General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Is President Obama admitting we caused overthrow of Ukraine's government? [View all]leveymg
(36,418 posts)Last edited Tue Feb 3, 2015, 11:22 PM - Edit history (2)
when a government takes another one out directly by force. That's an overt act of war. What happened in the Ukraine was an elected government was destabilized by a violent opposition, covertly backed by the west, and forced to flee abroad. That is an overthrow by agency, also known as destabilization leading to "regime change." The violent protests and subsequent offer of "brokerage" of an unscheduled election can be viewed as part of that regime change, which is how Yanukovich and the Russians see it. Obama appears to have acknowledged that in his comment, daring Russia to double-down on its own side of the table.
What makes this unusual is that Yanukovich, the elected President of Ukraine, fled to the superpower next door, where he announced the secession of the eastern province, Crimea, that the superpower had historically claimed as its own territory. That confirmed Yanulovich's role as the agent (pawn) of Russia in this game. Actually, Crimea had been part of the former Soviet Union which is actively reclaiming itself, using this power play by the west as an opportunity to do some reassembly of what may have appeared to be low-hanging fruit. The western powers doubled-down, in response, and that has set off a civil war in the Ukraine. That militarization of the game, in turn, has unleashed a potential for escalation to a new Cold War.
Frankly, Ukraine has history and geography against it. Not a good table to double-down on for the west. This part of the game we are unlikely to win.