West Rejects Treaty Between Russia And Abkhazia

[uhnope]

Source: RFE/RL

The West has criticized an agreement between Russia and Georgia's breakaway region of Abkhazia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and the leader of Abkhazia signed the "strategic partnership" deal on November 24 in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, just across the border from the separatist region. Tbilisi condemned the pact as an attempt by Moscow to annex the region. Under the document, Russian and Abkhaz forces in the territory will turn into a joint force led by a Russian commander. Putin said Moscow will also double its subsidies to Abkhazia to about $200 million next year.

In Washington, the State Department said it would not recognize any "so-called treaty" between Russia and Abkhazia. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the accord would not help achieve a peaceful settlement to the situation in Georgia. EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said the agreement violated Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Moscow recognized Abkhazia and another Georgian breakaway territory, South Ossetia, as indepedent states in 2008. That move came after Russia and Georgia fought a brief war over South Ossetia. Georgian Foreign Minister Tamar Beruchashvili denounced the new agreement as a "step towards annexation of Abkhazia by the Russian Federation." Georgian President Georgy Margvelashvili called the agreement "absurd and illogical." The deal comes amid tense ties between the West and Moscow over Ukraine, raising questions over Moscow's future plans. The Black Sea region has always been important to Putin, who justified the annexation of Crimea in March by saying it would guarantee that NATO warships would never be welcome on the peninsula, the home to the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

Read more: www.rferl.org/content/russia-abkhazia-nato-european-union-united-states-/26708819.html

---

Putin has just carved himself another slice of "New Russia"

[Duckhunter935]

1. Yep, next step

towards annexation of two more parts of another country for mother Russia. The Putin lovers will be proud.

[24601]

2. The article noted Putin's intent that NATO warships are not welcome in the Black Sea. That could be

a problem since NATO member Turkey is on the Southern Shore. The Russian Black Sea Fleet should then be banned from Turkish territorial waters and be confined to the Black Sea.

[happyslug]

7. So you object to people wanting to join a country they want to be part of?

The problem is these areas Putin is "Annexing" want to be part of Russia. They do NOT want to part of a Country NOT tied in with Russia. Putin is NOT taking over any lands that does NOT want to be part of Russia, thus no Russian move on Kiev. Putin himself say he could take Kiev in two weeks, and I tend to agree with him, but Putin does NOT want Kiev (The Ukraine as a whole is a basket case in the first place, Putin does NOT want to bail out the Ukraine thus he does NOT want it as far as Putin is concerned the Ukraine can be as independent as they want to be, but they have to pay him for heat this winter).

As to the Eastern provinces of the Ukraine, these areas speak Russian and economically tied in with Russia (Unlike the Western Ukraine which has always had stronger ties to its west, i.e. Poland and Germany). Kiev is actually the Capital, and the largest city in the Ukraine but in a region with the smallest population when compared to the Eastern and Western parts of the Ukraine.

Side note; Notice I used the term "Speak Russian' as opposed to being "Russian". Under the Soviet Internal pass port system, you had to state your nationality. If both your parents were one nationality that was your nationality on turning 18, if your parents were of two different nationalities, you picked one when you turned 18. In such cases, given that being a 'Russian' had advantages, most people of "mixed" marriages when only one parent was Russian, opted to be "Russians' themselves. Thus many communities in the Ukraine with "Russian" Majority voted for an independent Ukraine for many of these "Russians" were only 1/2 or less Russian.

On the other hand, Russia was the dominate LANGUAGE of the Soviet Union, and the Language of the Soviet Army and internal trade. Thus a lot of people in the Soviet Union learned and spoke Russian, even if their nationality was something else. Thus the better test is NOT ethnicity of being a Russian or a Ukrainian, but what language do they speak at home. In the Eastern Ukraine you have a lot of Russian only speakers, much more then the rest of the Ukraine. You also have people who naturally speak Russian, for that is the language of business in the former Soviet Union. This same area's main trading partner is NOT the Western Ukraine but Russia and they dislike any break up of those trade line and it is for that reason (economics) that the Eastern Ukraine is in revolt not love of Russia or hatred of the Ukrainians from the Western Ukraine.

This has been the problem of that area between Slesina Mountains in Western Poland to the Pacific, the borders are lines drawn in the sand. The border between the Ukraine and Russia is like the border between Indiana and Illinois, often just a fence with cornfields on both sides (and sometimes plowed by the same farmer for he owns or control fields on both sides of the border).

