Obama invites G7 leaders for meeting on Ukraine

[DonViejo]

Source: ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is gathering allied leaders for a meeting in Europe next week to discuss further action in response to Russia’s involvement in Ukraine.

White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said Obama on Tuesday invited leaders of the G-7 and European Union to meet on the sidelines of a nuclear summit next week in the Netherlands. Hayden said it will focus on what steps the group can take to respond to developments in Ukraine.

Members of the G-7 include the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Britain. The group already has suspended preparations for a G-8 Summit hosted by Russia in Sochi that has been scheduled for June.

###

Read more: http://www.salon.com/2014/03/18/obama_invites_g7_leaders_for_meeting_in_europe_next_week_to_discuss_further_action_on_ukraine/

[bemildred]

1. The outcome of that should be illuminating. nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

2. How so?

I'd be interested in hearing what you think may happen. Thanks.

[bemildred]

3. Something like this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=758397

I take this to mean Yats is following instructions to begin implementation of that. I expect Russia to fully cooperate, it works quite well for them. They get Crimea. They get Ukraine as a neutral buffer. They get to sell gas. And they don't have to pay for it, except Crimea. (Well, maybe some investments in Ukraine ...)

The statement from G7 when that meeting is over should offer some clues about the spin and about what is being done. That could contradict or confirm this thesis, depending on whether what is done conforms or tries to thwart the sort of developments I described.

There will be lots of people who object, of course. Efforts will be made to derail it. We will see. And lots of noise and bluster from all and sundry, for sure. Neocons and Neolibs, as one, will hate it, and hate Obama for it.

No, I don't have any proof. It's all speculation. But it explains things, and it's based on a wide reading of all the sources I can find. All I suggest is watch what happens and see if it matches up.

[geek tragedy]

4. the tell may be whether the G8 stays together or gets disbanded

if there's a pro forma time out for Russia followed by reinstatement, then probably there's a lot of outrage being feigned in public

if the G8 is disbanded, or if someone replaces Russia (Brazil makes a lot more sense, and the group should be less Eurocentric) then we'll know there's some very bad blood on both sides still

[bemildred]

5. That sort of thing yes. I don't think it's a done deal that the EU will be of one mind about it.

I think a good deal of squawking is still to come. But in some respects that's going to be the most interesting part, to me, the squawking.

And I will be very glad if the Syrian and Iranian negotiations are able to go forward unimpeded.

[geek tragedy]

6. there'll be ripples for years to come, not always obviously connected to this.

EU energy policy is going to have to adapt--letting Pooty Poot have that kind of leverage over them has proven embarrassing to say the least. A continent that never much liked depending on the US finds itself dependent on Russia.

Russia and Indian and China are migrating towards a regional political/economic bloc. I think Russia's pretenses of being a European nation are pretty much over--it'll look east from now on.

With China, India, Russia getting closer, whither the B and S of BRICS? The US quite frankly has been very lazy in cultivating relationships in Latin America--taking it for granted--in areas other than drug interdiction.

And none of that deals with the festering problems inside Ukraine.

[bemildred]

7. The game goes on.

I've been waiting to see if Putin was done for the moment, with taking things, and it seems he is, so on that basis, I think he still wants a neutral united Ukraine (minus Crimea), which works better as a neutral buffer for him, than as a client state.

What happens in Moldova will be a tell too, whether he tries to nibble there. The thing is he has "autonomy" problems of his own, so I don't think he'll push it, rather not. He's walking on a high wire too, patriotic mobs don't take direction well.

[geek tragedy]

8. He'll continue to nibble wherever possible

the one very big feature of NATO membership for countries like Poland and the Baltics is that he can't nibble them anymore.

I don't think there's any danger of him from unruly mobs--Russians prefer order, stability, and deference to authority over democratic practices and government accountability. There are three political parties that are represented in the Duma--and two of them are hardcore authoritarian (Communist, Zhironovsky). Their ideal leader is Brezhnev.

Autonomy issues aren't going to be much of an issue--he'll just crush them like he always has, with wide support from the rest of the country (the ban on advocating separatism was introduced by the Communists in the Duma, not United Russia or the Zhironovsky crowd).

If there gets to be some discontent over the economy, he can always pick a fight with Estonia or Poland in the press.

[bemildred]

9. We will see. nt

[bemildred]

10. Like this:

U.S. Expels Syrian Diplomats, Shutters Embassy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014758461

I don't know what the plan is there, but if I was Assad, I'd be nervous.

[geek tragedy]

11. The obvious question is whether he's lost Putin's protection or whether the US

is beyond giving a flying f@ck about what Putin has to say.

[bemildred]

12. Have a nice day. nt

[geek tragedy]

13. you too . nt

[bemildred]

16. And yeah, that is the question. nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

17. Well, this is not good.

Very interesting now how Syria is used as leverage by both the US and Russia in relation to the Ukrainian showdown.

So, I guess the envoy just upped the ante, eh?

Of course the Cheneyites will see this as our chance to show Russia!

[bemildred]

18. Could be a displacement activity, could be some horsetrading was done.

Putin didn't seem pleased with Yanukovich, and I doubt he is pleased with Assad. Either way, I think we might do something there now. But I'd not even try to guess what, except we won't mess with the naval base the Russians have in Tartus. And I favor the idea that some horsetrading was done, both Russia and the US have good reason to want that mess cleaned up.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

19. I don't know ...

... it seems sort of suspicious, the timing.

You may be right, but I don't see Putin abandoning Assad. I also don't like the potential that the US will intervene in Syria. It seems like the pieces are being put in place for this to happen - now with higher stakes.

Edit to add: I can't see how Putin can complain about a deposed government in Ukraine, then turn around and let Assad fall. It would make him look like a fool, and he doesn't like to look like a fool.

I'm thinking this is a major uptick in intensity.

[bemildred]

20. Could be, I'm guessing. I can't see Putin abandoning Syria, but Assad not so much.

I am worried we will bomb the shit out of Syria now, but hoping some more productive approach will be tried.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

14. Thank you.

This whole thing is just really confusing. I have no affinity for either side. Just trying to understand how this will be played out and hoping it plays out peacefully.

My ignorance on this matter aside, I tend to agree with you. If the two parties can come away saving some face, and Russia gets Crimea, and Ukraine gets to handle its affairs without a drop of blood being spilled, seems to be the best possible outcome.

Of course, there will be the neocon/neolib contingent that will make hay, but they're wrong on everything, and I can't understand why anyone would take them seriously.

Thanks for your insight.

[bemildred]

15. My pleasure. Yeah, the noise level is something. nt