Putin to recognise the independence of two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine
- Thread starter Jedi boro
- Start date
Jedi boro
Well-known member
Putin recognises independence of breakaway areas of Ukraine
The Kremlin says President Putin has decided to recognise the independence of two breakaway areas of Ukraine controlled by Russian-backed separatists.A Kremlin statement said Putin had told the French and German leaders he intended to sign a decree recognising the Donetsk and Luhansk areas as independent states.
Smoginexile
Well-known member
ThePrisoner
Well-known member
Putin has gone full megalomaniac. Unhinged dictator.
Still better than Johnson though.
Still better than Johnson though.
Glad you liked them
They’re both really knowledgeable on Russia, they’re Russian speakers, have extensive contacts and have spent serious time over here which gives them a proper handle on what’s happening away from the bluster, biased opinion and half-interested commentators we often get in our media.Galeotti used to be the Power Vertical co-host before Whitmore moved from RFE/RL and took the podcast with him, they were great together. Whitmore gets some really great guests, the former president of Estonia, was on a short while ago. Always worth checking them out when Russia us in the news.
Had Ukraine fulfilled the terms of the Minsk Protocol it wouldn't have been an option for Putin to recognise the break away republics. They would have had special status within Ukraine as the Protocol defined. The Protocol was signed as part of the agreement to halt the war in 2014.
Last week the Duma voted 351 to 16 to recognise the two regions. Ukraine has repeatedly rejected requests to fulfill the terms of the Protocol (according to Russia anyway).
Last week the Duma voted 351 to 16 to recognise the two regions. Ukraine has repeatedly rejected requests to fulfill the terms of the Protocol (according to Russia anyway).
Redwurzel
Well-known member
I am not a fan of Putin, but who decided to put the Donbas region into a greater Ukraine? - its comprised of mainly Russian speakers, a lot of ethnic Russians and people who have tended to ally with Russia since the mid 18th century - a situation not too disimilar to Ulster loyalists in Ireland who form about 55% of NI population, but probably only about 18% of the whole of Ireland. The Donabas stands out to me as region that neither should be in the Ukraine or Russia.
Last edited:
ThePrisoner
Well-known member
Baltics next, then Poland.
Minsk-2 is contentious for a number of reasons, but one fundamental issue is that Ukraine wants to reassert security and control over the separatist regions prior to any elections - meaning a Russian withdrawal, Russia wants elections whilst they still control the regions. Also Russia wants controls written in the Ukrainian constitution that would give them serious influence in the regions and therefore Ukraine itself. There are other issues but those alone are enough to make Minsk-2 dead in the water.
Jedi boro
Well-known member
They can’t touch the Baltic’s as much as they’d like to as unlike Ukraine, all 3 Baltic states Estonia
Latvia 
and Lithuania 
Are in NATO ( as are Poland 
)And article 5 would kick in
Every participating country agreed that this form of solidarity was at the heart of the Treaty, effectively making Article 5 on collective defence a key component of the Alliance.
Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.
Article 5
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
It’s a lot more complicated really, there have been different ethnic groups all over through history, mixing, fighting, moving, being forced to move - Tartars, various Slavs, Greeks, Turkic peoples, Caucasus peoples. Stalin deported entire groups like the Crimean Tatars and Volga Germans. There are many reasons for the borders being how they are, and it’s still debated whether Eastern Ukrainians are Russian ethnicity, Russian speakers and/or Ukrainian ethnicity. You could speak to dozens of people and still be none the wiser!
boroboy6872
Well-known member
Stupid questions so forgive me
By recognising the 2 breakaway regions, does that mean VP can move his troops further West?
or is this just putting a buffer zone between him and NATO?
By recognising the 2 breakaway regions, does that mean VP can move his troops further West?
or is this just putting a buffer zone between him and NATO?
TeaCider
Well-known member
They recognised the independence of Crimea and then Crimea "voted" to join Russia straight after.
It will be the same plan here.
He gets to portray it as a voluntary union to his domestic audience and try and ignore how the people controlling the disputed territories took control in the first place.
Jedi boro
Well-known member
A bit of both it does end the nato link but.
Yes as now “the invaders” will be sold as the protectors going in to defend their fellow Russians.
It’s now being spun as a moral crusade to protect them
boroboy6872
Well-known member
Thanks @TeaCider
I suspect we wait for that to happen before he moves again until he`s taken back what he believes is his or should I say Russia's