Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Xolodno

(6,395 posts)
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 05:34 PM Jan 2016

In Moscow, France Signals Russia Sanctions End in July

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2016/01/25/in-moscow-france-signals-russia-sanctions-end-in-july/?utm_campaign=yahootix&partner=yahootix#1245d08888b5

It will be a nice turn of events for Russia if it happens.

French Finance Minister Emmanuel Macron hinted this weekend in Moscow that his country would support an end to sanctions when they come up for renewal in July. “The objective we all share is to be able to lift sanctions next summer because the process has been respected,” he was quoted as saying in Le Figaro on Monday. For sanctions to be extended beyond July, all members of the E.U. would have to be in agreement.

------------------------------

Kerry signaled this and now France.

28 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
In Moscow, France Signals Russia Sanctions End in July (Original Post) Xolodno Jan 2016 OP
That's nice... davidn3600 Jan 2016 #1
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jan 2016 #2
We had permission from the UN to go into Iraq davidn3600 Jan 2016 #3
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jan 2016 #4
Us going into Iraq and the Russian annexing Crimea is no comparison at all davidn3600 Jan 2016 #9
There was no permission from the UN. former9thward Jan 2016 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jan 2016 #19
*looks at Guantanamo* Xolodno Jan 2016 #6
Oh and to sound a bit "cliche"....heading this one off at the pass. Xolodno Jan 2016 #8
It's possible for a rational mind to judge a thing in and of itself. LanternWaste Jan 2016 #22
Ooooh ......... nicely done! polly7 Jan 2016 #25
Yes, comes with being the 2nd largest nuclear power on the planet. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #5
In nuclear war... Xolodno Jan 2016 #7
Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to join Russia. polly7 Jan 2016 #10
Seriously? That vote was a joke and everyone knows it davidn3600 Jan 2016 #11
No, it wasn't a joke. But I understand why you need to make it one. polly7 Jan 2016 #13
So if California voted to leave the US and join Mexico, that'd be OK with you? davidn3600 Jan 2016 #14
Wouldn't bother me. polly7 Jan 2016 #17
A rational mind imagines current events, regardless of distance, are everyone's business LanternWaste Jan 2016 #23
Yeah whatever ..... nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #24
In the economics sense... Xolodno Jan 2016 #18
But its not RT.... Xolodno Jan 2016 #15
LOL. nt. polly7 Jan 2016 #16
Wow, did you copy and paste that all by yourself? n/t backscatter712 Jan 2016 #27
Did you get someone to type this for you!?!?! polly7 Jan 2016 #28
This is how international politics have worked for all of human history. Xithras Jan 2016 #20
At times... Xolodno Jan 2016 #21
Right - WE never do that. 840high Jan 2016 #26
 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
1. That's nice...
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 05:50 PM
Jan 2016

Russia can invade and annex any country it wants, violate any international law it wants, and the world won't do anything about it.

That's the signal now being sent.

Don't be surprised when Putin start threatening NATO countries next.

Response to davidn3600 (Reply #1)

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
3. We had permission from the UN to go into Iraq
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 06:06 PM
Jan 2016

It was based on lies, but it was permission.

No one gave permission to Russia to invade Crimea.

Russia also broke international law by removing insignia and identifying marks from their soldier's uniforms.

Response to davidn3600 (Reply #3)

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
9. Us going into Iraq and the Russian annexing Crimea is no comparison at all
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 06:48 PM
Jan 2016

That's ridiculous to even suggest it's the same thing.

former9thward

(32,025 posts)
12. There was no permission from the UN.
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:08 PM
Jan 2016
On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_and_the_Iraq_War

Response to davidn3600 (Reply #9)

Xolodno

(6,395 posts)
6. *looks at Guantanamo*
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 06:19 PM
Jan 2016

uh.....yeah...riiiight.

So by your assertion, GWB was justified? Don't think that will fly around here well.

