Different Voices

From the BBC:

"Voices from the conflict in Crimea"

The peninsula of Crimea in south-eastern Ukraine has become the arena for a struggle for influence between Moscow and the new government in Kiev.  While Russian President Vladimir Putin says Russian-speaking people in the region must be protected, others have criticised the Kremlin for sending in armed forces. With no shots fired and no diplomatic solutions yet offered, the people of Crimea, as well as Ukraine and Russia, have told the BBC of their feelings of apprehension and optimism

Pavel Rubtsov, Moscow, Russia:

I was born in Russia, in Moscow. I teach interpretation at the university. It's all very controversial.

Pavel says the media is not covering all aspects of the problem. Instead of talking about the legitimacy of Ukraine's interim government you are now shifting focus to the so-called "Russian aggression". It's not just about Russian aggression and influence. From what I've heard, the interim government in the Ukraine is not capable of running the country. The BBC is not covering all aspects of the problem. It shrinks the situation down to a black-and-white picture, which is not the case.

There are some people in Crimea who want to be with Ukraine, some with Russia, some neither.

There should be a referendum and proper elections in the Crimea, and Ukraine.

Olga Usenko, Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine:

 

I am Russian-speaking and work at the National University as a teacher. I have never had any problems with using Russian in everyday life or at work although I don't think it would be unfair if I was told to speak Ukrainian, not Russian, during the classes.  Of course, we are strongly against having any foreign country's troops on our land. I have cousins in Sevastopol, the Russian base in Crimea, one of whom works for the Batkivschyna political party and is a Ukrainian patriot. However, another one doesn't feel Ukrainian and wants to be in Russia because "the salaries are higher".

Nevertheless, no-one is ready to kill for that, and we hope nothing like that will ever happen.

I think at least half of Ukraine's population have some Russian blood and the same goes for the Ukrainian blood of the population of the European part of Russia. That adds to the absurdity of Putin's decisions. For now we just would like to be safe from the war, including any kind of military "protection" of any interested party.

Inna Lymar, Yalta, Crimea:

I was born in Kherson, Ukraine. My whole family and I speak in Russian, but we know the Ukrainian language.  Ukraine is one.  I lived in many regions of Ukraine - in Odessa, Kiev, Lviv, and Crimea. I now live in Yalta and Russian armies scare me. I am against division of Ukraine, and Crimea is Ukrainian. I do not need conditional assistance from Russia.

Steve Vorgias, Simferopol, Crimea:

I have been visiting Simferopol and the Crimea for over a year. The Russians you speak to think Crimea should have stayed with Russia, that the transfer by Khrushchev was invalid.  They are scared of what will happen next. They recently heard that the Russian language was no longer to be recognised by the interim government, which troubled them, and that Russian passports would be fast-tracked to citizens here for the first time, which cynically only just started to occur.  They see Putin as a strong figure, but none of them, neither Russian, Ukrainian or of Tatar descent, would disagree with the point that Yanukovych was corrupt. Sadly they have no faith in the democratic process, and state that governments previous to Yanukovych were also corrupt, and expect the next one to be so too. They make jokes about how one of Viktor's sons was appointed minister for roads and how none of the roads are repaired. As you drive you witness this state of disrepair, and the jokes start. All utilities including water, gas and electricity are channelled through to Crimea from Ukraine and they worry about hardships in the near future if supplies are cut off.

Sergei Larionov, Bachisarai district, Crimea:

I am a Russian citizen. I happen to spend the winter with my parents-in-law who are Russians living in Crimea. I have spent a lot of time in Crimea through my life, lived in Sevastopol a few years as a kid. It's second homeland to me.  Yesterday morning my mother-in-law was kind of sore at not seeing any Russian troops. I had to tell her they can't be near everyone's kitchen garden.  There's one thing that is not obvious from the foreign media coverage: Crimea certainly needed a strong police or military presence in the last days of February. I am referring to the clashes between Tatar and Russian demonstrators. They were not too violent in themselves but could have developed into something grave in a short while. I am not accusing Tatars, they have their own sentiment. People feared Maidan activists, those they call "fascists". Even if these "fascists" turn out to be just aggressive youths, they can be quite unpleasant and dangerous.  As I said, a strong police presence was necessary but there's no way the current Ukrainian authorities could have provided it. So, whatever Putin is doing many people feel safer with Russian troops here, that's for sure.

Andrii Moroz, Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine:

Andrii hopes for a bright, prosperous and independent Ukraine. In the beginning of February I supported the Yanukovych regime, as I live in the eastern part of Ukraine, where the idea of economic and cultural union with Russia is quite strong.  However, in February, the month which opened my eyes to the Yanukovych regime, I became a strong supporter of neither the European nor Russian road for Ukraine, but a supporter of democratic changes. Additionally, the way he treated his people by dividing them on speaking Russian or Ukrainian was completely outrageous.

Now I, a 28-year-old Russian-speaking man, who studied in London for two years, feel absolutely no threat from our newly formed government toward my family. The main idea of Putin's military intervention to protect Russian-speaking Ukrainians is a lie. We do not need to be protected by a foreign government. All Ukrainians hope for a bright future, and moreover, I personally hope for a peaceful and bright prosperity for independent Ukraine.

Nikolay Musienko, Kharkov, Ukraine:

 Far from everyone here supported Maidan, but I and all my colleagues are strongly opposed to Russian intervention and aggression against Ukraine. We strongly suspect that lots of people taking part in the Russian separatists' meetings, and the most active of them, are "imported" from nearby Russian cities like Belgorod to destabilise the situation here. I can't understand why the Ukrainian government doesn't close the borders with Russia! We can deal with our internal matters ourselves. We don't need any "protectors" and "friends" from Russia here. We are all Russian-speaking, by the way.

Svetlana Poddubnaya, Simferopol, Crimea:

"Many of the corrupt officials are still sitting in parliament," says Svetlana. Russian people of Ukraine and the Crimea are glad Russia "invaded" Crimea. My relatives have lived in Crimea and south-eastern Ukraine for a very long time. Ukraine's new government says there is no threat for Russian people living in Ukraine, but it's not true, since among representatives of the new government there are people who hold nationalist and radical views.  They threw Molotov cocktails and stones during the revolution at soldiers who carried out their duty and protected their president and government buildings. How can mothers explain to their children that their fathers, officers who died when protecting an order in the country, were killed by "a hero of Ukraine"?  The new government couldn't get power legally - now they appoint ministers and regional governors who are from western Ukraine and want residents of eastern regions silent. As for mass media in our country, they belong to magnates. They present the information in a way that is beneficial for them. There is a very high level of corruption in the country, but in spite of the revolution, many of the corrupt officials are still sitting in parliament. It is necessary to hold a referendum and legitimate elections in Ukraine. And it is necessary for Ukraine to become a federal state allowing people in each area to choose government servants themselves but not who were appointed in Kiev. It is the only way out.