Thus to say the "Eastern Ukraine" should remain part of the Ukraine, the question is why? In the days before the coup, no one really cared for the trade of the Eastern Ukraine was fairly secure given it was with Russia. Post Coup, you had Russia disrupting gas supplies, but the Ukraine on the national level saying they did not want to trade with Russia. This later acts was unacceptable to the people of the Eastern Ukraine so they went into revolt.

Basically the people of the Eastern Ukraine do NOT want to disrupt their trade with Russia, but also want to stay part of the Ukraine. Post coup it became a choice between those two as oppose to having both prior to the coup. When the Western Ukraine forced the Eastern Ukraine to make a choice, they did, it was to maintain their economic ties with Russia over staying in the Ukraine.

As long as the Eastern Ukraine did not have to choose between an independent and untied Ukraine AND trade with Russia, the Eastern Ukraine did both. When a choice had to be made, it was trade with Russia that won.

The Western Ukraine hates this decision and want to reverse it by force, but so far they have been unable to do so. Thus the stalemate at the present time in the Ukraine. The Government fo the Ukraine is broke so it can not launch another attack, and the Eastern Ukraine are still getting themselves together so they can not attack. It is the heating season and the Government of the Ukraine do NOT want Putin to turn off the Gas, so the Ukrainian Government will NOT do anything till the spring.

Unlike the rest of the world, Russia and the Ukraine have six seasons, Spring, Summer and Fall, as in the rest of the world. Then the Freeze, Winter and Thaw. During the Freeze and Thaw, you have snow, rain and mud. During the night it gets so cold so the mud freezes and thus do not dry out. During the day time hours, the sun melts the mud, so you have mud all around that restricts your movement. These Freeze-Thaw cycle goes for about six weeks. In the Freeze it ends with winter, which is when the ground is frozen solid all day long. Winter ends with the spring, when the freeze-thaw and mud return, then about six weeks later you have spring.

The best time to campaign in Russia is during the Russian Winter, when everything is frozen. Lakes and Rivers, which are barriers for ground movement the rest of the year, are frozen solid so are quickly passed over. For this reason the Mongols attack Russia in the winter, besieged and sacked Kiev and demanded tribute from Russia for the next 300 years. (1240 to 1480)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kiev_%281240%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Horde#Fall_.281480.E2.80.931502.29

The Great Stand at the Ugra River of 1480, where Muscovy denied the Mongols access to Moscow and forced them to retreat:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_stand_on_the_Ugra_river

Through other say the Russia Defeat of the Mongols in 1380 was the real start of their war of independence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kulikovo

That battle lead to unity of the Mongols and the subsequet siege of Moscow (and its sacking) in 1382:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Moscow_(1382)

Moscow was taken by the Mongols, but then the Mongols themselves over extended themselves and took on Timberlane:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokhtamysh

Timberlane, the single largest conqueror in history, he took more land then any other single military leader, beating out the #2 conqueror, Alexander the Great.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timur#Exhumation

The problem with both leaders, is their empire barely survived them for they were built on military might and that quickly changes. Uniting a people into one people takes longer but produces a longer lasting empire, which can be seen in the Roman Empire (roughly 202 BC till 450 AD as a united country, till 1204 AD as a country whose capital had NEVER been taken, and 1453 as a Greek City-State). Persian Empire, whose has survived several conquests, Alexander's, The arab Conquest of the 600s ADs, the Mongol Conquest of the 1200s and Timberlanes in the 1300s. The Russian Empire, from its first victory in 1380 to this day (and the related Mongol Empire from the 1200s to this day via its largest single populations, the Russians).

Those Empire were built by several leaders over centuries (or in the case of the Mongols and Arabs/Islamic empire several generals over a period of less then 100 years). Not being the product of one person these later Empires survived unlike the Empires of Timberlane an Alexander.

I bring this up for since Genghis Khan united everything between Moscow and the Pacific into one single country, the people of that area wants to be under one country. They stayed with the Mongols for 300 years, but slowly converted to accepting the Russians, for the simple reason the Russians, being the farmers of the Mongol Empire, could raise and support a much larger army then any of the herders that made up the rest of the Mongol Empire outside of China and Iran. With China and Iran not wanting to expand into Siberia, but Russia ready, willing and able, the Russian Empire was born.

