Obama says Russia `on the wrong side if history' on Ukraine, actions violate international law.
Source: official AP twitter feed
BREAKING: Obama says Russia `on the wrong side if history' on Ukraine, actions violate international law.
Read more: https://twitter.com/AP/status/440567821807153152
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/ukraine-crisis-russia-control-crimea-live
Haaretz is in the White House with prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and president Barack Obama. Obama has said that Russias steps in Ukraine are a violation of international law and Ukrainian sovereignty and said that he wants to see the Ukrainian people determining their own destiny, Reuters reports.
:large
Renew Deal
(81,855 posts)1000words
(7,051 posts)Checkmate.
George II
(67,782 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)I dont mean Barack Obama. Hes doing pretty much everything he can, with what are a very limited set of policy options at his disposal. No, Im talking about the people who wont stop weighing in on Obamas lack of action in the Ukraine. Indeed, the sea of foreign policy punditry already shark-infested has reached new lows in fear-mongering, exaggerated doom-saying and a stunning inability to place global events in any rational historical context.
But this crisis is Putins Waterloo, not ours. Which brings us to perhaps the most bizarre element of watching the Crimean situation unfold through a US-centric lens: the iron-clad certainty of the pundit class that Putin is winning and Obama is losing. The exact opposite is true.
Putin has initiated a conflict that will, quite obviously, result in greater diplomatic and political isolation as well as the potential for economic sanction. Hes compounded his loss of a key ally in Kiev by further enflaming Ukrainian nationalism, and his provocations could have a cascading effect in Europe by pushing countries that rely on Russias natural gas exports to look elsewhere for their energy needs. Putin is the leader of a country with a weak military, an under-performing economy and a host of social, environmental and health-related challenges. Seizing the Crimea will only make the problems facing Russia that much greater.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/03/obama-ukraine-russia-critics-credibility
The only "something" that he can do "now" is use the military. Nonviolent, diplomatic actions will take time and negotiation. My guess is that Bush, McCain, Palin and Romney would have been much more likely to do 'something' and most of us would not be happy about their action.
Renew Deal
(81,855 posts)Whining about history looks weak.
pampango
(24,692 posts)is usually violent action which usually makes a bad situation worse. The American attention span sometimes does require "do something now", so Obama runs the risk of being perceived as weak and indecisive.
He has been criticized on several occasions for not being 'decisive' and just sending the bombers in. I hope he is equally 'indecisive' now and puts together a broad, diplomatic response to Russia's action. Strong words now couple with peaceful, diplomatic actions later are preferable to 'send in the bombers'.
George II
(67,782 posts).....any suggestions about what he should do?
okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)tactic is very smart here. Putin can only keep the phone lines cut for so long on the Crimea, ditto the TV stations and the independent paper they invaded. Putin has been knocked off his game plan. He has to hold everyone together much longer and his chances of success decrease every hour.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)WASHINGTON (AP) President Barack Obama says Russia is "on the wrong side of history" in Ukraine and its actions violate international law.
Obama told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday that the United States is considering economic and diplomatic options that will isolate Russia. The president called on Congress to work on an aid package to Ukraine and make it the "first order of business."
Obama said continued military actions in Ukraine "will be a costly proposition for Russia."
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/obama-says-russia-violating-international-law
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)CORRECTS: Obama says Russia 'on the wrong side of history' on Ukraine, actions violate law. (Corrects APNewsAlert typo that said 'if' history)
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/us-russia-threat-ukraine-navy-dangerous-escalation-moscow-22754659
steve2470
(37,457 posts)steve2470
(37,457 posts)CNN has just broadcast video from moments ago in which US president Barack Obama addressed the situation in Ukraine in the Oval Office following a meeting with the Israeli prime minister. The vice president and secretary of state were also in the room.
Obama said the Russian presence in Crimea violates international law and Moscow is on the wrong side of history, according to reports moments ago. He went on to say:
Obama mentioned the previously floated idea for a mediating force under the auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
more at link above
Genghis_Sean
(39 posts)They could simply say they have evidence that Ukraine has weapons of mass destruction.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)under the Budapest Agreement.
In that agreement, the UK, US and Russia agreed to guarantee the territorial integrity of Ukraine and to refrain from influencing its internal politics through economic means.
Later, France and China agreed to follow the Budapest Agreement as well.
But I get your joke.
pampango
(24,692 posts)with his unilateral military action. How much more does he want to use the "Bush playbook"? Has anyone seen George lately? He's not in Moscow is he?
olddad56
(5,732 posts)for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, etc.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)jtuck004
(15,882 posts)own size.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)the photo of Obama with Netanyahu along side the actual subject is indeed ironic
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)We have emboldened other world powers to act similarly.
We changed the world.
olddad56
(5,732 posts)okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)on their many, many illegal actions.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)The point is there is no moral authority right now, and if the US wants others to change, it should lead from the front.
George II
(67,782 posts)QUESTION: "Can we trust Russia?"
PRESIDENT BUSH: "I will answer the question. I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country. And I appreciated so very much the frank dialogue."
olddad56
(5,732 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)frwrfpos
(517 posts)in the people who violently overthrew the government, that is a strange picture indeed.
Response to steve2470 (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
steve2470
(37,457 posts)Reuters: United States suspends upcoming trade and investment talks with Russia because of events in Ukraine U.S. trade representative spokesman
http://live.reuters.com/Event/World_News/108113064