^ This shows the two sides of the Ukrainian conflict perfectly. There are those Russians living in the Ukraine that for some unknown reason are scared and feel threatened - despite the fact that the Ukrainian Government since 1991 has never attacked them - and there are those Ukrainians living in the Ukraine that for a real reason feel threatened  - because Russia has constantly attacked and controlled them for centuries (during Czarist times, Soviet times and today.) Russians have always been paranoid and scared of outside influence and of being taken over, but in Russia's long history the majority of invasions and occupations occur by the Russians on those around them. If Russia is really concerned about the ethnic Russians living in the Ukraine then they should open their borders and let all of them flood back home to Russia. If the ethnic Russians are really so scared of the Ukrainians then they should willingly move to Russia. Since neither the Russian Government nor the ethnic Russians are doing that one can conclude that there is no real threat to their lives nor their livelihoods and are simply making the talk to justify their own goals - ie expanding their power and influence outside of Russia. Hitler and the Nazis did the exact same thing before and during World War 2 and despite the Russians claiming they are "protecting the people from the Fascists" it seems they (the Russians) are using those Fascist/Nazi methods themselves. The Russian military should withdrawal from all of the Ukraine (along with the hired thugs they sent in "unofficially' from Russia) and only after that is done then there should be a referendum monitored by the UN and other parties to make sure it is free and fair. ^

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26421859

US Aid

From USA Today:
"U.S. pledges $1 billion in aid to Ukraine"

The Obama administration announced $1 billion in economic and energy aid to Ukraine on Tuesday, part of its emerging response to Russian military activity in Crimea. President Obama, aides and allies are also considering a number of economic sanctions against Russia for its incursion into the Crimea region. The administration announced the assistance package for Ukraine as Secretary of State John Kerry landed in Kiev early Tuesday for talks with the new government. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the United States has been working with allies on a package to "help the Ukrainian government implement the reforms needed to restore financial stability and return to economic growth." In a statement, Lew stressed the need for continuing reform in Ukraine: "The United States is prepared to work with its bilateral and multilateral partners to provide as much support as Ukraine needs ... if the new government implements the necessary reforms." In terms of punishing Russia, Obama's options include freezing assets, visa bans, and trade and investment penalties. The Obama administration has suspended military cooperation and bilateral trade talks with Russia, and discussed boycotting a Group of Eight nations summit that President Vladimir Putin is expected to host in June in Sochi.  "The steps Russia has taken are a violation of Ukraine's sovereignty, Ukraine's territorial integrity," Obama said Monday. "They're a violation of international law." In televised remarks Tuesday, Putin said he reserves the right to protect Russian-speaking people in Ukraine in the wake of what he called "an anti-constitutional" coup that toppled a pro-Russia president. Putin, who said that full military force is a "last resort," added that he would not be deterred by economic sanctions from the West. "All threats against Russia are counterproductive and harmful," Putin said.

^ While the US aid is needed it isn't nearly enough. Obama continues to show his true colors of his complete lack of understanding and experience with foreign affairs. He tries to talk tough to Russia, but his seen around the world as a joke because he is all talk. He talked tough about Syria using gas on their own citizens and when Syria did nothing but more talk came of it. Money and talk do not always solve the world's problems and that is clearly the case with the Russian occupation of the Ukraine. ^

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/04/obama-russia-ukraine-1-billion-putin-crimea/6006759/

4 Loosing Reasons

From Yahoo:

"4 Reasons Putin Is Already Losing in Ukraine"

Even a week ago, the idea of a Russian military intervention in Ukraine seemed farfetched if not totally alarmist. The risks involved were just too enormous for President Vladimir Putin and for the country he has ruled for 14 years. But the arrival of Russian troops in Crimea over the weekend has shown that he is not averse to reckless adventures, even ones that offer little gain. In the coming days and weeks, Putin will have to decide how far he is prepared to take this intervention and how much he is prepared to suffer for it. It is already clear, however, that he cannot emerge as the winner of this conflict, at least not when the damage is weighed against the gains. It will at best be a Pyrrhic victory, and at worst an utter catastrophe. Here’s why:

At home, this intervention looks to be the one of the most unpopular decisions Putin has ever made.

The Kremlin’s own pollster released a survey on Monday that showed 73% of Russians reject it. In phrasing its question to 1600 respondents across the country, the state-funded sociologists at WCIOM were clearly trying to get as much support for the intervention as possible: “Should Russia react to the overthrow of the legally elected authorities in Ukraine?” they asked. Only 15% said yes – hardly a national consensus. That seems astounding in light of all the brainwashing Russians have faced on the issue of Ukraine. For weeks, the Kremlin’s effective monopoly on television news has been sounding the alarm over Ukraine. It’s revolution, they claimed, is the result of an American alliance with Nazis intended to weaken Russia. And still, nearly three quarters of the population oppose a Russian “reaction” of any kind, let alone a Russian military occupation like they are now watching unfold in Crimea. The 2008 invasion of Georgia had much broader support, because Georgia is not Ukraine. Ukraine is a nation of Slavs with deep cultural and historical ties to Russia. Most Russians have at least some family or friends living in Ukraine, and the idea of a fratricidal war between the two largest Slavic nations in the world evokes a kind of horror that no Kremlin whitewash can calm.

Indeed, Monday’s survey suggests that the influence of Putin’s television channels is breaking down. The blatant misinformation and demagoguery on Russian television coverage of Ukraine seems to have pushed Russians to go online for their information. And as for those who still have no Internet connection, they could simply have picked up the phone and called their panicked friends and relatives in Ukraine. So what about Russia’s nationalists? The war-drum thumping Liberal Democratic party, a right-wing puppet of the Kremlin, has been screaming for Russia to send in the tanks. On Feb. 28, as troops began appearing on the streets of Crimea, the leader of that party, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, was on the scene handing out wads of cash to a cheering crowd of locals in the city of Sevastopol, home of Russia’s Black Sea fleet. “Give it to the women, the old maids, the pregnant, the lonely, the divorced,” he told the crowd from atop a chair. “Russia is rich. We’ll give everybody everything.” But in Monday’s survey, 82% of his party’s loyalists rejected any such generosity. Even the adherents of the Communist Party, who tend to feel entitled to all of Russia’s former Soviet domains, said with a broad majority – 62% – that Russia should not jump into Ukraine’s internal crisis. That does not necessarily mean Putin will face an uprising at home. So far, the anti-war protests in Moscow have looked almost pathetically temperate. But sociologists have been saying for years that Putin’s core electorate is dwindling. What underpins his popularity – roughly 60% approved of his rule before this crisis started – is a total lack of viable alternatives to Putin’s rule. But this decision is sure to eat away at the passive mass of his supporters, especially in Russia’s biggest cities. In Monday’s survey, 30% of respondents from Moscow and St. Petersburg said that Russia could see massive political protests of the kind that overthrew the Ukrainian government last month. Putin’s only means of forestalling that kind of unrest is to crack down hard and early. So on Feb. 28, Russia’s most prominent opposition activist Alexei Navalny was put under house arrest less than six months after he won 30% of the vote in the Moscow mayoral race. Expect more of the same if the opposition to Putin’s intervention starts to find its voice.

The economic impact on Russia is already staggering.

When markets opened on Monday morning, investors got their first chance to react to the Russian intervention in Ukraine over the weekend, and as a result, the key Russian stock indexes tanked by more than 10%. That amounts to almost $60 billion in stock value wiped out in the course of a day, more than Russia spent preparing for last month’s Winter Olympic Games in Sochi. The state-controlled natural gas monopoly Gazprom, which accounts for roughly a quarter of Russian tax revenues, lost $15 billion in market value in one day – incidentally the same amount of money Russia promised to the teetering regime in Ukraine in December and then revoked in January as the revolution took hold. The value of the Russian currency meanwhile dropped against the dollar to its lowest point on record, and the Russian central bank spent $10 billion on the foreign exchange markets trying to prop it up. “This has to fundamentally change the way investors and ratings agencies view Russia,” said Timothy Ash, head of emerging market research at Standard Bank. At a time when Russia’s economic growth was already stagnating, “This latest military adventure will increase capital flight, weaken Russian asset prices, slow investment and economic activity and growth. Western financial sanctions on Russia will hurt further,” Ash told the Wall Street Journal.