Never mind the "international laws" in the case of Iran (wife's family was refugee's) with the USA overthrowing a democratically elected government...or supporting dictators everyone south of the US border, etc.

I won't go into how the US interfered with Ukrainian government.


But I will protest this....our government with our tax payer dollars, spent money in a government that was hopelessly corrupt and backed a corrupt leader. End of Story.

If you want to back a Bush and the waste of our money, hey, that's your problem.

Xolodno

(6,395 posts)
8. Oh and to sound a bit "cliche"....heading this one off at the pass.
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 06:30 PM
Jan 2016

The previous government was corrupt as well. Only difference was, rubles and not dollars were paying for it. I'd prefer our dollars stayed here to help us.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
22. It's possible for a rational mind to judge a thing in and of itself.
Tue Jan 26, 2016, 03:47 PM
Jan 2016

It's possible for a rational mind to judge a thing in and of itself. It's not possible however, for an irrational mind to do as such...

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
5. Yes, comes with being the 2nd largest nuclear power on the planet.
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 06:12 PM
Jan 2016

But, messing with a NATO country means messing with the #1 nuclear power, and #1 overall military power, on the planet.

Russia's paid a pretty high price for gaining essentially nothing.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
10. Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to join Russia.
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 06:53 PM
Jan 2016

They didn't want to be under the thumb of the brutal coup-sponsored overlords whose first action towards them was to demand they stop using their native Russian language.

Western sponsored coups never end well wherever in the world they're accomplished, don't blame the fear of people having to try to live with them on Russia, it's just red-baiting and pathetic.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
13. No, it wasn't a joke. But I understand why you need to make it one.
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:19 PM
Jan 2016

For the same reason we all needed to believe Hussein dumped babies out of incubators and Libyan Gov't troops were using Viagra as a weapon of war to rape women. It never ends .......... these western sponsored bloodbaths are all the same and have been for decades.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016114130

German Sociologists on Crimea’s Choice

by Konstanin Kosaretsky / February 11th, 2015

The attitudes of Crimeans were studied in January 2015. This representative sample included 800 respondents living on the peninsula, from all age and social categories. The poll had an error margin of 3.5%.

In answer to the most important question: “Do you endorse Russia’s annexation of Crimea?” 82% of the respondents answered “yes, definitely,” and another 11% – “yes, for the most part.” Only 2% gave an unambiguously negative response, and another 2% offered a relatively negative assessment. Three percent did not specify their position.

We feel that this study fully validates the results of the referendum on reunification with Russia that was held on March 16, 2014. At that time 83% of Crimeans went to the polling stations and almost 97% expressed support for reunification.

Ukrainians continue to question whether this was a credible outcome, but it is now backed up by the data obtained by the Germans. The 82% of the respondents who expressed their full confidence in the results of the Russian election make up the core of the electorate who turned up at the ballot boxes on March 16, 2014.


And now the moment of truth: “What is your opinion of what is being written by the Ukrainian media about Crimea?” Who could be a more objective judge on this issue than the residents of the peninsula themselves? Who else but they – who have been fated to experience all the pros and cons of both Ukrainian and Russian citizenship – could better evaluate the accuracy of the information being published? Perhaps no one.


Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/02/german-sociologists-on-crimeas-choice/

"Who could be a more objective judge on this issue than the residents of the peninsula themselves?" Who indeed?


"Did they poll any Tartars?" - "Why yes, they did".

These figures are also relevant in terms of another important question. The former chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars, Mustafa Dzhemilev, has repeatedly stated that all Tatars on the peninsula are opposed to reunification with Russia. Dzhemilev’s statements have been widely quoted by the media, which present them as entirely authoritative and undisputed.

But let’s think about that – Crimean Tatars make up 12% of the Crimean population, yet only 4% of those polled conveyed disapproval of Crimea’s reunification with Russia. And that 4% very likely includes not only Tatars, but also Ukrainians and citizens of other ethnicities. There’s an inconsistency here. Of course, further study is needed on this issue, but the results obtained by GFK cast doubt on whether Mustafa Dzhemilev or the entire Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars is an accurate barometer of the feelings of the Crimean Tatar community.

