Macron says France doesn't recognise Crimea annexation.

HTTPS://www.yahoo.com/ news/macron-says-france-not-recognise-crimea-annexation-113456672.html

So France, usa, uk, and anyone else that matters don't recognise this annexation, even Batjka Lukashenka in Belorussia is reluctant.

 

in your link he says "France is committed to Ukraine's sovereignty with its recognised borders" - but when recognised? as of in the future?

 

I say Russia annex the Ukraine and end this once and for all.

 

you see, the Ukraine's border is a thing of the recent past and thus liable to reconsideration. Hungary for example might want to have its piece of that... the USSR was destroyed while in crisis; this is not a legitimate way to disband a country; in fact you should have waited until the crisis is over, and only then hold referendums on independence of the republics.

 

I say Russia needs to breakup into smaller entities, it's just not practical in its present state.Nor is it viable.

 

Yes I noticed Russia also said it won't pay rent for Crimea but ironically it already is paying rent in the form of sanctions.

 

Dream more, kmiec~

 

Like in all those kind of wars, nobody care of what think people of Crimea or Dombass. It's rather hard as a french to have real news about Macron because his friends own all important radios, newspapers or TV channel.

 

Copter dude, your new profile picture is cool. I think I was wrong, you are not from Tblisi, but from Batumi.

As for the subject, Ukraine, and therefore Crimea, cannot be considered independently from Russian influence. That's the rule of nature, the cause of real politics, the geopolitical reality, the fruit of history...
Why? Because Ukraine being free from Russian influence means isolation of Russia, getting stuck in the heartland. More importantly, that would force a change in Russia's statehood. A federation then would be to turn into a "nation-state" because without being able to influence eastern Europe, the historical outpost of Russia, preserving "federation" at least in practicality would no longer be needed because Moscow's main concern is not the "people of the east" but the people of the west ever since. The fading necessity would be reflected on bureaucracy and governmental institutions. This in turn would weaken Russian Federation and it would shrink.

What's interesting is that such a change would not be desired by the west whatsoever because Russian Federation has been, for better or worse, bringing state authority, law, security, supervision, some standard of living, and other sorts of "modern governmental" services to the most extreme remoteness and climates of the world. Cease of that would create a humongous vacuum that even the entire western bloc could not fill because of the high costs due to that remoteness and the climate.

Take Iraq as an example, one single country in a limited area with a decent climate and easy to reach routs surrounding it from the sea, land and air. There has been no Russia in Iraq for more than 14 years. Could the west fill the vacuum that it created by overthrowing Saddam and manage to establish a modern governmental bodies functioning well in Iraq? Children who were born in 2003 are 14 years old today, and in less than 4 years they will be eligible serving in military. FOURTEEN fckng years dude and still people are getting killed in civil war by dozens everyday, and still no accomplishments... What? Iran? Yes, they were influencing local movements against the westerners who in the first place "SHOULDN'T BE" in there. Do you think Russia would have let west sneaking in easily to those remote lands of Russia? Hell no, they would do whatever they could to make the west trip and fall. So think of it, filling the vacuum, say in Chukotka or in Yakutia, once Russian Federation ceased to exist... Damn...

This sh.t is not that simple as it is depicted in those MSM craps Mr Arveladze...

Don't you forget; Geography is "DESTINY" !

 

The Ukraine was destroyed while in crisis; this is not a legitimate way to disband a country; in fact you should have waited until the crisis is over, and only then hold referendums on independence of....

 

The basic problem is simply multi-track, but is mainly due to these factors:

1.
Because of the history, Russians live not only in Russia but in all former Soviet republics which are now their own countries are considered a large minority ... so also in Ukraine and this often causes tensions in the population!

2.
The dissolution of the USSR had been badly done and would have had to run much better in many things, so also in the question of borders!
I know, of course, why the Crimea was / is part of Ukraine, but in my opinion it was idiotic that the Crimea was not directly part of Russia, but remained in the Ukraine and Russia only leased Sevastopl as a naval base. In my eyes Yelcin had totally failed here ... but maybe he was already drunk at noon, who knows!

3.
That Russia has annexed the Crimea is out of point 2 no problem for me and I see no reason for the sanctions to be completely honest. So I stand clearly in opposition to the politics of my country, but I see no problem as always, but I care only facts and facts, no stupid talk, no matter from whom!

4.
it looks a bit different with the Donbass, because here I am not so on the Russian side. This eternal stupid talk about the few Nazis in the ukraine goes to me and the reproaches against the Ukrainian government are annoying. I also regard the Maidan coup as justified, as Russalnd clearly supports the rebels, just as the West supports Ukraine for me.
It is irrational that no one would care for the Donbass if not being an economically important region. The stupid is that there can be no real reconciliation here, because on both sides too much blood has flowed and every solution is difficult, if at all a reasonable solution for both parties is possible ...
Ukraine will certainly not surrender the Donbass and the rebels will certainly not subordinate Kiev again.

 

Nice one, but since I am there anyway: referendums held before in Ukraine were getting rejected by it's government:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_referendum,_1994
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_constitutional_referendum,_2000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans...991#Refusal_of_the_Supreme_Council_of_Ukraine


So, I am not surprised that during the ongoing coup in capital and massive riots people took the opportunity to stand for their rights.


As for USSR - it was dissoluted almost half of year after August Coup, in safe conditions, with participation of president Gorbachev, even if he disapproved that initiative. People of RF, Belarus, Ukraine and other states made their choise, and chose to dissolute the Soviet Union, and the Communist Party along with it. Just so you know.

 

It went bankrupt and it had no choice. Ninian, you fail to provide proofs earlier, I still await?

 

Everybody dreamed thecSU would crumble, it did, was bankrupted, preceded by its defeat in Afghanistan. So nothing is impossible. Return of Manchuria to China, Karelia to Finland, konigsberg to Germany, Moldova( Bessarabia), to Romania, etc.

 

Rebels as in "russian" troops there, nor should Ukraine surrender it. And it is silly talk about "Nazis", mainly concocted by pro russian elements.

 

Blah-blah-blah, mr. "farmer".

 

That's the best you've got? No proofs? Yeah, I raise crops, food, I feed people.

 

And American advisors and mercenaries on the other "side" too...

 

Allegedly, throw in some German intelligence in there too, it was a brief stomping ground from 41-45?)

 

If you would stop this hint to WW-2 it would be better ... but I know that it is liked to do by many without sense at least.

Anyway, I will not deny that our agencies are involved there too, in what kind whatever... but so what, its their duty to act in favor of our country

 

"Allegedly", I say, but more the Russians in that respect. The hints can be stopped, on my part here, but others here....well.))

 

Dude I've been trying to find your reply within the quote of my post and now I'm blind. Thanks.

 

Great post. Everything else is secondary to geography/geopolitics. From a defensive stand point and if you wish to exert control from an offensive stand point.

Hence Crimea and the Ukraine have priceless value for both sides. For Russia they are both offensive and defensive. For France and NATO it's offensive because if the Ukraine stops having a rebellion and joins NATO.. Russia will then be unable to strategically defend vital infrastructure and key cities.

I'm not surprised at Macron saying France IE NATO doesn't recognize Russia's annexation of Crimea. Without it Russia has no port on the Black Sea that's the obvious.. I think the not so obvious is the US and NATO kinda pushing back on Crimea to slow down Russia's activity in the Ukraine. What I mean is we are about to step up our military aid to the Ukraine in support of the government against their rebels...Russia knows that if the rebellion is smashed and the Ukraine is admitted to NATO.. with its current borders? ..checkmate.

Basically I think this Marcon statement about Crimea is just NATO being nervous that Putin is going to decide to invade the Ukraine because the US is about to get involved heavily. So it's an attempt to muddy the water.

 

Oh no... They have been way too busy with putting up with what we bring upon them lately )

I grant you the honor of starting a thread about this.

German Police Warned Lawmakers of Possible Turkish Spying
BERLIN — German federal police have warned parliamentarians they may have been spied on by Turkish intelligence and may also face potential security risks from Turkish nationalists, Die Welt newspaper reported on Wednesday.

https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/06/27/world/europe/27reuters-germany-turkey-spying.html?_r=0

Ich bin very sad