Even Russia’s closest allies want no part of this.

The oil-rich state of Kazakhstan, the most important member of every regional alliance Russia has going in the former Soviet space, put out a damning statement on Monday, marking the first time its leaders have ever turned against Russia on such a major strategic issue: “Kazakhstan expresses deep concern over the developments in Ukraine,” the Foreign Ministry said. “Kazakhstan calls on all sides to stop the use of force in the resolution of this situation.” What likely worries Russia’s neighbors most is the statement the Kremlin made on March 2, after Putin spoke on the phone with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. “Vladimir Putin noted that in case of any escalation of violence against the Russian-speaking population of the eastern regions of Ukraine and Crimea, Russia would not be able to stay away and would resort to whatever measures are necessary in compliance with international law.” This sets a horrifying precedent for all of Russia’s neighbors. Every single state in the former Soviet Union, from Central Asia to the Baltics, has a large Russian-speaking population, and this statement means that Russia reserves the right to invade when it feels that population is threatened. The natural reaction of any Russian ally in the region would be to seek security guarantees against becoming the next Ukraine. For countries in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, including Armenia, a stanch Russian ally, that would likely stir desires for a closer alliance with NATO and the European Union. For the countries of Central Asia, Russia’s traditional stomping ground on the geopolitical map of the world, that would mean strengthening ties with nearby China, including military ones. China, which has long been Russia’s silent partner on all issues of global security from Syria to Iran, has also issued cautious statements regarding Russia’s actions in Ukraine. “It is China’s long-standing position not to interfere in others’ internal affairs,” the Foreign Ministry reportedly said in a statement on Sunday. “We respect the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.” So in the course of one weekend, Putin has spooked all of the countries he wanted to include in his grand Eurasian Union, the bloc of nations he hoped would make Russia a regional power again. The only gung-ho participants in that alliance so far have been Kazakhstan (see above) and Belarus, which is known as Europe’s last dictatorship. Its leader, Alexander Lukashenko, has so far remained silent on the Russian intervention in Ukraine. But last week, Belarus recognized the legitimacy of the new revolutionary government in Kiev, marking a major break from Russia, which has condemned Ukraine’s new leaders as extremists and radicals. The Belarusian ambassador in Kiev even congratulated Ukraine’s new Foreign Minister on taking office and said he looks forward to working with him. As for the impoverished nation of Armenia, a late-comer to Russia’s fledgling Eurasian alliance, it has also recognized the new government in Kiev while stopping short of any official condemnation of Putin’s intervention in Ukraine so far. But on Saturday, prominent politicians led an anti-Putin demonstration in the Armenia capital. “We are not against Russia,” said the country’s former Minister of National Security David Shakhnazaryan. “We are against the imperial policies of Putin and the Kremlin.”

Russia’s isolation from the West will deepen dramatically.

 In June, Putin was planning to welcome the leaders of the G8, a club of western powers (plus Japan), in the Russian resort city of Sochi. But on Sunday, all of them announced they had halted their preparations for attending the summit in protest at Russia’s intervention in Ukraine. So much for Putin’s hard-fought seat at the table with the leaders of the western world. In recent years, one of Russia’s greatest points of contention with the West has been over NATO’s plans to build of a missile shield in Europe. Russia has seen this as a major threat to its security, as the shield could wipe out Russia’s ability to launch nuclear missiles at the West. The long-standing nuclear deterrent that has protected Russia from Western attacks for generations – the Cold War doctrine of mutually assured destruction, or MAD – could thus be negated, Russia’s generals have warned. But after Russia decided to unilaterally invade its neighbor to the west this weekend, any remaining resistance to the missile shield project would be pushed aside by the renewed security concerns of various NATO members, primarily those in Eastern Europe and the Baltics. Whatever hopes Russia had of forestalling the construction of the missile shield through diplomacy are now most likely lost.

No less worrying for Putin would be the economic sanctions the West is preparing in answer to Russia’s intervention in Ukraine. Depending on their intensity, those could cut off the ability of Russian companies and businessmen in getting western loans and trading with most of the world’s largest economies. Putin’s allies could also find it a lot more difficult to send their children to study in the West or to keep their assets in Western banks, as they now almost universally do. All of that raises the risk for Putin of a split in his inner circle and, potentially, even of a palace coup. There is hardly anything more important to Russia’s political elite than the security of their foreign assets, certainly not their loyalty to a leader who seems willing to put all of that at risk.

And what about the upside for Putin?

There doesn’t seem to be much of it, at least not compared to the damage he stands to inflict on Russia and himself. But he does look set to accomplish a few things. For one, he demonstrates to the world that his red lines, unlike those of the White House, cannot be crossed. If Ukraine’s revolutionary government moves ahead with their planned integration into the E.U. and possibly NATO, the military alliance that Russia sees as its main strategic threat would move right up to Russia’s western borders and, in Crimea, it would surround the Russian Black Sea fleet. That is a major red line for Putin and his generals. By sending troops into Crimea and, potentially, into eastern Ukraine, Russia could secure a buffer around Russia’s strategic naval fleet and at its western border. For the military brass in Moscow, those are vital priorities, and their achievement is worth a great deal of sacrifice. Over the weekend, Putin’s actions showed that he is listening carefully to his generals. At the same time, he seems to be ignoring the outrage coming from pretty much everyone else.

^ It's good to see that ordinary Russians along with traditional Russian allies can see right through Putin's ploy and even they don't agree with it. ^

http://news.yahoo.com/4-reasons-putin-already-losing-ukraine-211452971.html

Republicans Were Right

From ABC:

"Republicans to Obama on Ukraine: ‘We Told You So’"

As the crisis in Ukraine continues to unfold rapidly, Republicans aren’t waiting for the dust to settle before declaring that they saw it coming. Predictions from the likes of President Obama’s 2008 presidential opponents Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Sarah Palin, and Obama’s 2012 Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney are making 2014 seem like a hangover of presidential election’s past. Remember that hot mic moment in the heat of the 2012 elections when President Obama was caught promising Vladimir Putin more “flexibility” after he was re-elected? Well McCain does.

“By the way, a couple of my favorites: ‘Tell Vladimir that I’ll be more flexible when I’m re-elected.’ Tell Vladimir I’ll be more flexible when I’m re-elected?” said McCain at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington today, his voice dripping with sarcasm. "This is the ultimate result of a feckless foreign policy where nobody believes in America’s strength anymore,” he added. Indeed, it seems that those who have been beating the drum about Putin’s cold war aspirations are feeling somewhat vindicated. Supporters of Romney, who has so far been absent from the recent fray on Russia’s bold move to essentially occupy Crimea, are quick to argue that his 2012 declaration of Russia as the U.S. “number one geopolitical foe” was anything but a gaffe. At the time, Democrats mocked him, and even President Obama used the comments to attack Romney in a debate.

Romney may be staying on the sidelines for now, but Palin, on the other hand, has jumped right in.

As a vice presidential candidate in 2008, and McCain’s running mate, Palin delivered a foreign policy speech attacking President Obama and predicting that Putin would “invade Ukraine” next.

Fast forward to 2014, with Russian troops on Ukrainian soil in Crimea, Palin savored the moment in a Facebook post. “Yes, I could see this one from Alaska. I’m usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did…” she wrote.

