The president from Russia, Vladímir Putin, urged today
to impede the escalade of the violence and to achieve the prompt stabilization
of the situation in Ukraine during phone conversations that it maintained with
several western leaders. As the Kremlin, Putin informed it approached the
crisis in the neighboring country with the German chancellor, Angela Merkel,
the first British minister, David Cameron, and the president of the Council of
the European Union, Herman Van Rompuy. He stood out the enormous importance of
impeding an escalade of the violence and the necessity of a prompt
stabilization in Ukraine, it points out an official statement diffused by the
Russian Presidency.
In these moments Putin is playing another time with
europa the NATO and the western world and he makes it because he leans on in
the sad experience of Georgia and Ossetia of the South that we live all in the
2008 this time or a lot I make a mistake or it passes the same thing in Crimea
and Ukraine again, because Russia what needs of its old world takes it for the
force and I list, Russia knows very well that its former satellites don't have
the but minimum possibility to counteract its military force that is mobilized
with a speed that has already wanted for yes "The Wehrmacht", fact
that surprisingly have contributed to that is if the Westerners for
distrustful, one can say that before the breakup of the USSR we don't trust
completely and among some and other the disarmament of all the Soviet former
new and independent nations was preferred.
To Russia we put it to him in tray he has the same
defense space in front of Europe and the NATO without a ruble and their
mobility cost him and force allows him to take to protect or to make what gives
him the desire in this belt before steel and now of butter, but this doesn't
respond my "question I title" it can be Crimea the modern Sarajevo and
to loosen, in this case the III war world, difficult answer but I will dare to
respond that NOT and in that base myself then in that Russia continues being a
monster of cardboard stone that bases its position of force on the fear of the
other thing that if he knows how to manage and very well, Russia doesn't want
wars for that reason with anybody neither to favor neither in against they see
that he made with Iraq, with Iran, and that he makes with the wild Syria, and
this makes it because it cannot maintain the cost that supposes to really
intervene in a war neither although they declare it others.
Russia kept Crimea because it interests him vastly
since it is the armor of the natural refuge of its naval fleet anchored in
Sebastopol port city of Ukraine, summoned in the peninsula of Crimea. I believe
that this time Russia is right because strategically if he wants to defend its
interests and because Crimea was not also Ukrainian but rather for politicians'
reasons it has been as a ball that has passed of Russian to Ukraine and finally
it is considered an independent republic inside Ukraine, this before the drift occidental
of this it can never interest Russia, so we have two scenarios one to free Crimea
of Ukraine and that he makes comfortable at Russia like friend and protector,
and two displace all the military force from the NATO to the area to tell him
that not to Russia.
The first option believes that it would finish with
the problem because Russia cannot sustain Ukraine for what doesn't interest him
we said to conquer it again but if one doesn't make he will make like he made
with Georgia it will put its army in Crimea and he will make like he/she made
with Ossetia of the south, take out me of here if you can Ukraine and you finishes
it cannot happen of here but another time was in evidence the UE and the NATO I
sincerely would prefer to avoid it, and it would convince Ukraine that is not
necessary him the peninsula for anything and that he worries about its national
stability.
The second option to face Russia is simply a question
of strategy of the UE and the NATO so quick would fall Crimea in hands of the
NATO like in hands of Russia, the problem is in that if he falls in europa we
would have a focus of guerrillas and of expense of money that now I don't
believe that it suits us, but this should decide it the judicious ones
political and military western, and frankly I don't believe that it is
necessary to take a risk for a peninsula that up to now has not given any problem,
me what I believe, is that that more it interests to europa and the NATO, it is
that as much as bigger expenses have Russia less you win of entering in
military adventures he had left them.