The problem with the Mongol Empire and its main Successor the Russian Empire has been what should the border be? The Great Wall of China is about the point where Farming cease to be profitable, but after the Mongol Conquest of China (and the Ming Revolt and restoration of China), the wall was deemed NOT to be sufficient (good for a fall back, but Ming and later Manchu China wanted a more northern border to give China was breathing space between their enemies to the north and the Chinese Farmers who lived south of the Great Wall.

This is also the problem with Iran. Iran wants to reach into what is today the Central Asiatic Republics. The language of commerce prior to the Russia movement into that area in the 1800s, had been Turkic and Iranian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_languages

Thus the Russians took over these areas, they had to deal with the languages of the locals.

At the same time, all of these tribes had benefited under Mongol Rule, in that trade increased do to the fact the area from China to Poland was under one country (After the 1200s the Polish border ended up including most of present day Ukraine, thus many of the Russian-Mongol wars of the 1200 to the 1700s ended up being Mongol-Russian-Polish wars).

I bring all of this up for the simple reason there is NOT a good border between Warsaw and the Pacific and thus everyone between those two areas end up fighting over where to draw the line in the sand that will be the border, till someone decides it should be different. THe river UNITE people, for Rivers are used for trade. Except for the Urals (a low set of mountains that have easy passes to go through), there are NO mountain ranges between Germany and the Pacific. THe Carpathian Mountains are to the south of Poland, but the Caucasus Mountains and the Himalayas mountains are also south of this huge steppe (as are the mountains of China and is rolling hills).

Thus the problem, where do you draw the border between the people who live in this area with that border being something more then a line drawn in the sand.

All lines drawn in the sand will NOT last if people on both sides of that line do NOT want it to stand. Till the coup, the people of the Eastern Ukraine were happy with trade with Russia AND staying in the Ukraine, but right now that is NOT an option and if they have to choose they will go with their own economic self interest which is with Russia. There are no natural borders in that part of the world and if people what to trade they will.

On the other hand if a people do NOT want to belong, they will not stay long in a country. That is something the Ukraine has to thing about when they proposed cutting off trade with Russia. Putin also has to consider this, thus his actions in regards to the Chechnya (Yeltsin had left them be free for a few years, to teach them the cost of being free of Russia, then when one radical band tried to invade another Russian Republic, Putin send in the troops and crushed them, while then giving them regional partial self government (and this is in the Caucasus Mountains, one of the few areas of Russia that you have natural borders):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya#First_Chechen_War

Sorry, if people want to be independent of another country, they will be today. On the other hand most people do NOT want to be "Free" for they know the cost of being a small independent country, as oppose to be part of a large strong country.

At the same time, the pull to be a member of a strong united country can be strong, and that appears to be the case with the Eastern Ukraine, they are drawn to Russia for Russia is doing much better then the Ukraine and has since 2000.

[Duckhunter935]

9. That is not what the polls said

Most in eastern Ukraine, 60% wanted to be part of Ukraine with more autonomy. Chechnya did not want to be part of Russian and Moscow crushed anyone that wanted autonomy. Same is happening with other parts of Russia that do not want to be part of Russia anymore. There are ways of doing this without invading with unmarked vehicles and troops and annexing other countries land.

[happyslug]

17. The polls show that the people WANT to be in the Ukraine AND TRADE with Russia

The problem is, since the coup, it has come down to picking ONE OR THE OTHER not having BOTH, which is the option the Eastern Ukraine prefers.

The Eastern Ukraine biggest trading partner is Russia, not Europe or even the Western Ukraine. Ukraine in many ways a weird country, its Center in in Kiev, which is in the Middle of the Ukraine, but also (outside of Kiev itself, Kiev is the largest city in the Ukraine) is the lowest population area of the Ukraine. Both the Eastern and Western Ukraine contain more people then in the middle of the Country. You have a solid majority in the East who speak Russian, even at home, and a Solid Majority in the West who speak Ukrainian.

Side note: What language a person speaks at home in the Ukraine is a better indicator of who they will support then their "Nationality". The reason for this is in Soviet Times a person's "Nationality" was what both his parents were OR if his parents were of two different nationalities, what he or she wanted to be when they turned 18, then was fixed for life. Given the advantages of being "Russian" in Soviet Times, most children of mixed marriages opt for being a "Russian", thus you have "Russians" in the Ukraine that at 1/8 or less Russian the rest is Ukrainian but on their nationality card, they are "Russian" because one of their great great grand parents had been a Russian and their children, grandchildren and great grand children all opt to be "Russian" as oppose to being "Ukrainian". How much of this still survives in today's Russia and Ukraine I do not know, but the effect is how people call themselves from a nationality point of view.