^ I can say "Told you so" too as I wrote the same thing years ago. ^

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/03/republicans-to-obama-on-ukraine-i-told-you-so/

Paralympics Bust

From USA Today:
"USA won't send presidential delegation to Sochi Paralympics"

The USA will not send a presidential delegation to the Paralympic Winter Games in Sochi because of host Russia's military action in nearby Ukraine. "In addition to other measures we are taking in response to the situation in Ukraine, the United States will no longer send a Presidential Delegation to the upcoming Winter Paralympic Games in Sochi," White House National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said in a statement on Monday. "President Obama continues to strongly support all of the U.S. athletes who will participate in the Paralympics and wishes them great success in the Olympic competition." The Games run March 7-16 in the same area as last month's Winter Olympics. Patrick Sandusky, chief communications and public affairs officer of the United States Olympic Committee, said the USOC had been advised of the decision by the White House. "We encourage all Americans to support our athletes by watching them compete on NBC, NBCSN and on TeamUSA.Org," Sandusky said in a statement. "As a sports organization, we will continue to fully support the amazing men and women that comprise Team USA at the Paralympic Winter Games in Sochi, and we encourage all Americans to support our athletes by watching them compete on NBC, NBCSN and on TeamUSA.org."  The delegation, which was announced on Feb. 7, was to be led by Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill. Other members: Kathy Martinez, Assistant Secretary for Disability Employment Policy, U.S. Department of Labor; Dr. Celeste A. Wallander, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director, Russia and Central Asia, National Security Council Staff; Anthony Robles, member of the President's Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition; Sandra Dukat, U.S. three-time Paralympian bronze medalist; Brian Mosteller, Director, Oval Office  British government officials will also boycott the Games, according to a New York Times report that said Queen Elizabeth II's youngest son, Prince Edward, a patron of the British Paralympic Association, had canceled a planned trip to attend the Games "on the advice of government." The presidential delegation to last month's Winter Games in Sochi also made news. Obama selected three openly gay former athletes – figure skater Brian Boitano, tennis player Billie Jean King and hockey player Caitlin Cahow – to be part of the official party. It was seen as a direct shot at Russia's anti-gay legislation that became a flashpoint for controversy before and during the Games. The delegation did not include the president, first lady or the vice president, all who headed the previous four Olympic delegations, or a cabinet secretary, only a former one.

^ Obama didn't go to the Winter Games because of Russia's stance on homosexuals and now there won't be an official US delegation to the Paralympics because of Russia's invasion of the Ukraine. is a small, yet effective sign of protest. ^

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/sochi/2014/03/03/united-states-official-delegation-sochi-paralympics/5976875/

West's Options

From the BBC:

"Crimea crisis: What can the West do?"

"A brazen act of aggression in violation of international law, in violation of the UN Charter," is how US Secretary of State John Kerry has described Russia's intervention in Ukraine. He has threatened repercussions and said "all options are on the table".  But would the US seriously consider "all options", including the military ones? What can the US and the West realistically do?

 

Diplomatic options:

The first big step often taken in response to an international outrage is condemnation by the UN Security Council, potentially followed by council resolutions demanding restorative steps by the offender and, when that fails, authorising international military action. But all of those options are effectively off the table. Russia is a permanent council member and so can and will veto any attempt to condemn it. This is the failure built into the Security Council system - that it is impotent against any permanent member. But there are other forums for action. Seven members of the G8 group of major industrialised nations have turned on the eighth - Russia - cancelling preparations for the G8 summit that was due to take place in Sochi, Russia, in June.  There are also other forms of co-operation with Russia that could be suspended. The EU-Russia partnership, with its biannual summits, is one. The Nato-Russia Council is another. But turning diplomatic backs on Russia has major risks. Russia's co-operation is vital to the West's policy on Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan, and it has vital influence in Syria. Britain has reportedly ordered a ministerial boycott of the Paralympic Winter Games which start on Friday in Sochi, which is less than 300 miles (480km) from the Crimean capital, Simferopol. But only a sporting boycott would have real news impact, and countries have been very reluctant to impose those since the tit-for-tat 1980 and 1984 Cold War boycotts.

Economic options:
 Going beyond diplomatic gestures, the West could impose measures designed to hit Russia where it hurts - in the pocket. These could be imposed without UN backing.  Russia has huge trade links with the West. The US has already cancelled talks with Russia on a bilateral investment treaty and energy issues.  One of the Europe's biggest potential levers over Russia, oil and gas, is also a weakness. Russia is the EU's biggest outside supplier, providing about 25% of its gas, worth almost $100m (£60m) a day, but precisely because Europe is so dependent it makes it an unlikely battleground. Europe does not have alternatives to make up the supply shortage - though, after a mild winter, it may have enough gas in storage to last several months. Russia's rich elite could be a target. Frequent visitors to the West, they often keep their billions in Western bank accounts or invested in property and football teams in the West. Russian-security analyst Mark Galeotti says: "There is no way round it, the most powerful weapon against the Kremlin is one targeting the elites on which it depends."

He says he expects "targeted bans and asset-freezes on officials, visa restrictions and even potentially targeted sanctions against Russian corporations". Hitting businesses might sound attractive - but the West is vulnerable to retaliation, with some of its own companies, like ExxonMobil and Boeing, having a huge presence in Russia. Economic pressure from the West may have to come over the longer term - focused on reduced investment and trade. Visa restrictions and asset freezes have been used before - notably by the US against Russian officials deemed to be involved in the arrest, death and posthumous trial of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky. These, relatively limited, sanctions had an ill effect on relations with Russia, which retaliated with measures including a ban on US-Russian adoption.

But Francesco Giumelli, an expert on international sanctions at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, says these cannot just be used against any rich Russian. "It is legally very difficult… how do you link those people in the elite to specific actions in Crimea? You need to have proof that they're involved in wrongdoing". He says travel bans - not financial measures - are the most likely first step, directed at generals or defence officials with a direct role in Crimea or, at a stretch, MPs who voted to support Russian action in Crimea. He says this might seem "symbolic" but shows a commitment to act, that could be escalated later - and the emphasis for now is likely to remain on mediation. Taking aim with harsher measures at Mr Putin's close circle or powerful businesses is likely only to provoke retaliation, he says, "and how does that help Ukraine?"

"It's easy to say 'we need to be strong' but what if they [the Russians] say the same? I don't think the EU has the will to raise it to a situation where somebody has to back down."

Military options:

Inferring from Mr Kerry's "all options" that he is not ruling out military action may be taking him too literally. Analysts agree that there is no prospect of Nato going to war with Russia over Ukraine.
Britain's Foreign Secretary William Hague has said explicitly: "For today, no military options [are] on the table." Ukraine is a partner-country of Nato but not an Alliance member, and thus receives no security guarantees. The overwhelming goal at the moment is to de-militarise the crisis and to try to get talks between Russia and Ukraine under way, says the BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus. Nato is thus likely to move cautiously. Any deployment of forces to the Black Sea region or offers for example of surveillance assets would inevitably be seen by Moscow as Nato wading in on the side of Kiev and would be "a red rag to a bull", our correspondent says.  This is not a potential war that Ukraine can win in military terms, with or without Nato help, he adds.
 What to expect:

Many analysts think that sudden decisive action by the West is unlikely. Any sanctions are likely to start small and get bigger, and in any case they take time to draw up and impose - not least in the European Union, where the agreement of 28 countries must be secured. The West will also be aware that sanctions can backfire, by harming its own economic links with Russia - especially if Moscow chooses to retaliate.

