SEVASTOPOL, Ukraine -- Rival groups of Russian and Ukrainian demonstrators hurled insults at each other to a background of cannon fire as the Russian navy’s Mirage sailed into Sevastopol on Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula last week.
The celebratory gunfire could become all too real if fears are realised that Russia may repeat its incursion into Georgia and turn Ukraine into the next Caucasian flashpoint.Crimea has a Russian majority population and, because of its strategic importance, Moscow deeply resented its loss at the time of the break-up of the Soviet Union.Mirage, a guided missile corvette, returned on Friday morning to the home port of the Russian Black Sea fleet after seeing action against Georgia’s port of Poti, where it shelled Georgian defences and landed troops who occupied the city.Many of the Russians waiting to greet Mirage belonged to a political party called the Russian Bloc, whose leader in Crimea, Vladimir Tyunin, said: “We say categorically that Crimea should and certainly will become part of Russia.”He claimed that the Ukrainian government was trying to force native Russian-speakers to speak Ukrainian, showing only films and television programmes dubbed in Ukrainian and forcing Russians to assimilate their culture.While Tyunin maintained that Russian annexation of Crimea would be peaceful, some of his supporters were more outspoken. One young woman said: “This is Russia. We want nothing to do with Ukraine. The Ukrainians oppress our people. They are totalitarians and fascists who take orders from America.”Her remarks were greeted with approval by others, who aired a ferocious litany of charges and threats against Ukraine. With a million Russians in Crimea, outnumbering native Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars, local loyalties are often to Moscow rather than Kiev and the presence of the base serves only to reinforce the Russian claim.Many “Crimean flags”, that differ only slightly from the Russian one, fly on the streets, not only in Sevastopol but also in most other Crimean towns.Taking part in a rival pro-Ukrainian demonstration, opposing the return of the Mirage, was Oleh Fomushkin, a former colonel in the Soviet army and now a community activist.“Moscow and its intelligence services have been active here for 17 years while the Ukrainian authorities slept or were too timid to act,” he said. “They’ve demonstrated their aggression in Georgia and they won’t hesitate to use violence to get hold of Crimea.”Tension in Crimea has risen because of the public support for Georgia of Viktor Yushchenko, the Ukrainian president. Russia accused Ukraine of supplying weapons to Georgia and Yushchenko enraged the Kremlin by ordering restrictions on the future movements of the Russian fleet in Ukrainian waters.The Black Sea fleet facilities are leased from Ukraine until 2017 but Ukraine, which wants to join NATO and the European Union, says it will not renew the lease. Moscow has made clear it is determined to stay.Reports that thousands of Russian passports have already been distributed on the peninsula have sparked fears that a takeover may be in the offing. Moscow issued passports in South Ossetia to foster its breakaway from Georgia.A western military source advised caution, saying Crimea was effectively already occupied by Russia.Mykola Vladzimirsky, a Ukrainian journalist, said Tatars, who were deported by Stalin in 1944 but have slowly returned, might take up arms.“If they carried out an attack against ethnic Russians, Moscow would have its excuse to annexe Crimea by contending that Ukraine is unable to defend Russian citizens,” he said.
Saturday 27 September 2008
Is Ukraine's Crimea The Next Flash Point With Russia?
MOSCOW—Russia's invasion of Georgia is raising concern that the next flash point may be Ukraine's Black Sea peninsula, the Crimea, an area once part of Russia that still provides a key warm-water port for the Russian Navy.
Moscow's relations with Ukraine have been strained since the 2004 Orange Revolution, in which pro-western Viktor Yushchenko won an election runoff after hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians protested the allegedly fraudulent victory of his Kremlin-backed rival.Like Georgia's western-oriented leader, Yushchenko has been pressing hard and very publicly for his country to join NATO, a move that infuriates the Kremlin.Next week, Vice President Dick Cheney is due to visit Georgia and Ukraine as a high-profile sign of Washington's support.For the Russians, the Crimea is an issue of strategic importance, even more than pride or nationalism. Russia's Black Sea naval fleet is based at Sevastopol, a city located at the tip of the Crimea peninsula.Russia holds a lease to the naval base until 2017, though in recent years Ukrainian politicians have made clear that they are eager for the Russian Navy to pull out.And just as Georgia's leader unwisely challenged Moscow's interests in the pro-Russian South Ossetia enclave, the Ukrainians made a brief but troubling show of standing up to Moscow over its Crimean port.After Russian warships departed Sevastopol for Georgia's Black Sea coast to support the Kremlin's offensive, the Ukrainian administration announced new restrictions on the fleet and threatened to ban the ships from re-entering Ukrainian territory.The Ukrainians backed down, but that is not likely to be the end of the issue. Yushchenko said at Ukrainian Independence Day celebrations on Sunday that Ukraine is vulnerable and should push harder to join NATO."We need to accelerate our accession to the European security system and improve our country's defenses," he said. "Only these steps will effectively guarantee our security and the inviolability of our borders."As a practical matter, the Georgian war is likely to put full NATO membership on hold, probably indefinitely, for Ukraine, as well for Georgia.All along, the European members have resisted Washington pressure to move quickly on their membership, fearful that the western military alliance—with its collective defense obligations—would risk being drawn into conflict with Russia over old territorial disputes festering since the breakup of the Soviet Union.A recent poll by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology of around 2,000 Ukrainians found that 50 percent fear a war with Russia over the presence of the Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol (35 percent said there was no cause for concern).The Crimea, while it has a majority Russian-speaking population, has been under Kiev's at least nominal control since 1954, when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev transferred it from Russia on the grounds that it had better economic and transport links with Ukraine.Russia had won the Crimea from the Tatars in the late 18th century, and Sevastopol assumed a vaunted place in Russian history; many Russian schoolchildren read Leo Tolstoy's short stories about Sevastopol.Today, ownership has become a highly emotive issue. Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov was banned from Ukraine in May after saying that Sevastopol, now a city of 400,000, does not belong to Ukraine.An overreaction, perhaps, but it's a potentially dangerous topic for Ukraine. According to the 2001 Ukrainian census, the most recent, around 60 percent of the 2 million inhabitants of the Crimea are Russian, and around 25 percent are Ukrainian.Last week, Russia denied reports that it has been distributing Russian passports in the Crimea, as it has done in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, two pro-Russian regions seeking independence from Georgia. According to the Ukrainian newspaper Express 24, 15,000 Sevastopol residents, most in the military, hold Russian passports.In Moscow, coverage of Georgia has so far drowned out the rumblings in Ukraine, but some Muscovites are clear where they stand. "No one in my circle—and they're rather well educated—would say the Crimea is Ukrainian territory.You could shoot them, and they wouldn't say it's Ukrainian," said Yelena Kamenskaya, a prosperous Russian teacher. She added: "We all think it's going to be the next trouble spot."As with Georgia, there is the prospect of U.S. involvement. The head of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council is in Washington this week for talks.And Vice President Cheney is traveling next week to meet with leaders in both Ukraine and Georgia, visits that may embolden Russia's hard-liners. In the wake of Russia's move into Georgia, he declared that "Russian aggression must not go unanswered."Parliamentarians from United Russia, Russia's ruling and virtually only party, see Yushchenko as acting at the bidding of the United States—some going so far as to cite the perceived influence of Cheney even before his trip was announced."It's not democracy when a president carries out the orders of a vice president of another country," said Sergei Markov, a United Russia deputy.Analysts have suggested that Yushchenko is bolstering the specter of a rampaging enemy to boost his own rock-bottom popularity ratings. And considering the common historic and ethnic origins of Ukrainians and Russians—closer than Russians and Georgians—ordinary Russians would have a hard time coming to terms with a war on Ukraine, says Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of the magazine Russia in Global Affairs."An armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine would be a catastrophe. The two peoples are so close that, from a moral point of view, it's horrifying."
Moscow's relations with Ukraine have been strained since the 2004 Orange Revolution, in which pro-western Viktor Yushchenko won an election runoff after hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians protested the allegedly fraudulent victory of his Kremlin-backed rival.Like Georgia's western-oriented leader, Yushchenko has been pressing hard and very publicly for his country to join NATO, a move that infuriates the Kremlin.Next week, Vice President Dick Cheney is due to visit Georgia and Ukraine as a high-profile sign of Washington's support.For the Russians, the Crimea is an issue of strategic importance, even more than pride or nationalism. Russia's Black Sea naval fleet is based at Sevastopol, a city located at the tip of the Crimea peninsula.Russia holds a lease to the naval base until 2017, though in recent years Ukrainian politicians have made clear that they are eager for the Russian Navy to pull out.And just as Georgia's leader unwisely challenged Moscow's interests in the pro-Russian South Ossetia enclave, the Ukrainians made a brief but troubling show of standing up to Moscow over its Crimean port.After Russian warships departed Sevastopol for Georgia's Black Sea coast to support the Kremlin's offensive, the Ukrainian administration announced new restrictions on the fleet and threatened to ban the ships from re-entering Ukrainian territory.The Ukrainians backed down, but that is not likely to be the end of the issue. Yushchenko said at Ukrainian Independence Day celebrations on Sunday that Ukraine is vulnerable and should push harder to join NATO."We need to accelerate our accession to the European security system and improve our country's defenses," he said. "Only these steps will effectively guarantee our security and the inviolability of our borders."As a practical matter, the Georgian war is likely to put full NATO membership on hold, probably indefinitely, for Ukraine, as well for Georgia.All along, the European members have resisted Washington pressure to move quickly on their membership, fearful that the western military alliance—with its collective defense obligations—would risk being drawn into conflict with Russia over old territorial disputes festering since the breakup of the Soviet Union.A recent poll by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology of around 2,000 Ukrainians found that 50 percent fear a war with Russia over the presence of the Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol (35 percent said there was no cause for concern).The Crimea, while it has a majority Russian-speaking population, has been under Kiev's at least nominal control since 1954, when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev transferred it from Russia on the grounds that it had better economic and transport links with Ukraine.Russia had won the Crimea from the Tatars in the late 18th century, and Sevastopol assumed a vaunted place in Russian history; many Russian schoolchildren read Leo Tolstoy's short stories about Sevastopol.Today, ownership has become a highly emotive issue. Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov was banned from Ukraine in May after saying that Sevastopol, now a city of 400,000, does not belong to Ukraine.An overreaction, perhaps, but it's a potentially dangerous topic for Ukraine. According to the 2001 Ukrainian census, the most recent, around 60 percent of the 2 million inhabitants of the Crimea are Russian, and around 25 percent are Ukrainian.Last week, Russia denied reports that it has been distributing Russian passports in the Crimea, as it has done in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, two pro-Russian regions seeking independence from Georgia. According to the Ukrainian newspaper Express 24, 15,000 Sevastopol residents, most in the military, hold Russian passports.In Moscow, coverage of Georgia has so far drowned out the rumblings in Ukraine, but some Muscovites are clear where they stand. "No one in my circle—and they're rather well educated—would say the Crimea is Ukrainian territory.You could shoot them, and they wouldn't say it's Ukrainian," said Yelena Kamenskaya, a prosperous Russian teacher. She added: "We all think it's going to be the next trouble spot."As with Georgia, there is the prospect of U.S. involvement. The head of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council is in Washington this week for talks.And Vice President Cheney is traveling next week to meet with leaders in both Ukraine and Georgia, visits that may embolden Russia's hard-liners. In the wake of Russia's move into Georgia, he declared that "Russian aggression must not go unanswered."Parliamentarians from United Russia, Russia's ruling and virtually only party, see Yushchenko as acting at the bidding of the United States—some going so far as to cite the perceived influence of Cheney even before his trip was announced."It's not democracy when a president carries out the orders of a vice president of another country," said Sergei Markov, a United Russia deputy.Analysts have suggested that Yushchenko is bolstering the specter of a rampaging enemy to boost his own rock-bottom popularity ratings. And considering the common historic and ethnic origins of Ukrainians and Russians—closer than Russians and Georgians—ordinary Russians would have a hard time coming to terms with a war on Ukraine, says Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of the magazine Russia in Global Affairs."An armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine would be a catastrophe. The two peoples are so close that, from a moral point of view, it's horrifying."
Testing For A New 'Cold War' In Crimea
LONDON, UK -- The Russian military operation against Georgia and its recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia have led to concerns amounting at times to near panic about whether a new Cold War is under way.
The Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said that he does not want a new Cold War but is not afraid of one either.So is the conflict a turning-point heralding a new age of confrontation or just a limited Russian action to resolve two border disputes left over from the Soviet era?Or something in between, a sign of uncertainty on both sides which will mean tension but not the kind of ideological struggle and military stand-off that was the Cold War itself?New testA good test of Russian intentions could come in Crimea, the territory jutting out in the Black Sea. It is part of Ukraine.The French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said: "It's very dangerous. There are other objectives that one can suppose are the objectives of Russia, in particular Crimea, Ukraine and Moldova."The problem over Crimea is this. Crimea was handed over to Ukraine from the Russian Soviet Republic by Nikita Khrushchev in 1954. However ethnic Russians still make up the majority of its nearly 2 million inhabitants. It is also home to the Russian navy's Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol, on which Russia has a lease until 2017.Sevastopol has resonance in Russian history, from the siege by the British and French in 1854-55. There have been small demonstrations there recently calling for Crimea to be returned to Russia. Valery Podyachy, head of the Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia Popular Front, said: "While Russia sent aid to flood-hit Ukrainian regions, Ukraine failed to help Russia to force Georgia to peace, and took an openly hostile stance."There is the potential therefore for trouble. If Russia started to agitate on behalf of its "brothers" in Crimea and argued that it must have Sevastopol (even though it is building another base), Crimea could provide certainly a test of Russian ambitions and possibly a flashpoint.Western worries This fear of future Russian actions partly explains the Western worries. The British Foreign Secretary David Miliband has gone to Ukraine talking of forming "the widest possible coalition against Russian aggression in Georgia".Mr Miliband is positioning himself at the hawkish end of the Western response. He said in a speech in Kiev that events in Georgia had been a "rude awakening" and that a "hard-headed engagement" with Russia was needed. But he added: "The Russian President says he is not afraid of a new Cold War. We don't want one. He has a big responsibility not to start one."The US Vice President Dick Cheney is going to Georgia. Nato has met to declare that there can be no "business as usual" with Russia.People are looking up the principles laid down by US diplomat George Kennan after World War II that called for the "containment" of an aggressive Soviet union.The other view There is another view, though, and this holds that while Russian intentions are not to be trusted, it cannot be wholly blamed for what happened in South Ossetia.The former British ambassador to Yugoslavia, Sir Ivor Roberts, said: "Moscow has acted brutally in Georgia. But when the United States and Britain backed the independence of Kosovo without UN approval, they paved the way for Russia's 'defence' of South Ossetia, and for the current Western humiliation."What is sauce for the Kosovo goose is sauce for the South Ossetian gander."The borders issue Behind all this also lies the problem of European borders. During and after the Cold War, it was held (and still is) that borders, however unreasonable to the inhabitants, could not be changed without agreement.This has given governments a veto. Serbia tried to veto the break-up of Yugoslavia. Georgia has not allowed Abkhazia and South Ossetia to secede. Ukraine holds on to Crimea etc.The potential for a clash between the competing interests of local people and central governments is obvious.The fear that borders may unravel also helps explain why the Russian recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia has upset Western governments so much.Their problem, however, is that they offer no solutions to those disputes beyond best intentions and a status quo policed by peacekeepers, a status quo that can easily be upset.
The Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said that he does not want a new Cold War but is not afraid of one either.So is the conflict a turning-point heralding a new age of confrontation or just a limited Russian action to resolve two border disputes left over from the Soviet era?Or something in between, a sign of uncertainty on both sides which will mean tension but not the kind of ideological struggle and military stand-off that was the Cold War itself?New testA good test of Russian intentions could come in Crimea, the territory jutting out in the Black Sea. It is part of Ukraine.The French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said: "It's very dangerous. There are other objectives that one can suppose are the objectives of Russia, in particular Crimea, Ukraine and Moldova."The problem over Crimea is this. Crimea was handed over to Ukraine from the Russian Soviet Republic by Nikita Khrushchev in 1954. However ethnic Russians still make up the majority of its nearly 2 million inhabitants. It is also home to the Russian navy's Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol, on which Russia has a lease until 2017.Sevastopol has resonance in Russian history, from the siege by the British and French in 1854-55. There have been small demonstrations there recently calling for Crimea to be returned to Russia. Valery Podyachy, head of the Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia Popular Front, said: "While Russia sent aid to flood-hit Ukrainian regions, Ukraine failed to help Russia to force Georgia to peace, and took an openly hostile stance."There is the potential therefore for trouble. If Russia started to agitate on behalf of its "brothers" in Crimea and argued that it must have Sevastopol (even though it is building another base), Crimea could provide certainly a test of Russian ambitions and possibly a flashpoint.Western worries This fear of future Russian actions partly explains the Western worries. The British Foreign Secretary David Miliband has gone to Ukraine talking of forming "the widest possible coalition against Russian aggression in Georgia".Mr Miliband is positioning himself at the hawkish end of the Western response. He said in a speech in Kiev that events in Georgia had been a "rude awakening" and that a "hard-headed engagement" with Russia was needed. But he added: "The Russian President says he is not afraid of a new Cold War. We don't want one. He has a big responsibility not to start one."The US Vice President Dick Cheney is going to Georgia. Nato has met to declare that there can be no "business as usual" with Russia.People are looking up the principles laid down by US diplomat George Kennan after World War II that called for the "containment" of an aggressive Soviet union.The other view There is another view, though, and this holds that while Russian intentions are not to be trusted, it cannot be wholly blamed for what happened in South Ossetia.The former British ambassador to Yugoslavia, Sir Ivor Roberts, said: "Moscow has acted brutally in Georgia. But when the United States and Britain backed the independence of Kosovo without UN approval, they paved the way for Russia's 'defence' of South Ossetia, and for the current Western humiliation."What is sauce for the Kosovo goose is sauce for the South Ossetian gander."The borders issue Behind all this also lies the problem of European borders. During and after the Cold War, it was held (and still is) that borders, however unreasonable to the inhabitants, could not be changed without agreement.This has given governments a veto. Serbia tried to veto the break-up of Yugoslavia. Georgia has not allowed Abkhazia and South Ossetia to secede. Ukraine holds on to Crimea etc.The potential for a clash between the competing interests of local people and central governments is obvious.The fear that borders may unravel also helps explain why the Russian recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia has upset Western governments so much.Their problem, however, is that they offer no solutions to those disputes beyond best intentions and a status quo policed by peacekeepers, a status quo that can easily be upset.
Yushchenko Plays A Risky Game As Russia Turns Its Gaze On Black Sea
Yushchenko Plays A Risky Game As Russia Turns Its Gaze On Black Sea
LONDON, England -- The last time a British government faced an international crisis over Crimea, the Foreign Office had no hesitation in dispatching gunboats to put the belligerent Russians in their place.
