Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Has Vladimir Putin finally met his nemesis?

Options
  • 09-12-2013 11:55am
    #1
    josip
    Registered Users Posts: 13,641 ✭✭✭✭


    Putin's long hold on power has been based on a strong man persona, both politically and also personally. His image is very carefully controlled to the point where, at least outside of Russia, the annual "Putin in adveturous pose" photos have become a source of humour. I have no idea what the opinion within Russia is on this. Many commentators remark that Russians have historically preferred a strong man at the helm. He is undoubtedly very powerfully politically, but while quite fit and in good shape, it's probably more PR than substance.

    The latest battleground for Russia is Ukraine, and here it's looking increasingly likely he will come up against a genuine strong man. Possibly for the first time. Vitali Klitschko's pedigree of Heavyweight Boxing titles makes Putin appear like some kind of ageing Walter Mitty character. While Klitschko does not have the political experience of Putin, he does have the support of Tymoschenko and other Ukrainian political heavyweights. Considering that Putin may also be past his political prime, is it reasonable to expect Putin to be ineffective against a Klitschko inspired Ukraine?
    Would a defeat in Ukraine reverbate within Russia and damage Putin's reputation sufficiently that he would be in trouble at the next elections?
    Tagged:


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    I hope so, I would love to see Ukraine join the EU. The EU needs to expand more, develop the union with the goal of eventually bringing in Turkey, the other post Soviet states and eventually Russia.


  • Options
    #3
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I hope so, I would love to see Ukraine join the EU. The EU needs to expand more, develop the union with the goal of eventually bringing in Turkey, the other post Soviet states and eventually Russia.

    and then asia, and sure why not north america and mars maybe?


  • Options
    #4
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »
    and then asia, and sure why not north america and mars maybe?
    Well Russia would include parts of Asia.


  • Options
    #5
    Dannyboy83
    Registered Users Posts: 4,236 ✭✭✭Dannyboy83


    I think Klitschko will just be portrayed as nationalist scum by the Russians and Ukraine would probably split in two anyway along ethnic lines - Nationalist in the north-west, Russian in the south-East, before the whole country would join.

    You have to experience Russian hero worship to believe it. I don't think Putin is in any serious trouble. Subjectively, he still looks preferable to the Yeltsin years/Gorbachev years.

    The take I've seen on events from the Russian perspective is hilarious at times. Numerous Russian acquaintances have 'corrected me', that the Ukranians are protesting because they don't want to join the EU!:rolleyes:
    Putin and co are masters of manipulating the average Russian through propaganda.


    While we're on this topic, who within the EU decided that the Ukrainians should be allowed to join?
    Should we not take a vote on this.

    The idea makes me quite uncomfortable, they are the most corrupt society I have encountered. Mutual distrust of Russia isn't a good enough reason to justify attaching such a dangerous parasite to yourself imho - and before anyone says 'what about the PIIGS?', there is no comparison to be drawn here. Look at everything from their crime to HIV to corruption rates and think again.


  • Options
    #6
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Dannyboy83 wrote: »
    While we're on this topic, who within the EU decided that the Ukrainians should be allowed to join?
    Should we not take a vote on this.
    Who is "we"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,668 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Who is "we"?

    ... and that opens another debate on the whole concept of the perceived democratic deficit in the EU.


  • Options
    #8
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,668 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    double post


  • Options
    #9
    micosoft
    Registered Users Posts: 2,359 ✭✭✭micosoft


    Manach wrote: »
    ... and that opens another debate on the whole concept of the perceived democratic deficit in the EU.

    I fail to see the democratic nature of allowing "us" to vote on the future of another country...


  • Options
    #10
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Well Russia would include parts of Asia.

    As would Turkey... which you seemed to miss.


  • Options
    #11
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    micosoft wrote: »
    I fail to see the democratic nature of allowing "us" to vote on the future of another country...

    Er, surely the democratic side of it would be "do we let them join" and if randomly appointed non-elected committees are the people making that decision instead of either the national assemblies of member states or the individual citizens of all of the EU, then it's undemocratic.

    But the EU, over all, lacks any real democracy anyway, so feck it, let them in, there's shale gas to be had, hurrah.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    A Primal Nut
    Registered Users Posts: 5,949 ✭✭✭A Primal Nut


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I hope so, I would love to see Ukraine join the EU. The EU needs to expand more, develop the union with the goal of eventually bringing in Turkey, the other post Soviet states and eventually Russia.

    Why does it need to?


  • Options
    #13
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Seaneh wrote: »
    As would Turkey... which you seemed to miss.
    Yes.
    A Primal Nut wrote: »
    Why does it need to?
    To combine Russian raw materials with Western industry and technology.


  • Options
    #14
    A Primal Nut
    Registered Users Posts: 5,949 ✭✭✭A Primal Nut


    micosoft wrote: »
    I fail to see the democratic nature of allowing "us" to vote on the future of another country...

    By the same logic, if Saudi Arabia voted to join the EU, the existing EU states shouldn't have a say in that either?


  • Options
    #15
    jmayo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,092 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Yes.

