That was simply stupid.
Anyway...
BBC has a pretty good Q&A on whats what. They downplay alot (like usual) but they also hit on most key points.
1. The main pipelines supplying Europe much of its energy goes through Ukriane.
2. The western Ukriane is pro-west the eastern pro-russian.
3. The President is pro-west the PM pro-russian.
4. Any kind of armed conflict in Ukraine would bring with it the risk of a Russian intervention, which would cause major east-west tensions.
5. The PM has a major power bloc and even if this is resolved peacefully the stage is set for a conflict in the future.
Quote:
Q&A: Ukraine political crisis
Ukraine has plunged into a new political crisis, with the president trying to dissolve parliament, and the parliament refusing to comply.
Rival demonstrations have been taking place in the streets of Kiev, raising fears of possible clashes.
The two sides are the same that faced each other in the Orange Revolution, in 2004, which resulted in the pro-Western Viktor Yushchenko becoming president.
The loser of the revolution, Viktor Yanukovych, became prime minister in August 2006 after building a majority in parliament, with the help of Communists and Socialists.
Since then the two men have been in a state of constant confrontation.
What is the latest row about?
President Yushchenko accuses Mr Yanukovych of trying to usurp power by poaching parliamentary deputies from other blocs, in violation of the constitution. Mr Yanukovych and his supporters have likened the president's decree dissolving parliament to a coup d'etat, and say they will take no notice unless the constitutional court rules that it is legally valid.
Has the president the power to dissolve parliament?
The constitution lists three situations in which the president has the right to dissolve parliament, and the poaching of deputies is not among them. On the other hand, it does say presidential decrees must be fulfilled.
Why have Mr Yushchenko and Mr Yanukovych been unable to work together for the last eight months?
They have been involved in a power struggle, hinging partly on different interpretations of the constitution. Constitutional reforms carried out as a result of the Orange Revolution weakened the president and strengthened parliament - but Mr Yushchenko and Mr Yanukovych have clashed over the details.
Would new elections resolve the problem?
It depends on the result.
KEY DATES
21 Nov 04 Yanukovych declared winner of presidential election - protests begin
3 Dec 04 Election annulled
11 Jan 05 Yushchenko declared winner of re-run election
8 Sep 05 Yushchenko sacks Tymoshenko government
26 Mar 06 Yanukovych party wins most votes in general election
3 Aug 06 After four-month deadlock, Yushchenko agrees Yanukovych can be PM
2 Apr 07 Yushchenko issues decree dissolving parliament
It is quite possible that Mr Yanukovych's party will be returned again as the largest party, in which case little would have changed. The only other leader with a chance of leading a parliamentary majority after the election is Mr Yushchenko's Orange Revolution ally, Yulia Tymoshenko.
She and Mr Yushchenko fell out when he sacked her as prime minister in September 2005. They are now on the same side again, but it is not clear how strong the relationship is.
Can the constitutional court resolve the problem?
In theory, yes. One of the encouraging things about this crisis is that both sides justify their actions in terms of the law and the constitution, so they ought to obey court rulings.
On the other hand, both sides have already made appeals to the court over the last eight months, and the court has yet to rule on a single case. So the court may not provide a quick way out.
Could the political course once again be determined by mass protests?
This seems unlikely. Mass street protests occurred in 2004, as a result of years of frustration bottled up during the presidency of Leonid Kuchma. As the protests gathered strength, euphoria swept through the pro-Western part of the population that was most hungry for change. These same people are now mostly deeply disillusioned by the last two years of political compromises and internal bickering.
Mr Yanukovych's supporters have no track record of mass street protests, and are hampered by the fact that their power base is in the east of the country rather than in the capital, Kiev.
Is violence possible?
It cannot be ruled out when large groups of opposing demonstrators take to the streets simultaneously. However, rival demonstrators behaved impeccably in 2004. Ukraine's post-Soviet history has been marred by constant friction between the president and parliament, but there has been little violence, apart from occasional fisticuffs on the floor of the parliament.
The defence ministry has said the army is supporting the president. The position of other forces controlled by the interior ministry is unclear.
Serious political turmoil would definitely not be in the interests of the financial backers of either Mr Yushchenko or Mr Yanukovych.
Could the country split?
This is always a worry in Ukraine when politicians seen as pro-Western (Mr Yushchenko) and pro-Russian (Mr Yanukovych) are in conflict with one another.
It is broadly true that the west of the country is pro-European and the east is pro-Russian. However, Mr Yanukovych has not been militantly pro-Russian as prime minister. He even intervened to stop regions in the east of the country unilaterally introducing Russian as a second state language - even though upgrading the status of the Russian language was one of his manifesto pledges.
Does this crisis matter to the wider world?
Any kind of armed conflict in Ukraine would bring with it the risk of a Russian intervention, which would cause major east-west tensions.
A long-running political stand-off could paralyse the country, but would probably not have many repercussions overseas. Russia was unhappy about what it regarded as Western interference in the Orange Revolution, and the West was critical of Russia's open support for Mr Yanukovych, but relations were not seriously affected.
The main pipeline delivering Russian gas to Europe passes through Ukraine, but there would not appear to be any threat to supplies at present.
Why is Mr Yushchenko so disturbed by Mr Yanukovych's attempt to poach deputies from other blocs?
He says the constitution only allows whole parliamentary blocs to change sides, not individuals.
Mr Yanukovych currently controls about 250 seats in parliament. If he were to reach 300, he could reject presidential vetoes, vote through changes to the constitution, and impeach the president
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6521707.stm
Its a major crisis that has the possibilty to send the entire continent of Europe into trumoil if it gets nasty...its the latest in a series and its highly unlikely regardles of outcome to be the last.
Russia has alot of desires in teh Ukriane..and would like nothing more to take it all back or a significant chunk of it. Problems like this are in their interests for very overt reason one of them being simply making it hard for the Ukraine to join NATO.
__________________
McCain/Palin 2008

"We make war that we may live in peace"
"Peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever."
"Keep that faith,keep your courage,stick together, stay strong,do not yield,do not flinch,stand up,we're Americans,we'll never surrender they will"
http://members.cox.net/neddy/bobhope_kerfuffles.wmv
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RnfflRNpwKA
http://youtube.com/watch?v=j-QYIP7o2-A