More on the linguistic divide in the Ukraine:

http://www.acting-man.com/?p=28941

In the following map, you see Kiev in the middle with the highest population density, but much lower population around the capital. Except for Kharkov, no one comes close to Kiev in population density, but the East has much higher population overall then the West, but both have much higher population then the center (the Center around Kiev):



http://ukrexport.gov.ua/eng/about_ukraine/population/ukr/179.html

Language usage, reflects the above division between the Russian orientated Eastern Ukraine and the more Western Oriented Western Ukraine:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QdpNMEFkBLk/Uw_oi_8OjGI/AAAAAAAAZEI/y-XHyyZlw1c/s400/Ukraine+Language.png

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2014/02/28/civil-war-lurking-in-ukraine-n1801974/page/full



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_language_in_Ukraine

Here we have a map that includes "Creole" a French Term where you have two languages mixing together to form something that is neither but both at the same time. Notice it is in the middle of the country, NOT the West nor the East:

?imgmax=800

http://bread-circuses-today.blogspot.com/2014/06/lies-damned-lies-and-ukrainian-language.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surzhyk

Here is map of the 2010 Election, the split was already clear by then:



http://galleryhip.com/ukraine-language.html

[freshwest]

3. I know it sounds like semantics, but it's not New Russia. This the old Russian Empire territory.

Think of the times of the Czars. That is when Russia was at its height.

Why they sold off Alaska, I don't know. But there has been some thoughts of them seceding to become a Republic. Or even go back to the Russians.

Neither scenario is likely, but in the event of a Koch orchestrated Civil War and fascist coup, who knows.

Still unlikely, though, any of it. The term Novorussia is not a new term, and was not started by Putin.

Please keep posting on Russia, you have found many interesting things out and shared them here. And yes, this is a re-alignment. But honestly, I don't think the West truly cares if they don't go deep into Europe, who is an ally.

[uhnope]

4. thx for the thoughtful reply & constructive criticism. n/t

[Adrahil]

6. Ya know... Most of Western Poland was German...

Maybe the Germans need to take it back.

[freshwest]

10. Your implication being? I'm just stating the history and probability that the West won't go to war.

And Poland isn't interested in being taken over by anyone now, and is a member of NATO under American and other member states' protection.

BTW, Poland once belonged to Ukraine. All of those boundaries have shifted so many times, the continent is positively drenched in blood. Poland is one of the prizes of Europe, large, arable and in histrorical terms, well managed by its rulers. But many have wanted that land.

The larger context is that nations are now re-aligning themselves, going for self-determination as FDR wanted. He envisioned the old colonial powers as giving up the reins in many regions. But only fter they'd done their part in the alliance to stop the fascists in Japan, Italy and Germany. He did not live to see that day come.

That the process under Putin's control will be democratic or honest is unlikely, considering the agendas that are being put forth. Putin is simply doing what empire demands. Just as ISIS is. I don't approve. But things will change, perhaps the Scots will leave the UK, next time they get interested in taking a vote. That is a big change.

Things are not like they were when I was growing up. I remember the air flights to West Berlin and the years of oppression to keep people going to the West. Back then, it seemed East Germany would have the last say there. Then the wall came down and the two countries reunited. When I saw it unfold, I admit to being stunned.

In times of profound change, the learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.

~ Eric Hoffer

Good luck to all these people, no matter what flag they live under.

[happyslug]

11. And Slavs reached the Elbe in 900, maybe that should be the Western Border of Poland

http://xenohistorian.faithweb.com/russia/ru01.html

[Adrahil]

16. Yeah, my point. If we start referencing history for justifications...

.... To seize lands, that becomes a very slippery slope. WAY too many Putin lapdogs willing to excuse his blatant undermining of sovereign states.

[happyslug]

18. The past often shows us how to solve problems of today....

One General told his officers when you fight first look how previous battles have occurred in that area, often such battles will show you want to do and want NOT to do. I bring this up to show the PAST can be guide to what to do in the present.

Another way to use the past, is that the past often explains the present. In the Ukraine, the Eastern parts of the Ukraine came under Russian Rule starting in the 1600s, previously being held by the Mongolian Golden Horde (Which is best translated into English as "Center Camp" for Yellow/Gold was the symbol of the Center, and Horde was the Mongolian word for Camp).