^ Unfortunately, it seems the US, EU and other countries will talk tough to Russia over their invasion of the Ukraine, but I doubt any real punishment will come to Russia for violating international law. You would think that all of these countries would have a Plan A-Z and yet it seems they don't. How can anyone in any country take someone seriously if all they do is talk and have nothing backing them up? The answer is: they can't. I'm not saying we should attack Russia over this, but we can't just sit-back and let them break laws and invade whomever they want to. We let Hitler do that for years before 1939 and all that showed us is that appeasement doesn't work. ^

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26418179

Unpatriotic Soldier

From USA Today:
"Soldier flagrantly avoids flag salute, sets off outrage"

A soldier who hid in her car to avoid saluting the flag — and then flaunted it on Instagram — is the latest service member to come under attack via social media and be accused of dishonoring her service. Pfc. Tariqka Sheffey, whose Instagram handle was "sheffeynation," posted a selfie with a caption that reads: "This is me laying back in my car hiding so I don't have to salute the 1700 flag, KEEP ALL YOUR 'THATS SO DISRESPECTFUL/HOWRUDE/ETC.' COMMENTS TO YOURSELF cuz, right now, IDGAFFFF." The image was distributed via Facebook and also sent to Army Times. Angry service members, Gold Star mothers and spouses have called for the soldier's removal from service. "Any soldier who refuses to salute the flag is in the military for the wrong reason and should be removed by dishonorable discharge with loss of all benefits," one Facebook commenter said. "If they won't salute it, they damn sure won't fight for it." Sheffey is a member of the 59th Quartermaster Company, 43rd Sustainment Brigade, at Fort Carson, Colo., post spokesman Dee McNutt confirmed. Fort Carson is about 75 miles south of Denver. When asked if an investigation was under way, McNutt said, "The chain of command is aware and looking into the situation. That's really all I can say at this point." McNutt said Fort Carson learned of the photo after receiving a number of complaints. The online outrage has quickly turned to hate, with a torrent of abusive comments, racial slurs and threats being made against the young soldier.

 

^ If you don't like the symbol of the country than you shouldn't be a soldier sworn at protecting the country. ^

 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/03/soldier-disrespectful-selfie/5971343/

Disabled Carts

From USA Today:
"Grocery cart caters to disabled kids"

A growing number of supermarkets nationwide are heeding the requests of special needs parents and purchasing modified carts that cater to children with disabilities. "Caroline's Cart" sprung from Alabama inventor Drew Ann Long, who struggled to shop with her special needs daughter in 2008. She since has built a brand that relies on parents to contact their local grocery stores to request the carts. "We are creating the demand with a network of parents," Long said. "Not one grocery store in the country can say it's in a community without any special needs children. If you make stores accessible, you'll see us." Sandy Hundsrucker, a Wisconsin mom, e-mailed Festival Foods, a grocer with 19 stores in the state and others in Minnesota, about her son, Will, who has cerebral palsy. It is difficult for him to keep his head upright and to get his legs into a regular cart. "If you see something out there that could help another family, don't be afraid to ask — the worst they can say is no," Hundsrucker said. "I can go to the grocery store and I don't need a stroller where I can only fit a gallon of milk or I can't buy dog food or anything else. It saves on the number of trips and having to leave William home with dad or taking turns going out shopping." After receiving a pair of requests at two stores, Festival decided to equip each store with a cart. "We strive to have a shopping experience that makes it enjoyable for everyone and when you have someone in the family who isn't given the ability to do that, we wanted to make that experience available for them," said Kelly Poppele, a company spokeswoman. The $850 cart offers handles that swing back to provide access to a seat; a seat angle that is adjustable for children with low muscle tone; a harness to keep the child secure in the cart; and a platform for a foot rest. The company's Facebook page has more than 10,000 members, and stores have taken notice. Long recently pitched the carts to a European conference in Germany and says he she received inquiries from New Zealand, Russia, Spain and the United Kingdom. Long said the company sells to some big names in the grocery industry, such as Kroger, ShopRite, Publix, Martin's and Albertsons. Kroger, the nation's largest grocer with 2,400 stores, purchases the carts after stores are contacted by customers contact stores, said company spokesman Keith Dailey. Hundsrucker said she'd like to see Caroline's Cart common in every grocery setting.

"There's no reason why every store shouldn't have it." Scott Dahl, president and chief executive of North Carolina company, Technibilt Ltd., which produces the carts, said orders ramped up to all-time highs in 2014. "We are confident that the retailers are quickly recognizing the need for such a product and we have experienced a large increase in both interest and orders over the last two months," Dahl said in an e-mail.

^ It is nice to see places that actually take their customers comments and convenience into consideration. Very few do that anymore. Any product that helps the disabled even a little is a great thing. Hopefully, things like this cart will be nationwide soon. ^

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/02/grocery-cart-for-children-with-disabilities/5959799/

Economic War

From USA Today:

"Crimeans worry Russian takeover may be bad for business"

The Crimea: Its mountains, beaches, villas and healing muds have drawn tourists for decades and make up a big part of the local economy. And yet in spite of the turmoil of the past few days, some here say a Russian takeover could be an opportunity. Cafe waiter Konstantin Solovev, 28, says the port city of Sevastopol already suffers from a lack of tourism infrastructure and is far below its potential. He hopes Russian money would follow the military trucks that entered the region over the weekend. "We don't have enough investment – why are there no Russian investors?" he complained. "But maybe now all that could change." Since Friday, unknown armed men took over key installations in this southern Ukrainian outpost, including the airports, communication centers and government buildings. These groups installed checkpoints on roads into the peninsula and monitored rail traffic headed there. A pro-Russian leader has taken charge of the local government and rallies in support of Russia have popped up in key cities. With the majority of the population ethnic Russian, that's no surprise, say analysts. Even so, some call it "madness" from an economic point of view. The Crimean economy is 75% supported by the Ukrainian state: It gets most of its food, water and electricity from the government, says Yaroslav Pylynskyi, director of the Kennan Institute at the Wilson Center, a policy research institute in Kiev. That's because following the decay of the Soviet Union, almost all of its economy was destroyed by the ensuing economic crisis and never fully lived up to its potential. "Crimea was unified with Ukraine after the Second World War – not because (Soviet leader Nikita) Khrushchev was drunk, as the Russians used to say in their propaganda, but because of economic reasons," he said. "The (Soviet) government wanted to put Crimea's post-war economic reconstruction on the shoulders of the Ukrainian republic." These days, the two main sources of income for the autonomous republic are tourism and agriculture. Both will be harmed by the turmoil here, said analysts. "And now, all railways and highways are blocked," said Pylynskyi. "Crimea has food for some time but where do they want to sell their peaches in summer time? If they block the railways, how do they want to send the peaches and some other spring vegetables to the rest of Ukraine? They can eat them themselves, maybe." Analysts say that it is now, at the end of February, when tour operators and individual tourists book hotel reservations, typically with 50% downpayments. But this has come to a crashing halt. And the end of May is the beginning of tourist season here. Meanwhile, the local government here has set March 30 as the day local voters will decide on the future of Crimea: Whether to secede, become independent or join Russia. It is unclear whether the referendum will be held, or even whether such a vote is legal. However, it will deter tourists, says Pylynskyi. "The main source of income of the Crimean population is tourism. In such a situation to arrange – not a war but discontent – is absolutely stupid," he said. "They have to understand they are ruining the Crimean economy with what they are doing. Who will send their children and grandparents to bathe in the sea in this situation if people are blocking roads with guns?"

