Skip to main content

Why Crimea is not like Kosova.. at all

There have been quite a few comments in the blogosphere and in the press along the lines of The West is being hypocritical about Crimea because they supported the separation of Kosovo from Serbia.

Let's just rewind for a moment, shall we.

In Kosovo, Slobodan Milosevic launched a war against his Albanian fellow citizens. He unleashed not merely paramilitary forces but his entire army. Massacres were taking place and virtually the entire population was set to flee across the border to escape the Serbian forces. The result was a Western (and Russian) intervention which stopped the violence and allowed the population to return. The war ended on June 11th 1999. Milosevic was only overthrown in early 2001. It was wholly unreasonable to expect the Kosovars to remain in a state where Milosevic remained in power, thus the province was initially ruled by NATO and then in 2008 the civilian and democratic authorities declared independence.

In Ukraine, the initially democratically elected Viktor Yanukovych embarked on a spree of corruption and theft which only has European parallels with the Putin regime. The corruption was matched by an increasing degree of brutality- the closure of the free press, murder and intimidation of political enemies and finally culminated in the use of snipers against peaceful protestors in the Maidan. As a result the regime which had come to power constitutionally lost all legitimacy and was overthrown- as has happened many times in history. Note too that Hitler initially came to power constitutionally, if not democratically, as did Vladimir Putin

Vladimir Putin used the troops he had in Crimea to seize control from the Ukrainian authorities and has staged a very hurried "referendum" which has taken place under the guns of Russian armed forces. It was neither a free nor fair election, and was marked by a complete contempt for any democratic norms. The option of the status quo was not even on the agenda. It is very similar to the plebiscite that took place after Germany seized Austria in 1938- with a very similar result, 99.7% in Austria and 96.7% in Crimea. Given that the Crimean Tatars boycotted the vote en masse and yet are said to have had a 40% turn-out, it is easy to see that the result is clearly fraudulent.

So despite the Putin propaganda that the revolutionary government in Kyiv is illegitimate and that Crimea is entitled to self determination, this is a straight forward power-play annexation. It is nothing like the democratic will of Kosovo, now repeatedly expressed through many democratic votes in the new Republic of Kosova. Freedom House acknowledges the progress that Kosova has made and rates the level of freedom way above that of Russia. Russia is now classified as one of the least free countries on the planet.

Putin has made his choices- and after the images of the Putin Youth on the streets of Moscow over the weekend (and the larger protests against Putin)- we see a sort of Happy Shopper version of Fascism. No free press. No free market. The glorification of the state and, of course, the use of violence.

As the West contemplates its next move- and it is being urged by China to cool things off- then we should think of two goals: one is the short term protection of Ukraine. The second is the longer term removal of Vladimir Putin, who is a tyrant to his own people and a global threat to peace. In the short term we accept the de facto annexation of Crimea. However we need to understand that this will not be the last time that Russia challenges the peace, and we need to be much more prepared. Meanwhile if Putin continues to try to regain control over Ukraine by destabilizing the east in order to provoke a war that leads to the return of Yanukovych or some other Russian puppet, then we need to set some very concrete security goals for the future: the end of the Russian occupation of Transnistria, the end of the frozen conflicts in Georgia and the de-militarization of Koenigsberg- which has been overtly used in the past few weeks to threaten NATO directly. These goals need to be achieved whether Putin survives the economic wreck he is creating, or not.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...