we could indeed be looking a a major war.
Ukraine does not support the use of its ports in a vicious war against a friendly country. It has indicated that it will not permit those ships that participated in the action to return to Ukrainian ports.
If Russia intends to break the blockade, then it will essentially be attacking Ukraine in the same way as it has already attacked Georgia.
This is playing with fire.
The rape of Georgia has already humiliated the West and killed tens of thousands.
Unless the Kremlin pulls back from the brink, we could indeed be looking a a major war.
Comments
Of interest legally what clauses are there in the lease which gives Ukraine the right to do this.
Lepidus
However, as we have seen in the last few days, the Kremlin is not too big on international law.
The language will be quite important. In any case the idea is insanely risky. Leave aside anything the Russians may do how do you think eastern Ukraine would react. Even more so the inhabitants of the Crimea. With the Russian fleet based there for decades many of the Sailors will be friends and relatives, do you think they'll just go oh well never mind if Ukraine fired on them whatever the circumstances. It is a terribly fragile Country, Yuschenko need only look at the 2004 and 2006 elections to see that.
Lepidus
It is dangerous, but not because of the steps that Ukraine is making, but because Russia seems unwilling to be be bound by any treaty whatsoever, and is prepared to use brutal violence to impose its will. This is, of course why Ukraine fully intends to increase the distance between K'yev and Moscow and assert a greater independence.
An armed attack against Ukraine would be a different story compared to Georgia, since the Ukrainian army is far more evenly matched- and the Russian domestic political implications, including in Tatarstan are a potential major headache for Putin.
It is a risk, but a calculated risk, and unlike Germany and Italy, Ukraine is demonstrating prepared to stand up for itself.
They may think of themselves as Ukrainian but Russians as well. Many are also fiercely resistant to the idea of Nato membership. On paper the Ukrainian army is a far more even match but I seriously doubt Troops from Donetsk would be as motivated as say Troops from Lvov to take on the Russian Army if the trigger is a Ukrainian ship opening fire on the Russian Navy. More likely there would be serious trouble in the Crimea which was only giftede to Ukraine by a Ukrainian Kruschev in 1957.
In short Yuschenko should think hard about risking Ukraine now for Georgia. He should get Ukraine into the EU first which is the one thing they all agree on and worry about Nato only many years later. He can achieve his goals gradually. If he attempts to force the pace now he risks it all.
Lepidus
Dear Consul. What the population of the Crimea was in 1941 is about as relevant as saying that Scotland was majority Pict around 820AD.
I think you underestimate the Russians they don't need to launch a direct assault. The rioting in Estonia is just a taste of what they could stir up in Ukraine if they felt like it, where the population is much closer to Russia being more distant from the EU. This is especially so in Crimea.
In the end Yuschenko was elected President of Ukraine not Georgia and it is his duty to ensure he looks after Ukraine first and foremost.
Lepidus
My comments about the history were intended to underline that Russia can not legitimately claim Crimea. They may indeed try to claim it- though that would break virtually all the treaties that they have ever signed with Ukraine and would therefore be a flagrent breach of international law.
You may say that the way in Georgia shows that Russia doesn't care for international law, but they can not behave in this manner for long before they end up totally isolated and their neighbours are armed to the teeth.
The loss of moral authority the hubris of Bush and Blair created is going to have consequences for a long time.
I recommend you read Simon Sebag Montefiori in the Times. As an excellent a summing up as I have seen.
Lepidus
Look at a map of the Caucusus and see the enclaves and remember the armed conflicts between Armenia and Azerbijan as well as Georgia over territory and interests. Remember too the religious overtones of different forms of orthodox christianity and islam.
The consequences of NATO becoming embroiled there are as worrying as the network of alliances before the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914. There are at least three local interested powers - Russia through previous ownership and its own national interests; Iran as a bordering state with a religious involvement; Turkey because of the borders and history - territory was lost at the end of the First World War; add western meddling in the area and the consequences however sympathetic one might be are incalculable.
Remember too that the involvement of NATO might not be welcome; the main neighbourhood NATO power is Turkey which has a great deal of form there especially with the Armenians.
All this is to say that extreme caution should be the approach by the west and before we condemn Russia too much we might look to the Caribbean where the USA has kept an active interest in the affairs of its independent neighbours to say the least.
This seems a colossal exaggeration. Georgia has hardly been “raped”, more like spanked and tens of thousands have not been killed. The actual toll seems very light considering the hardware employed. Considerably less than 1000 on all sides.
The Russians were quite restrained after the Georgians were routed and declined to do a ‘highway of death’ on them as others might. At the time I was surprised but realize now that they had no intention of taking Tbilisi.