Ukraine threatened to end Russia's lease on the Sevastopol base after ships based there were sent to attack Georgia.But when David Miliband, prior to his visit to Ukraine this week, took the wise precaution of first checking with Whitehall officials as to the current availability of British gunboats, all he received by way of reply was an embarrassed shuffling of feet.The might of the Royal Navy, which once struck terror into the hearts of even the most recalcitrant dictators, has been reduced to such a parlous state by the parsimony of Gordon Brown's Treasury that the prospect of Britain sending warships to confront the Kremlin's latest intrigues in the Black Sea is almost non-existent.The fact that the Government's military options are so limited explains why Mr Miliband was so keen to stress the need for international consensus in dealing with the Kremlin's latest Caucasian land grab.Moscow's decision to recognise the breakaway Georgian republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia took everyone by surprise, not least Mr Miliband who had been led to believe that Russian President Dimitry Medvedev, who has spoken often of his commitment to the rule of law, would never undertake so rash an action.Only last April, Moscow declared its support for a United Nations Security Council resolution reaffirming Georgian sovereignty. Mr Medvedev's natural disposition is to respect the territorial integrity of sovereign nations, a point he made repeatedly when the West decided to recognise Kosovo's declaration of independence.But one of the more revealing aspects of Russia's recognising the breakaway republics is the extent to which Mr Medvedev is in thrall to his prime minister, Vladimir Putin, the Richlieu of the Kremlin.Despite being elected Russia's president, Mr Medvedev's every action is controlled by Mr Putin - even the appointment of his diary secretary.And having taken the unilateral step of redrawing Georgia's borders more to Moscow's liking, there is growing concern throughout the West that the Kremlin intends to extend its geographical revisionism further afield, with the all-important Russian naval port of Sevastopol in the Crimea its top priority.It was no accident that Mr Miliband chose Ukraine as the location for his ground-breaking speech on the challenges facing the West in the post-Cold War era.Ukraine's post-Soviet relationship with Moscow has been every bit as fractious as Georgia's, particularly since the 2004 Orange Revolution brought to power the decidedly pro-Western government of President Viktor Yushchenko, which has joined with Georgia in seeking the twin holy grails of EU and Nato membership.This is not playing well in Moscow where, emboldened by its success with the Georgians, the Kremlin has now turned its attention to provoking discord in Crimea.Compared with Georgia, where Russian interests are mainly confined to protecting the small minority of Russian passport holders who remain, the stakes are far higher in Ukraine, where the Sevastopol naval base is regarded as a crucial strategic military asset, providing Moscow with its only access to the Mediterranean.At present the base is leased from the Ukrainian government until 2017, but now the Yushchenko government is seriously considering tearing up the agreement after Russian warships based at Sevastopol were used to attack Georgian positions during the recent fighting over the breakaway republics.While officially the purpose of Mr Miliband's Ukraine mission was to set a template for how the West should handle Russia, the subtext of his visit was to urge the Ukrainians not to fall into the same bear trap as the Georgians.But, as Mr Miliband discovered during his discussions with Mr Yushchenko - still suffering from the after-effects of dioxin poisoning at the hands of Russian agents during the 2004 election - and his even more hard-line prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, far from being cowed by Moscow's Georgian intervention, the Ukrainian government seems to be almost itching for a fight with Moscow.Not content with tearing up the lease agreement on Sevastopol, Mr Yushchenko is seeking to place restrictions on the movements of Russian naval ships.In its current belligerent mood, the Kremlin is not going to take such provocation lying down, and Russian soldiers have already been busy handing out passports to Crimeans to bolster the numbers of Russian "citizens" who might conveniently require Moscow's protection should Russia genuinely fear for the future of its Sevastopol base.The Ukrainian government's action is foolhardy, to say the least. And before Mr Yushchenko provokes Moscow any further, he would do well to remember that the last thing the West needs right now is a new Crimean war.
LONDON, England -- The last time a British government faced an international crisis over Crimea, the Foreign Office had no hesitation in dispatching gunboats to put the belligerent Russians in their place.