The problem with the Ukraine is as the Russians moved South, the Poles and Lithuanians moved East into the Ukraine (Most people stayed out of the Pripet marshes, which is present day Belarus, for it was one huge swamp and is the Border between Poland, Russia and the Ukraine. Thus Western Ukraine came under heavy Polish/Catholic Influence, while the Eastern Ukraine came under heavy Russian/Orthodox influence as the Golden Horde was driven out of the area as it slowly dissolved. This divide lasted from around 1504, when the Golden Horde was dissolved, till the mid 1700s when Poland was divided with Austria getting the Western Ukraine and Russia getting the Eastern Ukraine. Even after the Napoleonic Wars, where most of Poland ended up under Russian Rule, the Western Ukraine stayed under Austrian Rule.

Here are the modern borders of the Ukraine, imposed on a map of Europe in 1700 and 1900:





http://www.geocurrents.info/place/russia-ukraine-and-caucasus/ukrainian-regionalism-federal-option

Notice how much of the Western Ukraine is under Austrian Rule

[happyslug]

8. Watch the Term "New Russia" that was a name Catherine the Great gave to the region

It was "New Russia" for Catherine had taken it from the Turks and made it part of the Russian Empire. Thus it is a name for the Ukraine (which itself means "Border" or "March" in the Slavic Languages of Russian, Polish and Ukrainian, but Ukraine/Border Region is a more acceptable name then "New Russia" or the even older "Little Russian" name that were once used for Ukrainians).

"March" is an old term meaning an area within a week's march of the border. Thus "March" is probably a better translation then "Border" for the Ukraine but it is still more acceptable then "New Russia" or "Little Russia" which are older names for the people of the Ukraine. Borderland may be another way to view the word "Ukraine".



http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/why-vladimir-putin-referring-eastern-ukraine-new-russia-1463130

Side note: The reason the Russians sold Alaska to the US was that the Russia Government of 1867 decided it would be easier for they then close ally the US to defend Alaska from a British Invasion then they could. A secondary reason was to justify some payment to Russia for the us of their Fleet during the US Civil War to cover the US Coasts outside the American South. Britain and France was supporting the Polish war of independence during the 1860s (and putting down a Chinese rebellion at the same time). The Czar determined that his fleet would be to easily bottle up in case of the British-French attack on Russia, so the Czar sent the Fleet to the US with Orders to put themselves under the command of the US Navy if Britain or France (and most likely both) intervened in the US Civil War. The US agreed to pay for the use of the Russian Fleet but covered up the payment by increasing the pay the US paid for Alaska by the cost the Russians incurred by having their fleet in the US 1862-1865,

Side note: The Ukrainian Government wants people to stop referring to the Ukraine as "The Ukraine". I grew up using the the term "The Ukraine" instead of "Ukraine it is like saying "the USA" or "The Germany". On the other hand "The Ukraine" is like saying "the March" as in "The march was long" not as in "Germany was long". Borderland is another way to translate Ukraine into English.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Ukraine

[AtheistCrusader]

12. ACTUALLY, the Soviet empire assigned S. Ossetia and Abkhazia to Georgia for

administration, when it annexed Georgia.

This is an un-doing of an artificial imposition of control on the two breakaway regions. This should have happened when the USSR collapsed, but somehow, did not. It is not inappropriate to have it happen now.

[bhikkhu]

5. If you look at the history, Abkhazia and Ossetia have always been someone's pawn

always second-class semi-citizens of whatever ruler claimed them. At least in this case they chose their masters, but in the long term it would be good if there was some international policy to resolve this kind of issue, rather than turn it into a battle over spheres of influence.

Imagine there's a land with an old ethnic, racial or cultural tradition, which has always existed as a part of some empire or other and wishes for independence at last. What suggestions do we have for them? I'm not pro-putin by any means, but in this case he may be more on the right side. Look at the history, and recall that there are dozens of groups in the world in similar situations. Self-determination needn't be an absolute right, but subjection to a contemptuous master should be a requirement either.

[davidpdx]

13. I can see the banner now

"Coming in the Spring of 2015...Russia!"

[freshwest]

14. LOL! Or maybe 'Coming in the Spring of 2030':

[davidpdx]

15. Could be

Maybe he's Hitler's love child.