Although I do think that Russia could get all its objectives
through diplomacy, at this point it is evident that Russia’s objective is to
divide Ukraine and annex parts of Ukraine.
That choice is unfortunate, both for Russia and for Europe.
Unfortunate and unnecessary. There are better ways for Russian to obtain Russia’s
objectives, which I will discuss in the lectures next week.
we “only” face a political crisis, that is a constitutional crisis, and then a
financial crisis.
with CSTO; I think that desire is mutual, and think it is desirable to see NATO
and CSTO merge, though that is obviously a long-term goal.
Ukraine’s constitutional crisis is understandable, and has arguable legal legitimacy, I don’t
think the Russian Federation’s approach is best adapted to serve Russia’s
national interests, or the interests of the Slavic peoples.
Regarding Ukraine’s constitutional crisis there are two
issues:
binding referenda. If indeed Ukraine’s constitution requires a national
referendum regarding Ukraine’s territorial organization, and it does http://www.president.gov.ua/en/content/chapter03.html then the proposed referendum is a non-binding plebiscite.
“Citizens belonging to national minorities shall be
guaranteed, in accordance with law, the right to education in their native
language, or to study their native language at the state and communal
educational establishments or through national cultural societies.”
http://www.president.gov.ua/en/content/chapter02.html
language. When a State prohibits a language, that is often the first step;
then, expulsions. Then, mass murder.
Please read this article at your convenience:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2161503
similar crises elsewhere for example, Syria. Here are my publications on humanitarian
Intervention and blockades. http://amor.cms.hu-berlin.de/~engleeri/international/18BarryLRev1.htm
http://amor.cms.hu-berlin.de/~engleeri/international/Minn.pdf
constructing the rule of international law.
I recommend reading rt.com not because I think anyone has a
monopoly on truth, but because no one has a monopoly on truth.