Ukraine threatened to end Russia's lease on the Sevastopol base after ships based there were sent to attack Georgia.But when David Miliband, prior to his visit to Ukraine this week, took the wise precaution of first checking with Whitehall officials as to the current availability of British gunboats, all he received by way of reply was an embarrassed shuffling of feet.The might of the Royal Navy, which once struck terror into the hearts of even the most recalcitrant dictators, has been reduced to such a parlous state by the parsimony of Gordon Brown's Treasury that the prospect of Britain sending warships to confront the Kremlin's latest intrigues in the Black Sea is almost non-existent.The fact that the Government's military options are so limited explains why Mr Miliband was so keen to stress the need for international consensus in dealing with the Kremlin's latest Caucasian land grab.Moscow's decision to recognise the breakaway Georgian republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia took everyone by surprise, not least Mr Miliband who had been led to believe that Russian President Dimitry Medvedev, who has spoken often of his commitment to the rule of law, would never undertake so rash an action.Only last April, Moscow declared its support for a United Nations Security Council resolution reaffirming Georgian sovereignty. Mr Medvedev's natural disposition is to respect the territorial integrity of sovereign nations, a point he made repeatedly when the West decided to recognise Kosovo's declaration of independence.But one of the more revealing aspects of Russia's recognising the breakaway republics is the extent to which Mr Medvedev is in thrall to his prime minister, Vladimir Putin, the Richlieu of the Kremlin.Despite being elected Russia's president, Mr Medvedev's every action is controlled by Mr Putin - even the appointment of his diary secretary.And having taken the unilateral step of redrawing Georgia's borders more to Moscow's liking, there is growing concern throughout the West that the Kremlin intends to extend its geographical revisionism further afield, with the all-important Russian naval port of Sevastopol in the Crimea its top priority.It was no accident that Mr Miliband chose Ukraine as the location for his ground-breaking speech on the challenges facing the West in the post-Cold War era.Ukraine's post-Soviet relationship with Moscow has been every bit as fractious as Georgia's, particularly since the 2004 Orange Revolution brought to power the decidedly pro-Western government of President Viktor Yushchenko, which has joined with Georgia in seeking the twin holy grails of EU and Nato membership.This is not playing well in Moscow where, emboldened by its success with the Georgians, the Kremlin has now turned its attention to provoking discord in Crimea.Compared with Georgia, where Russian interests are mainly confined to protecting the small minority of Russian passport holders who remain, the stakes are far higher in Ukraine, where the Sevastopol naval base is regarded as a crucial strategic military asset, providing Moscow with its only access to the Mediterranean.At present the base is leased from the Ukrainian government until 2017, but now the Yushchenko government is seriously considering tearing up the agreement after Russian warships based at Sevastopol were used to attack Georgian positions during the recent fighting over the breakaway republics.While officially the purpose of Mr Miliband's Ukraine mission was to set a template for how the West should handle Russia, the subtext of his visit was to urge the Ukrainians not to fall into the same bear trap as the Georgians.But, as Mr Miliband discovered during his discussions with Mr Yushchenko - still suffering from the after-effects of dioxin poisoning at the hands of Russian agents during the 2004 election - and his even more hard-line prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, far from being cowed by Moscow's Georgian intervention, the Ukrainian government seems to be almost itching for a fight with Moscow.Not content with tearing up the lease agreement on Sevastopol, Mr Yushchenko is seeking to place restrictions on the movements of Russian naval ships.In its current belligerent mood, the Kremlin is not going to take such provocation lying down, and Russian soldiers have already been busy handing out passports to Crimeans to bolster the numbers of Russian "citizens" who might conveniently require Moscow's protection should Russia genuinely fear for the future of its Sevastopol base.The Ukrainian government's action is foolhardy, to say the least. And before Mr Yushchenko provokes Moscow any further, he would do well to remember that the last thing the West needs right now is a new Crimean war.
Moscow Mayor Yuriy Luzhkov: "If We Lose Sevastopol, We'll Lose The Caucasus"
MOSCOW, Russia -- Moscow Mayor Yuriy Luzhkov is convinced that a new Black Sea Fleet agreement must be signed with Ukraine.
Sevastopol was never given to Ukraine during the Soviet Union, says Moscow mayor Yuriy Luzhkov."I submitted a proposal to finish the new agreement by September. Russia needs to invite Ukraine to the table to consider this agreement," RIA Novosti quoted Luzhkov as stating.The Moscow mayor referred to Ukraine's recent actions as a "blatant disregard" for the present agreement due to the country's NATO aspirations. He added that Russia is "losing Sevastopol.""If we lose Sevastopol," said Luzhkov. "We'll lose the Caucasus."In May 2008, at a celebration marking the Black Sea Fleet's 225th anniversary, Luzhkov reiterated earlier calls to reintegrate Sevastopol and the Crimean Peninsula into Russia."Sevastopol was never given to Ukraine," said Luzhkov. "I have carefully studied all the main documents." After the speech, Ukraine's security service declared Luzhkov persona non grata.Recently, Ukraine's government stated a new agreement must be signed with Moscow that will regulate such issues as the Black Sea Fleet's participation in armed conflicts and ensure Ukraine's soverign right to monitor the fleet while on Ukrainian territory.Several weeks ago, Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko signed an order stating the Black Sea Fleet's commanding officer must inform their Joint Chief of Staff if Russian ships plan to leave Ukrainian territory. Russia's Interior Ministry referred to the order as "another serious anti-Russian maneuver" breaking the agreement on cordial relations between Kiev and Moscow.
