Ruger wrote:
Наверное что-то интересное, жаль что по-немецки
Thanks, Google Chrome:
CRIMEAN CRISIS
understanding of Russia, please!
No, not Putin, but the arrogance of the West carried the Ukraine crisis. A GUEST POST BY EUGEN RUGE
THE TIME N ° 11/2014
Updated 7 March 2014 12:16 clock 425 comments
I imagine, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov would be, let's say during the riots in Los Angeles in 1992, flew to California and had called for the overthrow of the Governor.
You could have found strange?
And as you found it, that the German and U.S. Secretary of State to Kiev traveled to assist in public speeches the rebellion against the local president?
I was born in Siberia, because my father was in the labor camp. I is the current Stalinisation Russia quite suspect. I am anything but a friend of Putin , and certainly not of Yanukovych - even if you will accuse me of that, because place in this republic is always someone who one coming from the former East questioner reflex standard with the then-go-but- over argument abwatscht.
This item is from the latest issue of TIME that you can purchase online or at the kiosk.
This item is from the latest issue of TIME that you can purchase online or at the kiosk.
And yet I feel the coverage in our country at the moment to be extremely one-sided. Where are the questions? Where are the doubts? Where are the standards for the evaluation of policy actions?
A few days ago Yanukovych was in a leading German newspaper compared to Gaddafi . Yes, it is yet? Everyone knows that Yanukovych just three years ago, democratic , has been elected President of Ukraine. Certainly can protest against a president is, for example, when you think he would have a need to sign Association Agreement , of which, however, even the former vice president of the European Union, Günter Verheugen, says that it "opens no clear perspective for this country." But how do we know that the majority of the Ukrainian population is actually for this agreement in this form? And even if that were the case: When did the Western Europeans accept this kind of plebiscite that does not even ask for numbers, but according to presence on the road?
Or is accepted, what is the economic and geopolitical interests of Western Europe?
EUGEN RUGE
© Arne Dedert / dpa
Eugen Ruge
The writer Eugen Ruge was born in 1954 in the Russian Sos'va. Two years ago he won with his novel In times of diminishing light (Random House), the German Book Prize
If the population is an autonomous republic of Russia wants to split off - as in the case of Chechnya - this is the unanimous approval of Western policy. But if the majority of the population of an autonomous republic to unite with Russia wants, then that is considered a disaster?
The population of the Crimea is about 58 percent of Russians. One of the first plans of the new - not selected - Ukrainian government was to abolish Russian as a second official language . Is it really inconceivable that the population of the Crimea majority sees this as a hostile act?
The International Monetary Fund calls from Ukraine a drastic increase in municipal rates and a wage freeze. At the same time several subsidies to industry and agriculture, and social services for the citizens should be deleted. This has also already promised the new Prime Minister. Is it really so unbelievable that there are parts of the population that does not want that?
Page 2/2: Neither Russia nor the West can do what they want
The donation of the original Russian Crimea to Ukraine took place under the conditions of the Soviet Union. This donation was an arbitrary act, which would have to be rejected basically from any Democrats. How can you give away a country, including its population! In all cases, because the peoples of Europe wanted to get rid of their forced upon by communist regimes State affiliations that West Europeans were in a hurry going to encourage this process and support. And is now called the " Russian invasion ", and indeed even before such a start?
The United States of America have their " vital interests "have often defended: in Cuba, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Agent Orange, with high-tech bombs, drones - and they do so to this day . Why no one comes to the idea of the United States excluded from the G-8?
Who really wants to defend our vital interests, which should be keep in mind the following: Russia is a great power on the decline. It has lost in recent years, dangerous influence and power. In any case long been encircled by U.S. military bases , it is now surrounded by military bases in former socialist countries, recently even in former Soviet republics. Really belongs to it as much fantasy to imagine how difficult it is for many Russians - is to deal with it - in government and in the population?
Humanity forgets quickly. We are repeatedly escape the nuclear disaster by a hair. A new edition of the Cold War, in an act too often on the defensive great power that still has the ability to destroy the planet plays a main role would be a scenario that one - should rather not play through - my advice. This does not mean that the Russians are allowed to do what they want. But it does not mean that the West is allowed to do what he wants. You have to set the drone war's not the same.
... and even then it's rare that you'll be going there...
