Will NATO annex Ukraine?

[Jefferson23]

Anyone who believes Washington is deeply enamored of ‘democracy’ in Ukraine must hit eBay, where Saddam Hussein’s WMDs have been found, and are on sale to the highest bidder.

Or pay attention to the non-denial denials of the Obama administration, which swears on a daily basis there’s no ‘proxy war’ or Cold War redux in Ukraine.

In a nutshell; Washington’s bipartisan Ukraine policy has always been anti-Moscow. That implies regime change whenever necessary. As the European Union (EU), geopolitically, is nothing but an annex to NATO, what matters is NATO extending its borders to the Ukraine. Or at least Western Ukraine – which would be a valuable consolation prize.

This is a purely military-centric game – the logic of the whole mechanism ultimately decided in Washington, not in Brussels. It’s about NATO expansion, not ‘democracy’. When neo-con State Department functionary Victoria Nuland had her 15 seconds of fame recently, what she actually meant was “We’re NATO, F**k the EU.” No wonder there will be an urgent NATO Defense Ministers meeting in Brussels on Wednesday, centered on Ukraine.

in full: http://rt.com/op-edge/will-nato-annex-ukraine-414/

[another_liberal]

1. "This is a purely military-centric game."

It certainly looks a lot like that to me. I wish we would stay the hell out of this one.

[Jefferson23]

2. As the saying goes, time will tell. n/t

[AverageJoe90]

3. Do remember that RT is the State Propaganda Organ for Putin's Russia.....

.....and that Putin's government is far from honest; in fact, he's basically Reagan and Bush rolled into one, with dashes of Mussolini here and there.

[Jefferson23]

4. The source you object to, ok. The author is an independent journalist, he writes

and is also published by AsiaTimes, OpEd News, Alternet, The Nation, HuffigntonPost
Commondreams.org.

Say what you will of his opinions, but Pepe speaks for himself...he is not a tool for Putin
and never was.

[Igel]

6. No, he is not a tool for Putin.

However, on any given issue it's fairly easy to see how he'll land.

First, he has his set of priorities and interests. Some topics simply are ignored.

Second, how does the West, esp. the US, fare in any potential outcome.

The "uprising" started long before the EU was point-center. It really gathered steam after repressive measures by Yanukovich.

The prediction in the OP would say that the "uprising" only started at the behest of NATO when EU was no longer likely to prevail. It's odd to speak of a "prediction" when the course of events is so well known.

It's also hard to square this OP with all the anti-fascist rhetoric that we hear--meaning that somehow the EU and NATO are fascist, while Putin isn't. That kind of synthesis is incorrect: It presumes that there's a coherent single message that focuses on that kind of detail or motivation, when the motivation is simple: RT goes with any story that makes Putin and Russia the hero and/or the US/EU bad, unless Putin/US/EU all happen on the same said (because it's in Putin's or Russia's interest). So RT has the gratuitous "bad US" and "bad EU" story that's just West-bashing a la Izvestija, making Russia look good by silence. But RT will also peg any convenient motivation on foes and competitors simply to cause a spike in ill-will, wagon-circling, and defensive indignation. The consistency is rhetorical and emotional, not logical.

[Jefferson23]

7. You're only correct, imo, on why RT may use his piece...but that is irrelevant to whether the

content..his opinion, is one of merit. Escobar is not fan of Putin, as you acknowledge but yet you
continue to attempt to reverse that acknowledgement.

However, on any given issue it's fairly easy to see how he'll land.

First, he has his set of priorities and interests. Some topics simply are ignored.

Second, how does the West, esp. the US, fare in any potential outcome.

If you like, you can peruse his work on foreign affairs, it is quite extensive, perhaps his political slant is not in
agreement with your own.

[quadrature]

5. tell this story to the Baltic peoples

then Poland
Hungary
Romania


etc

[Jefferson23]

8. Carnival in Crimea

Last edited Mon Mar 3, 2014, 02:32 PM - Edit history (2)

Time waits for no one, but apparently will wait for Crimea. The speaker of the Crimean parliament, Vladimir Konstantinov, has confirmed there will be a referendum on greater autonomy from Ukraine on May 25.

Until then, Crimea will be as hot and steamy as carnival in Rio - because Crimea is all about Sevastopol, the port of call for the Russian Black Sea fleet.

If the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is a bull, this is the red flag to end all red flags. Even if you're deep in alcohol nirvana
dancin' your troubles away at carnival in Rio - or New Orleans, or Venice, or Trinidad and Tobago - your brain will have registered that NATO's ultimate wet dream is to command a Western puppet Ukrainian government to kick the Russian navy out of its base in Sevastopol. The negotiated lease applies until 2042. Threats and rumors of reneging it have already emerged.

The absolute majority of the Crimean peninsula is populated by Russian speakers. Very few Ukrainians live there. In 1954, it took only 15 minutes for Ukrainian Nikita Krushchev - he of the banging shoe at the UN floor - to give Crimea as a free gift to Ukraine (then part of the USSR). In Russia, Crimea is perceived as Russian. Nothing will change that fact.

We're not facing a new Crimean War - yet. Only up to a point. NATO's wet dream is one thing; it is quite another to pull it off - as in ending the Russian fleet routinely leaving Sevastopol across the Black Sea through the Bosphorus and then reaching Tartus, Syria's Mediterranean port. So yes, this is as much about Syria as about Crimea.

in full: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/CEN-05-280214.html



Inside The New Cold War: Washington Sets Its Sights On Ukraine

February 17, 2014 |

Meet the new (cold) war, same as the old (cold) war. Same same, but different. One day, it's the myriad implications of Washington's "pivoting" to Asia - as in the containment of China. The next day, it's the perennial attempt to box Russia in. Never a dull moment in the New Great Game in Eurasia.

On Russia, the denigration of all things Sochi - attributable to the inherent stupidity of Western corporate media "standards" - was just a subplot of the main show, which always gets personal; the relentless demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin. [1]

Yet Nulandgate - as in US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria "neo-con" Nuland uttering her famous "F**k the EU" - was way more serious. Not because of the "profanity" (praise the Lord!), but for providing what US Think Tankland hailed as "an indicator of American strategic thinking".

http://www.alternet.org/world/new-us-russia-cold-war