^ Despite what anyone may say money rules the world. Places like the Crimea relay heavily on tourism and the Russian invasion may have ruined the reputation of the beaches - like they did in South Ossetia and Abkhazia (once the vacation pride of the Soviet Union.) ^

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/03/02/ukraine-russia-crimea-economy-reaction/5945987/

 

A Torn Moscow

From USA Today:

"In Moscow, Ukraine intervention has fans, critics"

Muscovites demonstrated in the street Sunday voicing protest against and support for the Russian government's threat to deploy armed forces to Ukraine. But while authorities accommodated and encouraged a pro-government rally, a smaller protest demonstration down the street was not sanctioned. "I'm sick of it," said Olga Ivanova, a public school teacher in Moscow who said that her bosses told her to go to demonstrate in support of the government's actions in Ukraine. Instead, she went to the unsanctioned protest rally down the street. "It wasn't completely obligatory, but it was hard to say no. Nevertheless, I said I couldn't. I want to come out and support my own position. I feel there shouldn't be any armed intervention." Police cordoned off several central streets in Moscow to let the thousands-strong pro-government rally pass, with pedestrians wanting to cross the street told to wait. Police said 27,000 people had showed up for the demonstration, with many holding signs that said, "We won't give up Sevastopol," and "Maidan won't pass," referring to Independence Square in Kiev, where the pro-Western opposition succeeded in ousting Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovich.

Few at the rally agreed to talk to reporters, particularly to an American publication. "Go talk to someone else," said a man holding a poster that said "I'm with Putin." Another man holding an

Others who came out to support the government said they were against military action, but for law and order for Russian-speakers in Ukraine. "I live in Moscow but I was born in Feodosia. I have a lot of friends there. We know the situation there. My mother lives in Crimea, and I remember when Russian-speaking residents were forced to get Ukrainian citizenship when Ukraine became independent in 1991," said Nina, who declined to give her last name. "I want to support the Russian-speaking population, but only peacefully," said Natalia Ivanova, a Muscovite in her forties, adding that she didn't think Russia would actually intervene militarily. "But if it's necessary, then it should be done. Still, the people [in Crimea] are very organized, I don't think they would need outside help to stand up for themselves." Down the street, an anti-government rally in front of the Kremlin gathered between 150 and 700 people during the afternoon, according to various estimates, but some demonstrators were scared away by police, who told the crowd over loudspeakers that the gathering "has not been sanctioned by executive authorities." A number of people who unfurled signs protesting Russian military action in Ukraine were seen being hauled away by riot police to several trucks that stood by. A total of 285 people were detained for protesting, according to the Moscow police. At one point, a riot police officer called out through a loudspeaker: "Dear women, there's not going to be a war, please leave." "People are gathered here who are outraged by the insolent policies of this country's government and Putin in particular," said Mikhail Barinov, a Muscovite and retired geologist in his late 50s. Asked if he felt that Saturday's ruling by Russia's senate, allowing the deployment of armed forces to Ukraine, would lead to military action, he said "an intervention has already begun. Yesterday, I couldn't believe that such an idiotic, odious decision had been taken by the so-called Federation Council. It's a disgrace. I have relatives in the Ukraine that have lived there for 100 years. I haven't seen any violations whatsoever against Russians there in the twenty-something years since the breakup of the Soviet Union. I regret that I didn't come out in protest together with the seven others in spring 1968 [when the Soviet Union sent troops to rein in the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia]."

^ It seems that the Moscow (and Russia) of today bears the same feeling of the Soviet Union. You have to agree and openly support the government no matter what otherwise you will be arrested. You have to attend the pro-government rallies or risk loosing your job. I can not understand how someone can say that the Russia of today is "modern, civilized and open for business" when in the same breath the country invades another country, arrests anyone who non-violently opposes them and censors everything. I am still a Russophile, but it is difficult to explain to non-Russians how the country and the people of Russia are good despite what the government in power at the time does. It was that way in Czarist and Soviet times and seems to be the case here. ^

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/03/02/moscow-ukraine-reaction/5945141/

Ukraine Aid

From USA Today:

"Congress pushes for Russia sanctions, Ukrainian aid"

Members of Congress called for immediate sanctions against Russia and an emergency aid package for Ukraine as the crisis in eastern Europe escalated Saturday. The day after President Obama said Russia would face "costs" for intervening in Ukraine, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the president needs to articulate what those costs are — and immediately impose them. "None of us should be under any illusion about what President Putin is capable of doing in Ukraine," McCain said in a statement. "Every moment that the United States and our allies fail to respond sends the signal to President Putin that he can be even more ambitious and aggressive in his military intervention in Ukraine." In a 90-minute phone call with Putin Saturday, Obama warned that Russia faces "greater political and economic isolation," and he threatened to boycott the upcoming G-8 talks in Sochi.

Obama's call came after the upper house of the Russian parliament authorized the use of troops in Ukraine on Saturday, ramping up the rhetoric by calling on President Vladimir Putin to withdraw Russia's ambassador to the United States.  Members of Congress, most of whom had left Washington for the weekend, responded in kind but stopped short of advocating any direct military action. One of the strongest calls for action came from Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. He urged Obama to dispatch Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to Ukraine's capital in a show of solidarity, ban Russian officials from travelling to the United States, convene an emergency meeting of NATO, and allow the Republic of Georgia into the Atlantic alliance. Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the United States and its European allies should place international observers in Ukraine. Those observers would make it more difficult for Russia to claim Ukrainian provocation, "and thereby help avoid a conflict that nobody should want." The ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, called for immediate sanctions against Russia. "Vladimir Putin is seizing a neighboring territory — again — so President Obama must lead a meaningful, unified response," Corker said in a statement. Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., advocated "a robust international economic assistance package" — including loan guarantees — for Ukraine. Engel, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Relations Committee, said the Russian parliament's moves "are acts of aggression that violate Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity." Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., another member of the committee, went further. Not only should the United States recall its ambassador to Russia, he said, but it should revoke visas and freeze assets of anyone associated with the Putin regime, supply military assistance to Ukraine and boot Russia from the G-8 group of industrialized nations. Cotton's statement also revealed a bit of domestic politics, blaming "President Obama's trembling inaction" for the crisis. Cotton, who's running for a Senate seat, compared Russian aggression in Crimea to the German annexation of Austria in 1938 and suggested that U.S. officials were downplaying the seriousness of the situation. Democrats, however, said Putin alone was responsible for the crisis. Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., tweeted, "Situation in Ukraine is now very grave. Putin is playing (with) fire in the Crimea."

^ Both the President and Congress have an obligation to stand behind their words of support for the Ukraine. Otherwise their speeches of support are just that - talk - and no one (from Russia to any other country) will ever take the US seriously again. ^

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/01/congress-response-to-ukraine-crisis/5926691/

2014 = 1936

1936 - Olympics held in Nazi Germany (Jews stripped of citizenship.) Shortly after the Nazis invaded: Czechoslovakia and then Austria to "help the ethnic Germans living there."

2014 - Olympics held in Putin's Russia (homosexuals stripped of basic civil rights.) Shortly after the Russians invade the Ukraine to "help the ethnic Russians living there."

I see no difference do you?

Иван Домой!