Source: Kommsomolska Pravda
Sevastopol was never given to Ukraine during the Soviet Union, says Moscow mayor Yuriy Luzhkov."I submitted a proposal to finish the new agreement by September. Russia needs to invite Ukraine to the table to consider this agreement," RIA Novosti quoted Luzhkov as stating.The Moscow mayor referred to Ukraine's recent actions as a "blatant disregard" for the present agreement due to the country's NATO aspirations. He added that Russia is "losing Sevastopol.""If we lose Sevastopol," said Luzhkov. "We'll lose the Caucasus."In May 2008, at a celebration marking the Black Sea Fleet's 225th anniversary, Luzhkov reiterated earlier calls to reintegrate Sevastopol and the Crimean Peninsula into Russia."Sevastopol was never given to Ukraine," said Luzhkov. "I have carefully studied all the main documents." After the speech, Ukraine's security service declared Luzhkov persona non grata.Recently, Ukraine's government stated a new agreement must be signed with Moscow that will regulate such issues as the Black Sea Fleet's participation in armed conflicts and ensure Ukraine's soverign right to monitor the fleet while on Ukrainian territory.Several weeks ago, Ukraine's President Viktor Yushchenko signed an order stating the Black Sea Fleet's commanding officer must inform their Joint Chief of Staff if Russian ships plan to leave Ukrainian territory. Russia's Interior Ministry referred to the order as "another serious anti-Russian maneuver" breaking the agreement on cordial relations between Kiev and Moscow.
Source: Kommsomolska Pravda
Sevastopol The Pride of Russian Sailors
A perfect place, at the very crossroads of nations and civilizations, not to mention a nice harbor, Sevastopol has always been and will forever be a golden getaway and a permanent battlefield. It all began with Chersonesos in the early 6th century BC when settlers of Greek Heraclea Pontica founded a colony in the south of the Crimean peninsula. The place later grew into a major trade point and constant source of discord between Scythians and Greeks (superseded by Romans), and later by Russians and Byzantines, Turks, as well as European allies and Germans.
The remains of renown Chersonesos can still be visited on the outskirts of Sevastopol. Those interested in antiquity will be surprised to see majestic columns of Greek temples and a Roman amphitheatre with numerous remains of foundations of large homes.
The locals come to bathe in proximity to the ruins, considering the pebbly beach one of the best in the area. A moderate fee is required to visit the territory, but locals just climb over a 16th century wall, arguing "we bathed, bathe and will continue to bathe like our grandparents did." The combative instinct has been nurtured by centuries of bloody wars and siegesl.
Another Chersonesos landmark is the newly rebuilt St. Vladimir Cathedral that overlooks the place. It is named after Saint Kiev Prince Vladimir who fought much in the region and eventually Christianized the Russian state.
Sevastopol itself was founded in 1783, after the Crimea was annexed by Russia, as a fortress and a convenient port with a row of harbors. Paying its respects to the region'slong history, Catherine the Great had the city's name based on two Greek words: Sebastos ("venerable") and Polis ("city") which evolved into ‘Sevastopol' over the years. The town's glorious military history did not remain idle for long. In 1854-1855, Sevastopol survived through its first big siege carried out mainly by the British, French, Sardinian and Turkish troops. Russian sailors had to sink an entire fleet to block the entrance to the harbor. Today, the column of the Sunken Ships Monument rises in the harbor near Primorsky boulevard (Marine boulevard).
The Heroic Sevastopol Defense museum is still one of the most visited places in the city. A century ago, Sevastopol faced another great siege by Germans that lasted 250 days in 1941-1942. The peculiar fact is that Germans cut off water supplies but did not take into account the big wineries of the city that were distributed among the population and used for food preparation and washing-up and of course drink.
The whole city seems to be military to the bone with every stone, every street and every building somehow proud of being part of a glorious history. The mere names of the streets remind of great Russian sailors and admirals. Being a military base and a former closed Soviet city, Sevastopol maintains its popularity among tourists as a southern seaside resort with picturesque landscape and seaside leisure.
The pleasant thing about the city is that it does not feel like a tourist theme park, thus, you can calmly stroll along its peaceful streets with no annoying taxi drivers and tourist kitsch sellers (although you can find them if you like).
Stroll along the city's main boulevards between Artillery and Southern bays. Take a boat excursion in the Artillery bay to sail along the main coastal landmarks and have a unique experience of passing near all the military ships and facilities of the Black Sea Fleet (both Russian and Ukrainian).
Following that it is recommended to go up one of the main streets of Sevastopol. There is no need to be a genius to find Lenina Ulitsa and its overlook along the Southern bay.
The calm and secure bay is packed with grey and seemingly narrow warships producing a strong impression of sardine tins. Note the small railway station and the railway track that stretches along the shore and pierces the hills. This is considered one of the most complicated railroad tracks in Europe. Walk back downtown in a calm and meditative manner, occasionally plunging into side streets and coming across cozy nooks wallowing in greenery. Most of the city was built anew after World War 2 in a modest Soviet post-war style, but exceptions of magnificent Art Nouveau buildings do occur and are anyway related to military history and Russian Navy. Although the city is a separate subject of Ukraine many Russian banners and St.Andrew crosses (symbol of Russian navy) can be seen in the streets.
Take a ferry to the northern part of the city crossing the large bay harbor dividing the city into two uneven parts and enjoy the panorama of the city, the Pride of Russian Sailors, as the official anthem of the city still states despite all Ukrainization attempts
The best time to visit Sevastopol is at the end of July. The last weekend of this month is usually marked by a Russian Navy holiday with ship parades, fireworks and other festivities. The city can be reached by regular direct trains or by regular flights through Simferopol (an hour drive from the city).
