Defying Russian warnings, Moldova and Georgia head for EU pact

Defying Russian warnings, Moldova and Georgia head for EU pact

CHISINAU/TBILISI (Reuters) - Undeterred by the conflict triggered by Ukraine's swing towards Europe, the former Soviet republics of Moldova and Georgia will sign a trade and political pact with the European Union this month with Russia warning both countries against the move.

The two small countries - Moldova has a population of just over 3.5 million and Georgia 4.5 million - see the signing of an association agreement as the crucial step towards mainstream Europe, leading to eventual membership of the powerful EU trading bloc.

But, as has been shown by their regional neighbor Ukraine, Russia sees their westward move further away from Moscow's sphere of influence as a geo-political setback that could threaten its markets too.

Last November, Russia persuaded a now-ousted Ukrainian leader to pull out of an identical pact with the EU. When protests then chased him from office, Russia, in a backlash, annexed Crimea, and armed pro-Russian separatist groups sprang up in Ukraine's east and the battle there is still raging.

How Russia - which went to war with Georgia in 2008 - will react now remains the big unknown but officials have warned of "possible consequences".

Putin once again is meddling into the internal affairs of Moldova and Georgia, who are looking at eventually joining the EU. Putin has warned them against the move, which makes no sense since both nations are sovereign and the population of both countries support the move.

I really don't know where Putin gets off thinking he can dictate foreign policy to sovereign nations. Maybe Putin would get somewhere with his neighbors if he didn't act like He / Russian are better than Moldova and Georgia.

The cold war is over with.
The days of the Soviet Union are over with.
Trying to argue sovereign nations are somehow beholden to Russia because of their location and Russia's BS claim of "near abroad" and sphere of influence is insane (like Putin).

So if Putin does not get his way he throws a tempter tantrum and threatens actions against these 2 nations.

There is absolutely no justification for Russia's actions and no amount of spin is going to convince anyone that Russia is justified in doing this.

"There is an aggressive attitude from Russia not only towards us, but towards any ex-Soviet state which has European aspirations. But this does not mean that we will reject our free choice," said Irakly Sesiashvili, the head of the parliamentary defense and security committee.

God the level of arrogance from Russia is mind blowing -

"It is Georgia's sovereign right to sign the Association Agreement with the EU, but it should also understand possible consequences," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich told a news conference last month.

"Georgia's sovereign rights should be exercised without damaging the rights of others ... It is very important to understand the consequences which the upcoming signing of the Association Agreement between Georgia and the EU on June 27 may have."

Its their right to choose, so long as they choose Russia. The association agreements and eventually joining the EU is an economic choice, not military.

Putin's administration needs to go.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Are you sure that Putin is meddling in 'international affairs'?

His Foreign Minister explained that after WW2 it was agreed by the allies that Europe would not move right up onto Russian borders and as far as he was concerned that pact or agreement is still in force.

I don't know the truth of this but its something that clearly the Russians feel very strongly about.

Surely there is a way to institute trade better diplomatically than the way it is being done at present in that area, which naturally helps feed paranoia and is probablyt instituted by arms dealers and war bankers whispering in Obama's ear. The USA is coming out of Afganistan (in a very Obama way), so perhaps an era of peaceful TLC would be better for its people?

With Russia's pairing with China of whom Europe is a very big customer, surely we can diplomatically broker a deal or else we are simply paying our luxuriously foreign living Diplomats far too much money for the job they achieve.

I do think country's have the right to trade and align generally where they wish, but surely we should deal with the issue of Russian borders simply because these new country's could be used as bases for American missiles if they were to align with Europe/NATO - which is probably Putin's worry.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The OP must either be a victim of the US government propaganda war on their own people or they are one of the perpetrators of this propaganda.

If ATS people are interested in learning about the truth of whats going on and why its going on in the Ukranine, I suggest you read Paul Craig Roberts. He has many good articles on this.

Incidentally, he also has good information on the why and how the price of gold is being deliberately being held down.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Well it seems that there are plans made by the leader of Gagauzia, a autonomous teritory in Moldova, together with a bishop of the Moldovan Orthodox Church, which is subordinate to the Russian Orthodox Church, and others, to disrupt the signing of the association treaty with the EU by organizing some sort of civil unrest prior to that date.

The info comes from a press release of the Moldovan SIS(security service) :

www.sis.md...

