It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK Foreign Secretary forming a Coalition against Russian 'Aggression'

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   

UK Foreign Secretary forming a Coalition against Russian 'Aggression'


news.bbc.co.uk

UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband is in Ukraine for talks on forming a coalition against Russian "aggression".

He is meeting leaders in Kiev, a day after Russia formally recognised the independence of Georgia's two breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Nato members have called on Moscow to reverse the step amid Western concerns Ukraine could be the next flashpoint.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   
I was at first skeptical that Ukraine would become embroiled in this regional conflict. However it is now centre-stage for 'coalition-building'.

I have to say I think this is somewhat heavy-handed. Surely quiet, closed-doors discussions involving all parties would be more conducive to mutual understanding than this type of posturing?

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Yes, it is all developing very awkwardly. But Ukrainian behaviour was predictable. They do not want to loose Crimea to Russian federation. And situation in Crimea is very similar to one in South Osetia/ Abkhazia. Crimea is not uncontrollable autonomic republic of course, but it has Russain fleet and a lot of Russian citizens.
It was a known and predictable huge cost (NATO in Ukraine) that Russian leaders choose to pay just to get tiny strips of land with no real gain in S.Osetia/Abkhazia. Just another weird desicion among other (almost all, actually) desicions in this conflict that i cannot understand.



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Reply to ZeroKnowledge


You sound like you know what you're talking about. Are you/your family perhaps originally from that region, and now living in Israel?

I too have perceived that Russia appears to have made some strange miscalculations, (which I outlined in another thread, here).

Would you agree with my suspicion that all this is at least partly due to a lack of top-rate diplomatic thinkers both in the East and the West? Is it that governments find it easier these days to rely on military power than brain power?



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 


My parents were born in Ukraine (actually Soviet Union of course), and lived for certain time in the Crimea. So when i visit my grandmother i get a very ..hm... long lecture about the situation. And if she tortures me , why i cannot offload it here?




Would you agree with my suspicion that all this is at least partly due to a lack of top-rate diplomatic thinkers both in the East and the West?

Yes , i agree. But since ATS had influenced me , i find it weird that there are not only capable politicians lacking. What about professional diplomats?Or what about Condolisa Rice's whose whole career was about Soviet Union/Russia. She does not know that the thing Russian leaders AND public want the most is at least a pretending of respect? Missiles, NATO - all junk. If Bush said how he respects Russia and its regained power - and then placed his missiles i am sure that there was much less noise.
As for Russian diplomacy - Russia is ran by ex KGB guys. They could be doing great job in making it stronger, but secret service guys usually are not required to be great diplomats. Somebody pisses you off - kill him with poisoned umbrella, poison his tea and such. So really i had no hopes from the East guys. But West, West.....



posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Reply to ZeroKnowledge


I presume your last remark was a translation of 'но запад, это запад' ('but the West is the West') implying you'd expect more from occidental governments. I suppose it all has to do with who's in power at any given moment. Much as I dislike certain aspects of President Clinton's term of office you have to grant it to him that he applied his intellect to international affairs in a serious fashion.

As far as respect goes, I think you hit the proverbial nail on the head. Bully-boy tactics seem to have taken over where diplomacy once held sway, and arrogance only breeds contempt and enmity. What we need is leaders of substance, not war-mongers (whether of the Cold variety, or otherwise).



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join