Another interesting place to see is Balaklava, a former top-secret town with a nuclear submarine base (now open for the public), an ancient Genoese fortress on the top of a hill and numerous World War II facilities still intact. To the north of Balaklava is the so called Valley of Death, where an English elite cavalry brigade led by Lord Cardigan found their final abode in a massacre of the Crimean War in 1854. A monument to the English cavalrymen with cemetery is still preserved. In 1945, it was visited by Winston Churchill. And nearby Bakhtiseray, the remains of the Khanate and historical site of the crimeajewel.
The remains of renown Chersonesos can still be visited on the outskirts of Sevastopol. Those interested in antiquity will be surprised to see majestic columns of Greek temples and a Roman amphitheatre with numerous remains of foundations of large homes.
The locals come to bathe in proximity to the ruins, considering the pebbly beach one of the best in the area. A moderate fee is required to visit the territory, but locals just climb over a 16th century wall, arguing "we bathed, bathe and will continue to bathe like our grandparents did." The combative instinct has been nurtured by centuries of bloody wars and siegesl.
Another Chersonesos landmark is the newly rebuilt St. Vladimir Cathedral that overlooks the place. It is named after Saint Kiev Prince Vladimir who fought much in the region and eventually Christianized the Russian state.
Sevastopol itself was founded in 1783, after the Crimea was annexed by Russia, as a fortress and a convenient port with a row of harbors. Paying its respects to the region'slong history, Catherine the Great had the city's name based on two Greek words: Sebastos ("venerable") and Polis ("city") which evolved into ‘Sevastopol' over the years. The town's glorious military history did not remain idle for long. In 1854-1855, Sevastopol survived through its first big siege carried out mainly by the British, French, Sardinian and Turkish troops. Russian sailors had to sink an entire fleet to block the entrance to the harbor. Today, the column of the Sunken Ships Monument rises in the harbor near Primorsky boulevard (Marine boulevard).
The Heroic Sevastopol Defense museum is still one of the most visited places in the city. A century ago, Sevastopol faced another great siege by Germans that lasted 250 days in 1941-1942. The peculiar fact is that Germans cut off water supplies but did not take into account the big wineries of the city that were distributed among the population and used for food preparation and washing-up and of course drink.
The whole city seems to be military to the bone with every stone, every street and every building somehow proud of being part of a glorious history. The mere names of the streets remind of great Russian sailors and admirals. Being a military base and a former closed Soviet city, Sevastopol maintains its popularity among tourists as a southern seaside resort with picturesque landscape and seaside leisure.
The pleasant thing about the city is that it does not feel like a tourist theme park, thus, you can calmly stroll along its peaceful streets with no annoying taxi drivers and tourist kitsch sellers (although you can find them if you like).
Stroll along the city's main boulevards between Artillery and Southern bays. Take a boat excursion in the Artillery bay to sail along the main coastal landmarks and have a unique experience of passing near all the military ships and facilities of the Black Sea Fleet (both Russian and Ukrainian).
Following that it is recommended to go up one of the main streets of Sevastopol. There is no need to be a genius to find Lenina Ulitsa and its overlook along the Southern bay.
The calm and secure bay is packed with grey and seemingly narrow warships producing a strong impression of sardine tins. Note the small railway station and the railway track that stretches along the shore and pierces the hills. This is considered one of the most complicated railroad tracks in Europe. Walk back downtown in a calm and meditative manner, occasionally plunging into side streets and coming across cozy nooks wallowing in greenery. Most of the city was built anew after World War 2 in a modest Soviet post-war style, but exceptions of magnificent Art Nouveau buildings do occur and are anyway related to military history and Russian Navy. Although the city is a separate subject of Ukraine many Russian banners and St.Andrew crosses (symbol of Russian navy) can be seen in the streets.
Take a ferry to the northern part of the city crossing the large bay harbor dividing the city into two uneven parts and enjoy the panorama of the city, the Pride of Russian Sailors, as the official anthem of the city still states despite all Ukrainization attempts
The best time to visit Sevastopol is at the end of July. The last weekend of this month is usually marked by a Russian Navy holiday with ship parades, fireworks and other festivities. The city can be reached by regular direct trains or by regular flights through Simferopol (an hour drive from the city).
Another interesting place to see is Balaklava, a former top-secret town with a nuclear submarine base (now open for the public), an ancient Genoese fortress on the top of a hill and numerous World War II facilities still intact. To the north of Balaklava is the so called Valley of Death, where an English elite cavalry brigade led by Lord Cardigan found their final abode in a massacre of the Crimean War in 1854. A monument to the English cavalrymen with cemetery is still preserved. In 1945, it was visited by Winston Churchill. And nearby Bakhtiseray, the remains of the Khanate and historical site of the crimeajewel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
