General Discussion

The entire situation originated from an attempt by the EU to draw the Ukraine into its economic sphere of power (complete with bailout loans and austerity programs), and Russia's attempt to offer a much sweeter counter deal. The government of th4e Ukraine went with the counter deal ... it would have been financially irresponsible to make another choice.

But that decision met with the intense disapproval of a large chunk of the Ukrainian people ... who took to the streets (apparently with at least some EU support) and toppled the government (which was, let's face it, both corrupt and barely competent).

Now Russia had long broadcasted that they would at some point react to encroachment in its direction by the EU and/or NATO. So I was not surprised when they began supporting a counter coup insurgency. Nor was I surprised that they jumped Crimea, given its strategic importance to them. What amazed me was the utter lack of preparedness by the EU and NATO for these moves. It was as if they believed it inconceivable. I thought it was inevitable.

Everything was going their way until an airliner got shot down. Both sides accuse the other of doing the deed. I am concerned that there has been a shortage of conclusive evidence either way ... though we have been told such evidence exists. Recently, Putin challenged the West to release the cockpit voice recordings ... one wonders why that has not been done, and why other evidential disclosures have not been made. Let us as citizens beware the fog of war ... both sides of the issue are blowing lots of smoke right now.

In any event, the loss of the airliner finally prompted the governments of Europe to actually get off their butts and join with our President in formulating sanctions and other plans of action. If the Russians did not expect a NATO reaction of this sort, then they are as incompetent and/or arrogant as the EU planners.

NATO has no choice but to position itself to repel further incursions, and prepare military options for dealing with the situation. The cease fire agreement, which resolves none of the political matters, is a responsible action by both sides. It slows down the rush towards war. Neither side really wants an engagement between main NATO and Russian forces, with its potential for rapid escalation into an exchange of battlefield tactical nukes ... and thus the risk of broader escalation.

More significantly, as observed by no less than Henry Kissinger, this presents a crisis to the "New World Order" constructed after the Cold War. I agree, and further hold it was inevitable.

The neo-cons proclaimed "an end to history" ... the supreme triumph of capitalism. Well, the supreme triumph has produced multiple conflicts, ethnic cleansing, imposition of brutal economic policies, and massive wealth inequality in the nations of the West ... it wasn't all it could have been, shall we say. And it's excesses have produced consequences. New alliances are forming to oppose that western consensus ... and along with them, the beginnings of separate financial systems.

What happens next? I have no idea. I just hope everyone keeps their cool ... in a very real sense, we are back in cold war conditions, but without the training for and experience of that kind of world.

Trav