Ukraine in crises

[Sayhey]

From the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4040041.stm)

Both sides in Ukraine's disputed presidential election have warned of a civil conflict, as tens of thousands of people continue to protest in Kiev.

Opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko rejected the official results declaring Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych as president, and urged a general strike.

Outgoing President Leonid Kuchma called on world leaders not to interfere.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell said Washington "cannot accept" the election result as legitimate.

Despite the obvious hypocrisy of the Bush administration telling anyone that their electoral process maybe tainted, this is a huge story with ramifications for eastern Europe for generations to come. One can only hope that the Ukrainians get a true accounting of their vote.

[miloblithe]

This is all such divisive stuff. I don't see how the U.S. outwardly supporting a legal process and (I suppose) recount (i.e., supporting Yushchenko) and Russia supporting Yanukovych can, no matter who comes out on top, possibly be good for U.S.-Russian-Ukranian relations. This just seems to be drawing the lines more clearly. I realize that the theory is that once decided, we move on and deal with reality, but the damage may be significant.

[Xtremehkr]

I wonder why the current administration are choosing not to support this election. Hypocrisy aside, because we all know (though not will admit) that this is not a hinderance for them. Is there another reason why they are taking this position?

Not that fixing elections is right, but at this point, when our administration opposes something I have to wonder why.

[zimv20]

at this point, when our administration opposes something I have to wonder why.
maybe it's simply a short-sighted retaliation for russia announcing its shift towards more euros.

[Sayhey]

As in most things this administration does, the key is not in what it says but in what it does. I'm waiting to see what real steps the Bushies take in making in rough for the Russians and their friends in Kiev if the vote is not counted correctly. I'll be real surprised if Bush pushes his buddy and fellow "democrat" Putin real hard.

[Xtremehkr]

maybe it's simply a short-sighted retaliation for russia announcing its shift towards more euros.

Sounds like a good reason, I was also thinking of the military infrastructure that existed in the Ukraine that was an issue a while ago. I don't know how that turned out, but it has something to do with that, because I think the Ukraine had some control over weapons grade Uranium that would be better kept under the control of a U.S. friendly regime.

Maybe it's a bit of both but the current American Administration seems to care little about the value of the dollar or the national debt and trade deficit.

An interesting but perhaps relevent reference. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393058506/102-3278013-8827348?v=glance)

[Xtremehkr]

The Canadians are now objecting to the results, but I feel they are more likely to be siding with the people of the Ukraine.

[pseudobrit]

As in most things this administration does, the key is not in what it says but in what it does.

Which I'm pretty sure will be nothing.

[Xtremehkr]

Which I'm pretty sure will be nothing.

And there's that. There may be nothing at all in the Ukraine that is of any interest, I doubt Putin likes to have any threats nearby.

[blackfox]

Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?

[miloblithe]

I don't think this is retaliation against Russia; I think it has everything to do with Yushchenko being a pro-Western candidate and Yanukovych being pro-Russian. Not surprisingly, the US supports the pro-Western candidate (even though he does want to withdraw Ukraine's troops from Iraq). I don't think this is a short-sighted view, but rather a long-sighted one: the US wants Ukraine, a huge and significant country, becoming more western and open rather than more authoritarian and closed.

[blackfox]

You know I like the fact that there is a "crisis". I like the fact that in the face of voting fraud and collusion, that the Opposition and many of the citizens are not taking this sitting down.

This is a marked difference from Russia, for example. I do not know how this will end up in the short-term, and in many ways it doesn't matter, as both Candidates would likely have to pursue a dual-course of Russian-appeasemant and engagement with the West for Economic growth (and to appease E. and W. Ukranians).

The fact that there is such a huge outcry over the results, is a sign that the Ukrainian people want a democratically-elected government and are willing to fight for it. This is good news, and in the longer-term almost guarantees a positive outcome in terms of a healthy political system.

[Zaid]

^^^^

Agreed!!

[Sayhey]

Absolutely, blackfox! While it is appropriate to point out the hypocrisy and emptiness of the Bush administration's rhetoric, the real story is of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians struggling in a peaceful way to demand real democracy. Powerful and exciting stuff!

[IJ Reilly]

Looking on the bright side, the administration could have just as easily remained silent on the matter or made a less definitive statement about the legitimacy of the election results. Showing deference to Putin would have been less problematic diplomatically, I would have thought.

[Xtremehkr]

This article explains why Russia is so concerned about the Ukraine. There may be some military action from Pooty Poot over this one...

Link (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-russia25nov25,0,2410270.story?coll=la-home-headlines)

MOSCOW — Over the last five years, Russia has watched as its once-powerful hold over Eastern Europe and Central Asia gave way to bewitching new alliances with the West.

Government leaders in Serbia and Georgia stopped calling the Kremlin for advice and turned increasingly to Washington. Much of Eastern Europe, including the three former Soviet republics in the Baltics, joined NATO. Russia grumbled, but acquiesced.

But these nations were not Ukraine.

Russia has long measured its power by its control over the strategic plains and mountains between Russia and the rest of Europe, and Ukraine is now a post-Cold War political battleground between Moscow and the West.

In Russia's view, the key to its continued influence in Kiev is Viktor Yanukovich, Ukraine's prime minister and the declared winner in the nation's bitterly contested presidential election. Though tens of thousands of Ukrainians are protesting his victory as a fraud, any decision by Yanukovich to relinquish his claim depends largely on whether Moscow will back down.

And Russia — for reasons that are as old as its history, and as contemporary as President Vladimir V. Putin's determination to consolidate Soviet-style power on his nation's borders — cannot concede Ukraine, many analysts say.

"Russia cannot really afford to suffer a defeat over Ukraine," Liliya Shevtsova, an analyst with the Carnegie Moscow Center, said Wednesday. "Russia cannot be a power without Ukraine. It is historically conditioned, but it is also a plain fact."...


Washington is claiming not to support the outcome of this election, but I wonder if anything will be done about it. I can't imagine that they would be unhappy about a weaker Russia.