    To combine Russian raw materials with Western industry and technology.

    Ah shure wouldn't the Russians just give away their goal, oil and gas to us if only they were in the EU. :rolleyes:

    Why wouldn't the Russians not want to develop their own industry and technology ?

    And since you are such a fan of adding members mind telling us then what Turkey brings to the party ?


  • Options
    #16
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,629 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    jmayo wrote: »

    And since you are such a fan of adding members mind telling us then what Turkey brings to the party ?

    Well what does Ireland add to the EU?


  • Options
    #17
    jmayo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,092 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    riffmongous wrote: »
    Well what does Ireland add to the EU?

    Dammed if I know at this stage ;)


  • Options
    #18
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    jmayo wrote: »
    Ah shure wouldn't the Russians just give away their goal, oil and gas to us if only they were in the EU. :rolleyes:

    Why wouldn't the Russians not want to develop their own industry and technology ?

    And since you are such a fan of adding members mind telling us then what Turkey brings to the party ?
    The Russians wouldn't be giving away their resources, they would be selling it to a stable market content in the knowledge the West can't place import duties on them. They would also be in political union with the other former Soviet nations and would be able to project their voice as part of a growing superpower again.

    Aside from Russia itself Turkey has the most powerful military in Europe with the possible exception of Britain, they also wield huge influence in the Turkic Balkan and Caucasus regions and the wider Islamic world. Having them on board gives the EU a huge geopolitical boost.

    But this is asking the wrong question, a country doesn't need to bring anything to the Union to make it a valuable member.


  • Options
    #19
    Defiler Of The Coffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,117 ✭✭✭Defiler Of The Coffin


    riffmongous wrote: »
    Well what does Ireland add to the EU?

    The English language, low tax rates, great educated workforce, bending over backwards/forwards for the ECB.

    Oh, and the 'craic'


  • Options
    #20
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,629 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    Defiler Of The Coffin wrote: »
    The English language, low tax rates, great educated workforce, bending over backwards/forwards for the ECB.

    Oh, and the 'craic'

    How do those things benefit the rest of the EU though?


  • Options
    #21
    jmayo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,092 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The Russians wouldn't be giving away their resources, they would be selling it to a stable market content in the knowledge the West can't place import duties on them.

    Ehh Europe or rather the EU countries need some of Russia's exports more than they need EU.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    They would also be in political union with the other former Soviet nations and would be able to project their voice as part of a growing superpower again.

    Didn't you notice any of the stuff going on in Ukraine ?
    They have enough nuclear weapons to be a super power.
    They have a seat on UN security council.
    They can still project their power as in Syria and do so without added interference of Brussels sticking their nose in.
    They don't need or probably want to be part of EU to wield power.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Aside from Russia itself Turkey has the most powerful military in Europe with the possible exception of Britain, they also wield huge influence in the Turkic Balkan and Caucasus regions and the wider Islamic world. Having them on board gives the EU a huge geopolitical boost.

    So we want Turkey for it's conscript army ?
    Would this be the same army that only a few years had top members arrested for plot to overthrow democratically elected government ?

    And the converse could be argued that it also gives us part of the Islamic world, some of which wants to wipe us out.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    jmayo wrote: »
    Ehh Europe or rather the EU countries need some of Russia's exports more than they need EU
    Didn't you notice any of the stuff going on in Ukraine ?
    They have enough nuclear weapons to be a super power.
    They have a seat on UN security council.
    They can still project their power as in Syria and do so without added interference of Brussels sticking their nose in.
    They don't need or probably want to be part of EU to wield power.
    They're a great power now and nothing more, Britain and France have the power to project themselves unilaterally in Syria as well and Turkey could do it much more efficiently than either of them given it's influence in the region. But Britain, France and Turkey know the benefits of greater European integration. Russia hasn't come round yet but I hope they do one day.
    So we want Turkey for it's conscript army ?
    Would this be the same army that only a few years had top members arrested for plot to overthrow democratically elected government ?
    Lithuania has conscription don't hold that against them. We don't want Turkey for their army, we want Turkey because it furthers the EU's goal of uniting the continent. Their army is an added asset but their influence in the Middle east, North Africa and Caucasus is a more important asset.
    And the converse could be argued that it also gives us part of the Islamic world, some of which wants to wipe us out.
    Don't be paranoid, those nasty Muslamics don't want to wipe you out and Turkey is the most economically and socially progressive country in the Islamic world.


  • Options
    #23
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Seaneh wrote: »
    Er, surely the democratic side of it would be "do we let them join" and if randomly appointed non-elected committees are the people making that decision instead of either the national assemblies of member states or the individual citizens of all of the EU, then it's undemocratic.
    On what planet do "randomly appointed non-elected committees" get to make that decision?

    Is this the level of debate we're reduced to on the EU? We can just make stuff up and say "if the random stuff I just made up is true, then that's proof that the EU is undemocratic"?


  • Options
    #24
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »

    Aside from Russia itself Turkey has the most powerful military in Europe with the possible exception of Britain, they also wield huge influence in the Turkic Balkan and Caucasus regions and the wider Islamic world. Having them on board gives the EU a huge geopolitical boost.