From Yahoo:

"Russian troops take over Ukraine's Crimea region"

Russian troops took over Crimea as the parliament in Moscow gave President Vladimir Putin a green light Saturday to use the military to protect Russian interests in Ukraine. The newly installed government in Kiev was powerless to react to the action by Russian troops based in the strategic region and more flown in, aided by pro-Russian Ukrainian groups. Putin sought and quickly got his parliament's approval to use its military to protect Russia's interests across Ukraine. But while sometimes-violent pro-Russian protests broke out Saturday in a number of Russian-speaking regions of eastern Ukraine, Moscow's immediate focus appeared to be Crimea. Ignoring President Barack Obama's warning Friday that "there will be costs" if Russia intervenes militarily, Putin sharply raised the stakes in the conflict over Ukraine's future evoking memories of Cold War brinkmanship. "Russia and the West find themselves on the brink of a confrontation far worse than in 2008 over Georgia," Dmitri Trenin, the director of Carnegie Moscow Center, said in a commentary posted on its website. In Georgia, the Russian troops quickly routed the Georgian military after they tried to regain control over the separatist province of South Ossetia that has close ties with Moscow. The latest moves followed days of scripted, bloodless turmoil on the peninsula, the scene of centuries of wars and seen by Moscow as a crown jewel of the Russian and Soviet empires. What began Thursday with the early-morning takeover of the regional parliament building by mysterious troops continued Saturday afternoon as dozens of those soldiers — almost certainly Russian — moved into the streets around the parliamentary complex and seized control of regional airports, amid street protests by pro-Russian Crimeans calling for Moscow's protection from the new government in Kiev. That government came to power last week in the wake of months of pro-democracy protests against the now-fugitive president, Viktor Yanukovych, and his decision to turn Ukraine toward Russia, its longtime patron, instead of the European Union. Despite the calls for Moscow's help, there has been no sign of ethnic Russians facing attacks in Crimea or elsewhere in Ukraine.  Obama on Friday called on Russia to respect the independence and territory of Ukraine and not try to take advantage of its neighbor's political upheaval. He said such action by Russia would represent a "profound interference" in matters he said should be decided by the Ukrainian people. He has not said, however, how the U.S. could pressure Moscow to step back from its intervention. The Russian parliament urged that Moscow recall its ambassador in Washington in response to Obama's speech. On Friday, Ukraine accused Russia of a "military invasion and occupation" in the Crimea, where Russia's Black Sea fleet is based. Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk called on Moscow "to recall their forces, and to return them to their stations," according to the Interfax news agency. "Russian partners, stop provoking civil and military resistance in Ukraine." Ukraine's population of 46 million is divided in loyalties between Russia and Europe, with much of western Ukraine advocating closer ties with the European Union while eastern and southern regions look to Russia for support. Crimea, a semi-autonomous region that Russia gave to Ukraine in the 1950s, is mainly Russian-speaking.  In his address to parliament, Putin said the "extraordinary situation in Ukraine" was putting at risk the lives of Russian citizens and military personnel stationed at the Crimean naval base that Moscow has maintained since the Soviet collapse.

 

^ Иван Домой! (Ivan Go Home!) - - - Poland (1939), Estonia (1939), Latvia (1939), Lithuania (1939), Finland (1940), East Germany (1953), Hungary (1956), Czechoslovakia (1968), Afghanistan (1979), Moldova (1992), Georgia (2008), the Ukraine (2014.) ^

http://news.yahoo.com/russian-troops-over-ukraines-crimea-region-200052097.html

Troops Approved!

From the BBC:

"Russian parliament approves troop deployment in Ukraine"

Russia's upper house of parliament has approved President Putin's request for Russian forces to be used in Ukraine. He had asked that Russian forces be used "until the normalisation of the political situation in the country" Russia's Black Sea Fleet is based in the Ukrainian region of Crimea, where many ethnic Russians live. Kiev has reacted angrily to days of military movements in Crimea, accusing Moscow of trying to provoke the new government into an armed conflict. Interim President Olexander Turchynov has called an emergency session of his security chiefs. Russia's Vladimir Putin submitted the request for troops "in connection with the extraordinary situation in Ukraine and the threat to the lives of Russian citizens", the Kremlin said.  The BBC's Richard Galpin in Moscow says it is potentially significant that the request was for deployment in Ukraine as a whole, and not specifically for flash-points such as Crimea. The upper house went into a special session almost immediately after Mr Putin made the request, in what seems to have been a carefully co-ordinated series of events during the day Earlier, the lower house of parliament had urged the president to take whatever measures were necessary to "stabilise" the situation in Crimea. During the upper house debate, one legislator accused US President Barack Obama of crossing "a red line" with his comments that there would be costs if Russia intervened militarily in Ukraine. The upper house has recommended that the Russian ambassador the US should be recalled, although the decision lies with Mr Putin. The request follow days of military activity in Crimea during which unidentified armed men moved in to take over the regional parliament, state television and telecommunications hubs.

Soldiers from Russia's Black Sea Fleet, which is based in Crimea, are reported to be guarding some administrative buildings and military bases. Amid the closure of airspace over Crimea's regional capital Simferopol on Friday evening, there were unconfirmed reports that Russian planes were flying in thousands of troops.  Ukrainian Defence Minister Ihor Tenyukh said on Saturday there are now an extra 6,000 Russian troops in Crimea, alongside an additional 30 armoured vehicles.   Under the agreement governing the presence of the fleet in Crimea, the Russians must co-ordinate all troop movements outside the fleet's base with the Ukrainian authorities beforehand. The newly-elected pro-Moscow leader of Crimea, Sergiy Aksyonov, earlier said he had appealed to Mr Putin for help to ensure peace on the peninsula - a request which the Kremlin said it would "not leave unnoticed". Events in Crimea have angered the new interim government in Kiev - which does not recognise the province's new leadership - and has alarmed Western leaders. President Turchynov accused Russia of trying to provoke Kiev into "armed conflict", but said they would not react. US President Barack Obama said on Friday that "any violation of Ukraine sovereignty... would be deeply destabilising".

He warned of the "costs" of any Russian intervention in the Ukraine and commended the interim government in Kiev for its "restraint". Meanwhile, big pro-Russian rallies are being held in several Ukrainian cities outside Crimea.

• In Donetsk, Mr Yanukovych's traditional stronghold, demonstrators from a crowd of some 7,000 tried unsuccessfully to occupy the regional administration building, raising a Russian tricolour on a nearby flag-post

• In Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-biggest city, scuffles broke out when protesters with Russian flags tried to occupy the regional administration building

• In Mariupol, in the south-east, hundreds of protesters carrying Russian flags gathered outside the city council in eastern and southern Ukraine.

^ Come on Russia don't do anything stupid and start a war in the Ukraine. The EU, the US and the rest of the world would be forced to help the Ukraine and then we would all be in a real mess. Learn from your own history of invading neighboring countries. It may work out in Russian interests for a while, but then in the end Russia looses (ie the Cold War.) What Russia is doing (ie they say they are only protecting ethnic Russians living in the Ukraine) must have been learned from Nazi Germany because they (the Nazis) "only" wanted to help the ethnic Germans in Austria, Czechoslovakia and then Poland and we all know how that war ended for Germany. If ethnic Russians want the protection of Russia then they should move back to the Russian Federation. No one is topping them (on any side.) ^

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26400035

US Crimea: Leave!

