[notastartup]

that is very good insight. Another point might be the idea of creating buffer zone (Ukraine) to counter the threat of NATO military assets being placed right at the border with Russia, access to Black Sea. I understand that if Putin does not take Ukraine, NATO will.

This is like China not willing to give up North Korea, it has it's function as a buffer.

[Perdition]

That is why it is happening. NATO was set-up to counter the Soviets (dominated by Russia) and it is a slap in the face for Russia to allow NATO right on their border when they are trying to become a real world power again.

NATO might have gotten away with limited defence/economic pacts with former Soviet satellites, but full NATO and EU membership was bound to provoke a reaction from Russia.

Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed.

[ceejayoz]

> Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed.

Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West

Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea

Gotcha.

Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU?

[Perdition]

>Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West

Ukraine should have been quietly told that joining NATO or the EU was not possible.

>Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea

Strawman: This.

What Russia did is absolutely wrong IMO, but it is expected (just like the US doesn't like anyone else messing with South America or the Caribbean).

>Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU?

The US has been the primary power in Western Europe since the 8th of May 1945. The US can directly control who enters NATO, and wields significant influence over the primary EU members. The possibility of Ukraine joining NATO or the EU would have gone through State and should have been firmly rejected.

EDIT: Downvotes and no replies, I can't tell whether I am on Hacker News or reddit.

[PeterisP]

The concept of "should have been quietly told that joining .. was not possible" is immoral.

Nations have a right of self-determination. Russia and USA can argue for their interests, but if USA and Russia agree "oh, country X will be in your sphere of influence" without giving country X a voice and a veto-vote there - that is evil and insulting to people living in those nations, just as Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement before WW2.

Such divisions should be unacceptable to the global community.

[AnimalMuppet]

Well said. But...

Putin probably remembers his history. In World War II, Germany nearly overran Russia, and it started from the middle of Poland. If it had been able to start from the eastern border of Ukraine, Russia might well have not survived.

So Putin may feel, historically, that Russia's survival is at stake if Ukraine joins NATO. (I am not saying that Putin's desire to control Ukraine is moral or ethical. I am merely saying that it is understandable.)

[democracy]

Not directly in charge, but close...

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/bolivia-angered-by...

[ceejayoz]

The UK's GCHQ is just as interested in nabbing Snowden as the NSA.

[ajuc]

Why should people in states bordering Russia care what Russia thinks of their independence and alliances?

[AnimalMuppet]

Morally/ethically: They shouldn't.

Practically: Because that is the way the world actually works. If you've got a big power like Russia, with a leader that is willing to use that power, then your choices have consequences. You'd better think about those consequences when you're making your choices.

[Edit: If you're a neighbor to a big power like Russia, then your choices have consequences. The point was not that Russia's choices have consequences, but that Ukraine's do.)

[Perdition]

Because that is political reality.

Do you see any armies marching to protect Ukraine's territorial integrity? Russia isn't a small state that can be easily threatened, and nobody in the West has the stomach for a real war. I bet Russia could take all of Ukraine with no response beyond a boycott and some air-strikes.

P.S. The US has done far worse things than what Russia is currently doing in order to keep South America and the Caribbean within their sphere of influence. Small neighbours of great powers seldom get to exercise real independence.

[nikatwork]

How does the US doing bad things justify Russia doing bad things to a territory independent of both? That makes no sense at all. And the fact that Russia can get away with it does not ethically absolve their actions.

If we followed your ideas, the Baltic states would never have broken away from Russia. That actually worked out quite well for them.

[Stolpe]

It doesn't justify it, however it explains it.