And for those claiming that the west is trying to subvert or even destroy Russia I have one thing to ask:

1) Why is it that all the former SSR's are trying in one way or another to get away from the Russian influence and want to associate themselves with the EU or NATO, without being coerced in any way by either entity ?

a reply to: Shiloh7

Your argument about possible US bases is not relevant to the conversation since it deals solely with EU membership which affects trade.

Georgia nor Moldova can be a threat to Russia so again the concern there is nothing but an excuse Russia uses to try and justify their actions.

Nothing occurs in Russia without putin knowing about it. Especially when it deals with foreign relations.

a reply to: learnatic

Ironic that you attack the op and level an asinine accusation without once refuting the facts the article contains.

Think you can suck it up for a minute and participate on topic and, you know, actually add to the conversation?

a reply to: Dutzy

Thanks for the additional information and a very good question. I have asked it a few times in the other Russian threads and for some reason Pro Russians cant bring themselves to provide an answer other than their "near abroad" fantasy.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The most aggressive country and it's leader gets a nobel peace price..

Or like the west/US wants to help the rebels/terrorists fighting Assad.. but they have a problem the same kind of people (probaly coming also from Libya) took a large Iraqi city: www.bbc.com...

For many Assad is a true hero for others it seems want to get rid of them for reasons we don't hear or really know.

Just saying things are messed up and picking a side who's right or wrong is hard to see or really know.. it's just a big mess where nobody's taking blame but solely pointing fingers.

a reply to: Plugin

Since the most aggressive country does not have anything to do with the Nobel Peace Prize, maybe you should take that up with the Norwegians eh?

As for the reminder of your argument you might want to check the title of the thread since it has nothing to do with Assad, Libya or Iraq.

As for your very last comment you apparently didn't read the article since Russia has no business telling Moldova or Georgia how to run their affairs. Either Russia will respect those decisions and but out, as they are fond of telling everyone else although if Ukraine is an example Russia will meddle simply because of Putin's arrogance and egotistical delusions where he thinks he is the Czar in charge of the Soviet union.

I doubt you or Putin would go along with the possibility of all other nations supporting regions that make up Russia to cede and go it on their own. Once that is done we can move military units into those areas to protect them from Russian aggression.

Whats good for the goose eh?

a reply to: Xcathdra

You didn't mention the Foreign Minister's comments about a pact not to move Europe right up to Russia's borders which in effect has been broken if it existed. This is one of Russia's problems and it won't deal without this issue being resolv ed. Once as important an individual as the Foreign Minister brings this point up, it can't be ignorred.

With Europe depending on Russian Gas supplies, Europe is not in a position to argue the toss next winter unless it suddenly invents a new form of fuel.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You really do lose all credibility when you harp on about Russia's intentions and Putin's Soviet aspirations. One look at world history and wars since the fall of the Soviet Union tell us all we need to know about belligerent nations and imperialism.... and it is NOT Russia that is acting that way!
Quite simply, there are those who want a war and the destruction of Russia, whatever the cost, which has been a long term goal in plain sight. Unless of course you blame the Russians for having their borders so close to NATO and US (same thing) military bases. I mean, how provocative having a border so close to the US military!

For a conspiracy related site, you sure do spend a lot of time pushing the "offical" line on this subject, totally ignoring anything to the contrary.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Again 2 countries making arrangements that deal / affect a 3rd party sovereign nation is the problem.

If the West was going to invade Russia it would have happened at the end of WWII when General Patton pushed in constantly. We could have moved during the cold war when issues arose in Poland, and when the Warsaw Pact invaded Czechoslovakia.

The days of invading a nation for territorial gain are over with. Something Putin does not seem to grasp.

Do you really think using the excuse of proximity as justification? Because if that's the case then the US has every right to remove Cuba, an ally of Russias, as it presents a threat to the US "Near-abroad". Just as Russian ties with Columbia and Venezuela create the same issue.

I don't see the US or the EU invading Kazakhstan for joining Russian economic bloc instead of the EU.

The argument on what country can go where and when is not justification for Russia to interfere in the sovereign affairs of another nation. If you and Russia are going to argue from that vantage then you open the door for the same measures to be applied.