Those few respondents who disapproved reunification were then asked “Why do you fully or mostly disapprove annexation?” Only 20% of them (i.e., less than 1% of the total sample) claimed that they preferred to live in the state of Ukraine. The most common response, offered by 55% of those who opposed reunification, was “Annexations was not fully legitimate, it should be brought into accord with the international law.” Which means that, in theory, they do not object to the idea of living in Russia, but rather question the legitimacy of the transition.




So. no, Crimea wasn't 'taken' by Russia.


The people voted, overwhelmingly to leave Ukraine. They were immediately threatened by the brutal coup-sponsored 'gov't' with the loss of their native language, what other fears do you think they might have had, a people predominantly of Russian culture suddenly confronted with that kind of hatred and threat???

The fascist right-wingers handed them to Russia on a silver platter ..... they went willingly.

There were picture after pictures of them lined up to vote, ordinary people wanting to get the hell of a place they were being treated as the enemy right from the start of the brutal coup.

?w=736&h=491&l=50&t=40
Two women hold flags reading "Crimea is with Russia" as people wait for the announcement of preliminary results of today's referendum on Lenin Square in the Crimean capital of SimferopolReuters

Crimea parliament has formally voted to declare independence from Ukraine following an overwhelming outcome from the referendum to secede from Kiev rule and join Russia, according to reports.

A formal application to join Russia was sent after 93% of Crimea residents reportedly voted in favour of the split, in a referendum that the US and the EU say violates the Ukrainian constitution and international law.


http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukraine-crisis-crimea-votes-join-russia-eu-us-eye-sanctions-1440572


With Crimea's electorate composed mostly of ethnic Russians, the referendum was widely expected to support a split from Ukraine. While the Kiev government called the vote illegitimate and other countries saying they won't recognize the outcome, exit polls cited by officials reported that 93% of Crimean voters supported joining the Russian Federation. That number increased to 95% once half of the ballots were counted. As voting concluded, huge crowds gathered in the Crimean capital of Simferopol to celebrate the outcome.

Evgeny Feldman, a staff photographer for the Russian publication Novaya Gazeta, spent the day in Crimea's main cities, Simferopol and Sevastopol, as the vote progressed under the watchful eyes of masked soldiers aligned with Russia.



People celebrate in Lenin Square, in the Crimean capital of Simferopol, after a reported 95% of people voted to make the peninsula a part of Russia.


The crowd celebrates, waving Russian flags, in front of a statue of Lenin in Simferopol.


Local residents, including a police officer, show identification to get their ballots from election commission members in Simferopol.


A woman votes in Simferopol: Little tension could be seen in the voting booths, where most voters appeared to choose to make Crimea a part of Russia.



A Simferopol voter lets her son cast her ballot during the first hour of voting.

http://mashable.com/2014/03/16/crimea-votes-the-day-in-pictures/




by Joshua Tartakovsky, August 16, 2014


In his essay for the New York Review of Books, titled ‘Ukraine, the Edge of Democracy’, historian Timothy Snyder praises Ukrainian democracy which of course does not include the referendum practiced by its ethnic Russian citizens. Written before the Ukrainian presidential elections, Snyder praised in his article the upcoming elections, that eventually saw the victory of oligarch Petro Poroshenko, as a marvelous display of democracy, despite Russian federalist rebels’ alleged and unproven attempt to disrupt them. Although it was clear that Poroshenko, a major oligarch, is likely to win, Snyder sees these elections as a bright new page in Ukrainian history, while not addressing the obvious question of whether the goal of the Maidan protests were to replace one corrupt politician, Viktor Yanukovych, by another. For him, these elections were an event in which "Ukrainians stand up for their rights". Equally significant is the fact that Snyder mentions nowhere in his essay the referendum that took place in Donetsk and Luhansk in East Ukraine just several days earlier, that received, according to British newspaper.