From the US State Department:

"Travel Warning February 28, 2014"

The Department of State warns U.S. citizens to defer all non-essential travel to Ukraine, and particularly the Crimean Peninsula, due to the potential for instability following the departure of former President Yanukovych and the establishment of a new government. Groups have staged protests, set up roadblocks, and occupied government buildings in several cities throughout Ukraine since November 2013. All U.S. citizens in Ukraine, and those considering travel to Ukraine, should evaluate their personal security situation in light of political instability and the possibility of violence. This replaces the Travel Warning for Ukraine dated February 23, 2014, to provide updated information regarding developments in Ukraine. The Department of State authorized the departure of family members of U.S. government personnel from Ukraine on February 20, 2014. All Peace Corps Volunteers departed on February 25, 2014. The U.S. Embassy in Kyiv’s Consular Section is open for all public services. The Embassy’s ability to respond to emergencies involving U.S. citizens in other parts of Ukraine is limited. The Department of State urges U.S. citizens who travel to Ukraine to carefully evaluate the risks posed to their personal safety, particularly in Crimea and the eastern oblasts of Donetsk, Lugansk, and Kharkiv. While the transition to a new government has been largely peaceful, the police presence in Kyiv and other cities remains limited and there is still a potential for violence between supporters of different political parties. Large crowds remain in Kyiv’s Independence Square and adjacent areas. Since February 27, demonstrations and clashes have occurred in several cities in Crimea and eastern parts of Ukraine. Ground transportation may be disrupted throughout the country. Drivers, especially in Crimea, may encounter roadblocks that restrict access on certain roads. Commercial air travel could be delayed or cancelled with little or no notice. Travelers should check with their airlines for possible flight delays or cancellations prior to travel.  The situation in Ukraine is unpredictable and could change quickly. U.S. citizens throughout Ukraine should avoid large crowds. Those in Kyiv should keep away from the downtown areas of Kyiv near Independence Square and government buildings. U.S. citizens should be prepared to remain indoors for extended periods of time should clashes occur in their vicinity. Protests in Kyiv began on November 21, 2013, following the Government of Ukraine’s announcement that it was suspending preparations to sign an association agreement with the European Union. On February 22, following three months of large protests and violent clashes, former President Yanukovych departed Kyiv. The Ukrainian Parliament established a new government on February 27. Groups that oppose the new government and support closer ties with Russia have staged demonstrations in cities throughout eastern and southern Ukraine. Unidentified, armed soldiers have occupied several government buildings, including airports, and established roadblocks on the Crimean peninsula and there are media reports that the airspace above the region has been closed and flights cancelled.

U.S. citizens living or traveling in Ukraine are strongly encouraged to enroll in the Department of State's Smart Traveler Enrollment Program(STEP) to receive the latest travel updates and to obtain updated information on security within Ukraine. By enrolling, U.S. citizens make it easier for the Embassy to contact them in case of emergency.

^ Unlike, the Canadian Embassy, the US Embassy in Kiev is still open and running. The US official statement gives a lot more detail to it's citizens too. ^

http://ukraine.usembassy.gov/tw02282014.html

Crimea Canadians: Leave!

From Yahoo Canada:
"Ottawa says Cdns in Ukraine's Crimea region should leave while still can"

The Department of Foreign Affairs is advising against travel to Ukraine's Crimea region and says Canadians already there should consider leaving "while it is safe to do so." The warning comes as Russian President Vladimir Putin received permission to use the country's military in Ukraine, moving to formalize troop deployments that Ukrainian officials have called an ongoing invasion of the strategic region of Crimea. Foreign Affairs says its advisory is due to "political uncertainty" and reports of armed groups operating in the area, along with protests and public clashes. It says those who can't leave Crimea — where the airports aren't operating — should stay indoors and avoid large crowds and demonstrations. The department is also advising against non-essential travel to Kyiv due to instability. Putin's request to Russia's parliament loosely referred to the "territory of Ukraine" rather than specifically to Crimea, raising the possibility that Moscow could use military force in other Russian-speaking provinces in eastern and southern Ukraine. Canada has warned Russia not to breach the sovereignty of its Ukraine neighbour, joining other countries in sending a strong message to Moscow. Ukrainian officials and some Western diplomats said that a Russian military intervention is already well underway after heavily armed gunmen in unmarked military uniforms seized control of local government buildings, airports and other strategic facilities in Crimea in recent days. Ignoring President Barack Obama's warning Friday that "there will be costs" if Russia intervenes militarily, Putin said Saturday the "extraordinary situation in Ukraine" was putting at risk the lives of Russian citizens and military personnel stationed at a naval base that Moscow has maintained in the Black Sea peninsula since the Soviet collapse.

^ The Canadian Embassy in Kiev has been closed and Canadians are being told to leave the Crimea. It seems the situation is getting pretty intense. ^

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/ottawa-says-cdns-ukraines-crimea-region-leave-while-153154847.html

Flag Banning

From Yahoo:

"Court OK's High School Ban on American Flag T-Shirts"

In a case that pits individual rights against kids' safety, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday that it was appropriate for school officials to ban students at a San Jose, California, area high school from wearing American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo. The May 5th holiday, popular in the United States but largely unrecognized in Mexico, commemorates the 1862 Battle of Puebla and celebrates Mexican culture, heritage, and pride.  The ruling stems from a controversial incident in 2010 when five students were told by administrators at Live Oak High School (which has a history of racial tension and gang violence) to either turn their American flag T-shirts inside out or go home. In a unanimous decision, the court cited two instances where students had been threatened with violence for wearing the flag. In 2009, some students of Mexican descent told an assistant principal they would "f--- up" other kids who were chanting "USA" around a flag they had hung from a tree on the school campus. The next year, students wearing the flag tees were warned by text messages and phone calls that gang members would come to the school and beat them up. Because only shirts with the American flag were targeted, school officials didn't ban shirts bearing images of other countries' flags, including the Mexican flag. In response to the ban, a group of parents sued the district, alleging violation of the teens' First Amendment rights. The school district has not responded to Yahoo Shine's request for comment. The court pointed out that under previous law, it is indeed legal to restrict high school students' free speech because of safety concerns. The Live Oak dress code also states, "The school has the right to request that any student dressing inappropriately for school will change into other clothes, be sent home to change, and/or be subject to disciplinary action." Writing for the panel of three judges, 9th Circuit Judge M. Margaret McKeown stated, "Our role is not to second-guess the decision to have a Cinco de Mayo celebration or the precautions put in place to avoid violence. ... [The events] made it reasonable for school officials to proceed as though the threat of a potentially violent disturbance was real." However, some parents are still threatening to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court. "This is the United States of America," Kendall Jones, whose son was one of the students banned from wearing a shirt depicting the American flag, told the San Jose Mercury News. "The idea that it's offensive to wear patriotic clothing … regardless of what day it is, is unconscionable to me." School clothing bans have become common across the country in recent years, as administrators have cracked down on everything from leggings to NRA T-shirts to UGGS. Last year a Michigan school told middle-schoolers who were wearing T-shirts memorializing a friend who had died from leukemia to change tops or cover up the friend's name printed on the shirt (administrators later apologized and reversed their decision). Not surprisingly, the American flag T-shirt case is particularly controversial and has strong supporters on both sides of the issue.

The court ruling appears to be on firm ground because of legal precedent, but blogging about the case, Eugene Volokh, a professor of law at UCLA and specialist in free speech, says it's about far more than T-shirts and that there are some serious issues at stake. "This is a classic 'heckler's veto' — thugs threatening to attack the speaker, and government officials suppressing the speech to prevent such violence," he wrote. "The school taught its students a simple lesson: If you dislike speech and want it suppressed, then you can get what you want by threatening violence against the speakers." However, after the decision, school district superintendent Steve Betando said he felt "relieved." From his point of view in the trenches of a challenged school, the court gave administrators the power to avert potential harm to their students.

^ This is just outright discrimination (by both the school and the courts.) If anything all t-shorts with any flag on it should have been banned. Instead only the US flag t-shirts were targeted. How can you not be allowed to show the American flag in the US? ^

http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/court-okays-high-school-ban-american-flag-t-172900062.html