Not one NATO country that has a direct border with Russia hosts a NATO base nor do they host NATO forces. That recently changed because of Russians invasion of Ukraine and belligerent attitude towards smaller countries Putin thinks he can boss around.

a reply to: Shiloh7

With Europe depending on Russian Gas supplies, Europe is not in a position to argue the toss next winter unless it suddenly invents a new form of fuel. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

You do understand that Russia isn't the only place for Europe to get oil, and it has already been said by Saudi Arabia that they would produce enough to cover any shortfall that has arisen because of Russias little venture into Ukraine.

www.ibtimes.com...

So it seems Europe doesn't have to worry too much if Russia decides to play games with their oil.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I believe he was talking about gas, not oil.

What post "WWII" agreement? The Soviet Union was given the eastern half of Europe by the U.S. and the U.K.. It took three generations for that arrogance and stupidity to correct itself.

Zero credibility to those who think this is about forcing a war with Russia. U.S. military presence is Europe is at an all time low, post WWII.

This is a direct result of Russian expansionism. Simple.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

It appears the price of oil is being inflated to put it over $100 by an ally to Russia and Iran - China.

China’s Record Oil Hoarding Seen Keeping Crude Above $100

China is hoarding crude at the fastest pace in at least a decade, shielding itself from supply disruptions and helping keep prices above $100 a barrel.

The country imported a record volume in April as it emulates steps taken by the U.S. in the 1970s to create a strategic petroleum reserve, government data show. Chinese President Xi Jinping is building stockpiles as his nation clashes with Vietnam over resources in the South China Sea and faces potential risks to oil sales from Russia, Africa and the Middle East because of sanctions and violence.

Click link for remainder of article.

It also supports what I have been saying about how Russia and China view each other. This will give China wiggle room by creating a strategic petroleum reserve.

Bulgaria Suspends Involvement in Russia’s South Stream Pipeline



Im thinking Putin is upset about Georgia and Moldova moving to the EU because it directly affects Russia's ability to annex more territory without having a direct confrontation with the European Union.

Like I said everything Russia is doing is having the opposite results.

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: Xcathdra

You didn't mention the Foreign Minister's comments about a pact not to move Europe right up to Russia's borders which in effect has been broken if it existed. This is one of Russia's problems and it won't deal without this issue being resolv ed. Once as important an individual as the Foreign Minister brings this point up, it can't be ignorred.

With Europe depending on Russian Gas supplies, Europe is not in a position to argue the toss next winter unless it suddenly invents a new form of fuel.

Their is no pact. Nothing in writing or on any record. Some Russians say their was a verble agreement that NATO (not the EU) would not expand east. This is at a time when the Soviets wanted everything detail in writing as German unification began. Even the disposition of Soviet war cemetaties in eastern states was put in writing. So if such and agreement existed they would have wanted in writing. Some people in the West think something might have been said while at the same time people like Gorbachev's foriegn minister says nothing of the kind was promised.

So why the confusion? Well most likely it came down to some low level meetings where some low level Soviet may have brought up the idea of NATO expanding east. To the rest of the Soviets and the Western personel they most likely brushed this aside as something not worry about because nobody at that time could imagine the complete collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union. It would be hard to get an agreement on something nobody could see coming.

As is nothing exists to prove any agreement was ever made which would be very odd for a time when the Soviets wanted everything spelled out on paper. So lets just put that puppy to bed.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
What post "WWII" agreement? The Soviet Union was given the eastern half of Europe by the U.S. and the U.K.. It took three generations for that arrogance and stupidity to correct itself.

Zero credibility to those who think this is about forcing a war with Russia. U.S. military presence is Europe is at an all time low, post WWII.

That's a bit misleading. There may be fewer troops, of course, but the destructive firepower in place is probably much higher than in the 1940's.

This is a direct result of Russian expansionism. Simple.

What Russian expansionism is that exactly because, so far, I am having a lot of trouble finding it. The only expansionism I can find is by the USA and it's controlled NATO organization.

a reply to: Flatcoat

I believe he was talking about gas, not oil.

No, he was talking about crude oil...

Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest producer and exporter of oil, on Monday sought to reassure markets by stating that it is willing to increase the supply of crude if the ongoing crisis in eastern Ukraine created a shortage.

www.ibtimes.com...

a reply to: Xcathdra

It appears the price of oil is being inflated to put it over $100 by an ally to Russia and Iran - China. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well the Saudi's say it shouldn't be any more than $100 a barrel, so this should get interesting especially if the Saudi's do ramp up production.