    Geopolitical boost? :rolleyes:

    Turkey is hated by almost all its neighbours (with the exception of Azerbaijan).

    Cyprus (non-occupied), Greece, Iraq, Syria, Armenia, Israel are particularly hostile; but it has no particular friends in its old colonies across the Bosporus.

    Turkey's only traditional European allies (France, or more recently, Germany) are not greatly keen on its inclusion in the EU.

    From a numbers point of view adding the equivalent of Britain and France to the EU would be a large step. When recent expansion has already pushed the balance towards developing rather than developed (and consequent economic migrant issues) it would seem a strange move to advocate the inclusion of a country as large as Turkey which arguably has similar economic challenges.

    The strong military presence in Turkey, and its tendency towards secular junta at the expense of Islamic factions is the only thing that makes it seem even remotely a possibility - and that does not, to put it mildly, auger well.


  • Options
    #25
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    On what planet do "randomly appointed non-elected committees" get to make that decision?

    Is this the level of debate we're reduced to on the EU? We can just make stuff up and say "if the random stuff I just made up is true, then that's proof that the EU is undemocratic"?

    Most EU policy is dictated, almost exclusively, by the EC, commissioners not elected.

    Who in Ireland elected Máire Geoghegan-Quinn?

    Nobody.


    If you try and pretend that democratic deficiency in the EU isn't a real and current issue, you're either a liar or massively uninformed.


  • Options
    #26
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,668 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    On what planet do "randomly appointed non-elected committees" get to make that decision?
    Actually having randomly selected people on committees, historically speaking, is a good idea. From my reading of the EU texts, the centralised officials of that organisation have very much a blinked pro-European world-view. Not surprising and actually I've found them grand to interact with. However, it does not dispose them well to consider alternatives that to not meld into view point. One instance is the loops ran through to get Greece into the Euro. Another would be ignoring the deep and historical ties that the Russian elites have with that area.


  • Options
    #27
    jmayo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,092 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    We don't want Turkey for their army, we want Turkey because it furthers the EU's goal of uniting the continent.

    Unless I am mistaken the most of Turkey is actually in Asia or have you developed the same sense of Europe as UEFA, FIFA and the Eurovision.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Their army is an added asset but their influence in the Middle east, North Africa and Caucasus is a more important asset.

    Ehh what influence as the other poster said ?
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Don't be paranoid, those nasty Muslamics don't want to wipe you out and Turkey is the most economically and socially progressive country in the Islamic world.

    Do we really want a country in the EU that had a leader who said the following "Caricatures of prophet Muhammad are an attack against our spiritual values. There should be a limit of freedom of press" about the publication of a cartoon in a newspaper in "another" European country ?
    Oh and some kid decided it was a good idea to shoot a catholic priest in response to the cartoons.


    Claiming Turkey is the most advanced and socially progressive country in the Islamic world is about as great a recommendation as saying franco was the best fascist leader.
    Oh and Malaysia would probably argue that point anyway.


  • Options
    #28
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Seaneh wrote: »
    Most EU policy is dictated, almost exclusively, by the EC, commissioners not elected.
    Neat sidestep. You claimed that the decision to allow new member states was decided by "randomly appointed non-elected committees". I called you on that, and suddenly we're talking about "most EU policy" rather than the specific question of accession.

    As it happens, you're still wrong after the goalpost-moving exercise. EU policy is decided by the member state governments. Legislation to implement that policy is initiated (mostly) by the Commission, and subject (largely) to approval by the Parliament.
    Who in Ireland elected Máire Geoghegan-Quinn?

    Nobody.
    Who elected Máire Whelan? Nobody.

    There are good reasons for having some offices filled by appointment rather than election. If your only metric for anything is democracy, you've got a cripplingly one-dimensional view of the world.
    If you try and pretend that democratic deficiency in the EU isn't a real and current issue, you're either a liar or massively uninformed.
    Why is it an issue? Because you say it is? Who elected you the arbiter of democratic deficiency?
    Manach wrote: »
    Actually having randomly selected people on committees, historically speaking, is a good idea.
    I don't disagree.
    From my reading of the EU texts, the centralised officials of that organisation have very much a blinked pro-European world-view.
    European officials in pro-Europe shocker - film at 11. Next thing you'll be telling me that US officials have a pro-US worldview. Where will it end?


  • Options
    #29
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,668 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Ah the joys of selective quoting. You seem to have missed the following sentence starting with "No surprise". Perhaps a refresher course in indepth reading in order?


  • Options
    #30
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    Manach wrote: »
    Actually having randomly selected people on committees, historically speaking, is a good idea.

    Yes indeed, when competent, altruistic and decent people are selected, it's great. The other side of the coin though is cronyism. Jobs for the boys on boards and committees.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Dannyboy83
    Registered Users Posts: 4,236 ✭✭✭Dannyboy83


    Lucky for us, Russia has bought them off
    http://rt.com/business/ukraine-15-billion-gas-381/
    Ukraine scores $15 bln from Russia, 33% gas discount


Advertisement