The Independent, a 90% turnout. If one is concerned with democracy, as Snyder claims to be, one would expect him to mention as well the popular referendum in which very large masses participated only a few days earlier. Snyder goes on to argue that in the presidential elections, the separatists’ "only hope to stop elections is intimidation" while not only failing to prove his accusations but also failing to mention that during the referendum in Donetsk and Luhansk, it was the National Guard of the Ukrainian Government that killed at least one civilian, in a crude attempt intimidate residents from voting. A video of the event makes leaves little room for doubt that random citizens were selected and fired at by Ukrainian forces in order to prevent the referendum from taking place.


One should expect at least a mention of these facts, especially when the article is concerned with democracy and the dangers of intimidation yet Snyder apparently deemed these events irrelevant. Snyder wrote that Ukrainian citizens must have elections that are not "imposed by violence" but apparently this does not apply to residents of East Ukraine.

With this in mind, it is not surprising that Snyder said that President Yanukovych "presided over the murder of protesters" while he also disingeniously referred to the Maidan coup as "weeks of peaceful protests". The Telegraph points to growing evidence that hired snipers fired on the protesters, and the violence undertaken by Right Sector at Maidan was raised by congressman Dana Rohrabacher in his questioning] of Victoria Nuland at the US Congress.


While Snyder claims that "Russian propaganda quite effectively shrouds the real issues by shunning political discussion in favor of fantastic stories about a fascist takeover in Kiev", the fact that extremist elements now form part of the Ukrainian Government, has been confirmed by respected voices such as Anatol Lieven.


http://original.antiwar.com/joshua_tartakovsky/2014/08/15/mass-killing-in-east-ukraine-and-the-failure-of-liberal-intellectuals/


 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
23. A rational mind imagines current events, regardless of distance, are everyone's business
Tue Jan 26, 2016, 03:52 PM
Jan 2016

A rational mind imagines current events, regardless of distance, are everyone's business (yes, even ours) should they decide as much.

Unless of course, we should refrain from discourse about any nation or region other than our own-- which in and of itself, seems rather a rather myopic perspective of the world (but I admit our biases often compel us to engage in that same myopia and irrational thought to better soothe our senses).

Xolodno

(6,395 posts)
18. In the economics sense...
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:36 PM
Jan 2016

...Yes.

That is indeed capitalism. Why not join a better "competitor"? Nationalism is a semi-welfare agenda (why should people in California pay taxes to help the rich in Texas?).

On one hand, we have an economics system that advocates what you stated.

The other, we end the "borders" of the world......which I agree is pie in the sky, unicorns prancing, etc.

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
20. This is how international politics have worked for all of human history.
Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:58 PM
Jan 2016

International law essentially just a bunch of gentlemanly agreements between national leaders to behave in a certain way, and they are only enforceable insomuch as we're willing to go to war to enforce them.

Sanctions are a coercive measure, not a punitive one. Once it became clear that sanctions weren't going to force Moscow out of Crimea and East Ukraine, they stopped having any real purpose. At this point, they're mostly just a feel-good measure for the west so it seems like we're "doing something".

Today, it's pretty clear that the only military force will push Russia out of those areas. Because nobody in their right mind advocates declaring war on Russia, we have three choices. We can accept the new reality, we can continue to pretend that our santions are going to have an effect, or we can take an even more aggressive stance and risk open warfare with one of the few nations on Earth capable of obliterating all of Europe.

Xolodno

(6,395 posts)
21. At times...
Tue Jan 26, 2016, 02:25 PM
Jan 2016

..I wonder if some here want the last option. Their hatred of "Putin" seems to override common sense.

We promised Yeltsin that NATO would not expand past Germany....did it any way because Russia was in such turmoil under Yeltsin all they could do was send essentially a strongly worded letter.

Ironically, its our support for Yeltsin that gave rise to Putin.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In Moscow, France Signals...