Russia doesn't *need* Crimea. Russia *wants* Crimea.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

This whole line about Russia needing Crimea because it's Russia's only warm weather port is pure and utter bullshit.

Russia has hundreds of miles of coastline of its own along the Black Sea. They actually held the Olympics there less than a month ago. There's plenty of port space along that coast.

The fact is, an annexed Crimea would not be continuous with Russia. And while that's not at all unheard of (think Alaska or Hawaii), nonetheless Crimea would stick out like a sore thumb given that it would be sharing its border with a country that is historically uneasy with Russian influence.

Moreover the argument that Russia has a historical claim to Crimea is due in most part to an intense policy of Russification of that region and its expelling of the native people of the area, the Tatars.

This is about Russian greed. No more, and no less.

[elfin]

1. Crimea has the best deep port

They will NEVER let it loose IMO. The threat of it being out of their control drives this along with their greed and imperialistic aspirations.

[kwassa]

9. Russia's Black Sea Fleet it their 2nd smallest, and they are building up another port ....

on the Russian part of the Black Sea

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/russias-black-sea-fleet/2014/03/13/fa40de64-ab1e-11e3-98f6-8e3c562f9996_graphic.html

[hunter]

2. Sort of how the U.S.A. wanted Texas and California?

Ah, history is a messy business.

When are we going to learn to solve our problems without oppressing or shooting one another?

[malaise]

10. It's quite a selective business as well

We'll never learn.
I only have a simple question - how much more oil does the West want and at what cost to the rest of humanity?

[Benton D Struckcheon]

3. Erm, not really true.

Russia founded Sevastopol 200 years ago. That's been theirs from the start. I don't support the invasion, but their claim to that place is a strong one.

[kwassa]

6. The original city there goes back to the ancient Greeks.

Many others have owned the turf before the Russians moved in more recently.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

14. Russians have been there about as long as the US has been a country.

It's almost literally bringing up ancient history to say they're "recent" arrivals. Lavrov wasn't lying when he said their ties to Crimea are stronger than, say, Britain's to the Falklands. He may have been lying about lots of other things, but he wasn't lying about that.
I'm sure they find the fact it's part of Ukraine to be an injustice, but trying to take it back is just revanchism. Classically so, right down to the stupid claims about "protecting" Russians.

[LiberalEsto]

4. I would add, Putin's imperialist notions

to re-create the Soviet Union.

[joshcryer]

5. They need Crimea to assure Eurasia succeeds.

It offers a staging point to invade eastern Ukraine. As well as a way out polarize Ukrainians against one another.

[HeiressofBickworth]

7. I find it utterly fascinating

that Putin's actions regarding Crimea come on the heels of what could be considered a PR failure for Russia with the winter Olympics. There was all of the press about the failure to timely complete hotels, the filming of events showing poor audience attendance and let's not forget the Vanity Fair article last month about the criminal connections of Putin and how so much Olympic money was siphoned off to criminal enterprises. With invading Crimea and all the muscle flexing that has been going on, it seems that Putin is out to show the world that he is, in fact, a force to be dealt with.

Like Bush illegally attacking Iraq just to show his father up, Putin seems to be serving his personal ego rather than national interests.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. So, leave it up to the Crimeans to decide. Self determination.

[geek tragedy]

12. I agree. But, the occupation needs to end first. nt

[Cha]

11. Oh Blame it on the West.. Keep Protecting PUtin and blame it on the "WEST.. Oil"

blah blah blah.

[Demo_Chris]

13. To be more precise, Russia does not currently need the Crimea....

But that might change, and that is why Russia is never going to let it slip into Western hands or influence. Everything else is posturing. They aren't going to let go, we aren't going to war over it, and that's pretty much that.

[Igel]

15. The Tatars aren't native.

They're just immigrants that arrived a lot earlier than the Russians.

Of course, Slavs had been there earlier. Arabs gave them hell, with all the raids for capturing slaves. Slav, slave, same origin (with a possible serendipitous overlap with a name the Slavs called themselves).

Greeks were there before them.

Let's not forget the Sarmatians, related to the Persians, who were there before the Greeks.

Or the Scythians. Whatever language they spoke.

And whoever was there for the thousands of years before them.


Greed has many forms. In a way, I'm greedy. I like learning stuff. Others are greedy for fame. Or prestige. Some just want money. Or land.

Putin's a nationalist, first and foremost. Hearing him decry fascists is like listening to a Brit say how horrible a New Zealand accent is and saying, "Abominable accent, why can't they speak English?"

[MNBrewer]

16. Looks like they want at least part of what's left of Ukraine, too.

[dipsydoodle]

17. More accurately

Crimea wants to loose itself from Ukraine and maybe become part of Russia.

The reasons are economic and easy to search. I suggest you do so.