-----Poroshenko's Passports-----
Imagine this, a room full of muttering journalists and jingoists silence themselves as a, rather short, man approaches a wooden podium at the center of a blue and white stage. This man was the most feared, respected, and outright loved man in the entire conference, and he came with a surprise.
Perhaps the most shocking moment of the entire conference came as Poroshenko, President of Ukraine, walked in a shaken hurry toward the podium. He had something in his hands: multi-colored, eagle-stamped, booklets. If you have eyes, you already know what they where, as you have undoubtedly read the heading already. They were passports. Russian Passports. Proof! Or so he claimed. Poroshenko was shaking, obviously excited. He intends to shove in the audience's face that he has proof and that they should support him in thwarting the Russian Menace.
Unfortunately for the little Poroshenko, he failed to realize that soldiers of the Russian Federation (Official Government) do not carry passports while on duty. In addition, he dismisses the possibility of Russians serving for the Donbass People's Republic out of their own volition. If this wasn't enough, he neglects that if Russian troops were, in fact, in Ukraine, then they would not carry passports for fear of being captured. This, to me, is the biggest offender, as Russia's proxy-war would deteriorate completely if such a claim was proven. So, by necessity, if Russian troops were in Ukraine,then they would have left anything identifying themselves as such, far behind. To conclude the case against the legitimacy of Poroshenko's claims, he refused to send copies to the Kremlin, and only brandished them in front of the audience without showing their contents.
The outcome of this little show is that those informed on the matters of Russia know that Poroshenko is a joke. Those who are not informed, believe every word that the man says, as he promotes his jingoist position. Poroshenko does not want autonomy for Russian speakers or for East Ukraine (he looked very unhappy at the end of the Minsk Peace Talks). He just wants help in quelling the rebellion and taking Crimea back from Russia. As it stands, the reddit thread for Poroshenko's speech has been upvoted over 6,000 times and the news is spreading everywhere. The peace talks in Minsk between Vladimir Putin (Russia), Angela Merkel (Germany), Petro Poroshenko (Ukraine), and Francois Hollande (France) are beginning to look like my last hopes for this to be resolved in a civilized manner. Progress was made, but I am not overly optimistic. The original Minsk peace didn't work, and I am unconvinced that these will. I am happy, at least, that world leaders are willing to recognize the need for Luhansk and Dontesk to have autonomy.
-----Lavrov-----
I don't have much to say about Lavrov's speech, but rather, the audience's reactions and questions. Lavrov (Russia's flagship diplomat to just about everything) began his speech and ended it the exact same way. He encouraged dialogue between the EU and Russia. This doesn't seem like a funny topic, but the audience members thought that it was quite funny as Lavrov cited communication failures between the East and West regarding the situation in Ukraine. He continues to note that Russia has been limited in its participation in lawmaking in various peacekeeping and economical organizations. Again, this draws laughter. I do not really have much to say about this. It seems to me like the members of various governments attending do not care much about what Russia has to say. One may argue that they are laughing about Lavrov's claims to lack of dialogue, but here Russia stands, out of the G8 and out of PACE due to 'anti-Russian sentiment.' If the west is not willing to host a respectable dialogue, then they must bear the responsibility for the results. And laughing about a nation wanting dialogue after raping its economy and forcing the largest release of land resulting from zero warfare, seems silly to me, at least.
There is one specific comment that was addressed to Lavrov that I would like to address: "The EU believes in self-determination, while Russia believes in spheres of influence." This commentator is quite right... about Russia. He is, however, completely wrong about the nature of the EU and its military counterpart, NATO. Everybody knows the arguments against the 'peacefulness' of NATO: Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, and now Ukraine. But, usually, there isn't much to say about the EU. Nobody considers that it may very well be a massive power bloc that has swallowed up sixteen countries since the fall of the Soviet Union. Imagine, for a moment, that the EU was made up of member states that were treated by Germany (in Brussles) like states are in the United States. Take a moment and fathom that Brussles and the EU is like an incredibly massive US federal government, usurping the will of the states underneath it. If you would indulge that thought, you'd be closer to the truth. As it stands, the EU is horribly corrupt as the politicians that snake about the massive conference halls would be happy to prove. The EU has a sphere of influence, and that sphere tried very hard to push into Ukraine, and is still trying desperately. I am disappointed that Lavrov failed to point this out, instead making the usual attacks at NATO which caused for more laughter. If you are having doubts about this theory, then ask any politician in the UK about what the EU has done to their country. If you're lucky, you'll get a down-to-earth fellow with serious problems with the forced, unrestricted immigration policy; the financial burden of propping up failed European Economies (Greece, Spain, Italy); and one that has serious problems with the globalized nature of the EU, which involves the sweeping away of borders, the destruction of national heritage and culture, and the scale of policy making that comes with such a massive government. Alternatively, you may encounter a politician that believes that these things are good, but you have my permission to laugh in their faces like they probably laughed in Lavrov's last week.
On a different note, Lavrov said something really, really, really stupid that really, really, really deserved to be laughed at. "Actually we (Russia) supported a unified Germany after WWII." This.. I just... Can't help but be amazed at what happens when someone's mind goes blank, as these diplomat's often do. He was trying to downplay Russa's involvement of dividing Germany, when instead, he should have put his big boy pants on and justified it. There is no European nation more historically appalling than Germany over the last half of a millennium, aside from the Soviet Union, which Germany created during WWI by directly funding Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution. Add Imperialism (most nations were guilty of this), Nazism, Prussia's conquests against Poland and France, and a generally jingoist attitude toward its neighbors, and you begin to see that Germany well deserved division. I, for one, find it ironic that Nazi Germany was defeated by the evil red empire that it had created twenty-eight years earlier, and it divided her. Lavrov really should've pointed this out, but he was in Munich, after all. I, personally would have rather been booed than laughed at. But that's just me I suppose.
-----Conference as a Whole-----
If I could describe the entire conference with one word, it is funny. Really. The conference was incredibly funny to someone who doesn't care about East-West relations, but it was a damming scene to those of us who do. At least with some groundwork for peace, this situation may begin to wind down, but only if everyone does their part. Given the attitudes expressed at the Munich, Merkel and Hollande are the only western leaders who care anything about their relationship with their eastern neighbors. I certainly hope that Merkel and Hollande will serve as an example to the rest of the west and prove that co-operation is preferable to jingoist ideas of national hatred, assigning blame, and hunting for misunderstanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment