Do you agree with the President Obama's handling of the Ukrainian Crisis? Give your answer in reaction to the following videos. Consider the following manners in which the Obama Administration should proceed:
a) Economic Sanctions/ Aid depending on your point of view
b) Diplomatic measures
c) Future military assistance should the violence in the region expand.
http://www.voanews.com/content/ukraine-crisis-sharpens-debate-on-obama-foreign-policy/1867640.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/mccain-obamas-feckless-foreign-policy-invited-ukraine-crisis/
I agree with McCain (never thought I'd say that) about military action, there is no military option with this because a. that's going to result in a lot of people dying and preferably we will avoid that, secondly, no one is going to fight a war over Crimea, if Russia annexes it, Crimea river. (see what I did there? Crimea....sounds like cry me a....yeah, you get it)
ReplyDeleteI also don't see diplomacy working out here, Obama and Putin and probably the first and second most powerful men on the face of the planet and it depends who you ask which one of them is which. There is no way Obama can ask Putin nicely to pull troops out of Crimea and Putin will comply.
So I think we'll be taking an economic approach, when countries do something they shouldn't there have to repercussions, and we can't go to war and kill soldiers every time that happens. Being America, and the fact that pretty much every other country in the world is on our side, or at least against Russia, comes with the perk of being able to damage Russia pretty effectively economically, so that will likely be what we will do in response to the current situation in Crimea.
Which student wrote this? Also please be sensitive to what is going on over there; there are some considerable human rights violations and it may be too soon to joke about i.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W8Be32jnOM
ReplyDeleteThe President spoke on this issue as I was assigning this to 4th period.
Ordoct Oho is correct, there is no need for military interference in the Middle East, at the moment. Unnecessary death is not what is needed. Obama’s statements in the above video show that America’s stance is “need based”. With Obama’s declared initiatives, we are no longer being “feckless”. Abiding with international laws the support of allies is key to any future aid needed, militarily and monetarily. Although military action might be necessary in the future, only Ukraine’s future decisions will determine what type of action we will take against Russia.
ReplyDeletenatalie gr
·Currently, the government has acted wisely in dealing with the Ukraine crisis. As O'Hanlon and McCain assert, there simply is no military option. McCain's speech, delivered on March 3rd, was obviously listened to by President Obama. McCain urged for three actions: identifying the kleptocrats (the corrupt Russians and Ukrainians), expanding the Magnitsky Act, which was aimed at punishing Russian officials who were suspected to be responsible for the death of Sergei Magnitsky by prohibiting their entrance to the United States and use of their banking system, and enacting economic sanctions. President Obama responded with four points of his own, which include two of McCain's. So far, Obama has imposed sanctions on Russian officials, entities operating in the arms sector of Russia, and individuals who supply material support to senior officials of the Russian government. By imposing these sanctions, Obama fulfills two of McCain's points: identify the kleptocrats and impose economic sanctions. Obama other three points were: a statement of the U.S. allegiance to its NATO allies, a warning to Russia that further rash actions will only deepen their diplomatic isolation, and a diplomatic solution. Obama believes further problems can still be diplomatically avoided by having the Russian troops withdrawn from the Crimea, increasing the numbers of international monitors in Ukraine, and engaging in dialogue with the Ukrainian government (which is open to pursuing constitutional changes).
ReplyDeleteObama stated that the U.S. will support its Ukrainian friends. Therefore, if further blatant actions are committed by Russia, Ukraine’s military should receive various kinds of assistance. If Obama provides military aid when the situation escalates, he will prove to the world that America’s word can be taken seriously. If not, he truly will be “feckless.”
I believe that President Obama is on the right path, but has not imposed economic sanctions that are strong enough to deter Russia from interfering with the Ukraine's sovereignty. President Obama needs to make it clear that the United States will not stand for such blatant disregard for international law. While do nit believe that Obama's foreign policy is "feckless" as Senator McCain stated, I do believe that economic sanctions should target all of Russia as opposed to individuals. I wholeheartedly agree with President Obama on one point: a concerted effort should be made to solve this issue through diplomacy rather than economic or militaristic attacks. All those involved must be careful to avoid the escalation if an already tense situation.
ReplyDeleteKatie Cresser
I couldn't have agreed more with Senator McCain: we must use stronger economic sanctions in order to discourage Russia's current actions. They cannot succeed if they do not have the money to finance their occupation. In this instance, it would be the wisest way to prevent any more harm from being done. Military action would just create a larger threat for American lives and potential war. I believe that, if matters get worse in Crimea, Obama should follow Bush 41's footsteps and call an urgent meeting of the UN. If necessary, a coalition of international forces would help out the Crimean people as well as minimize harm of the American soldiers. Something must be done in Crimea. The people are crying out for help, and it reminds me of when Hitler invaded Poland. We must reinforce why Russia's actions are not okay. Megan Byrne
ReplyDeleteAfter watching the videos, I agree with Senator McCain and Ordoct Oho about the military. No need to send soldiers over there; soldiers from the war on terrorism are slowly coming home and no need to go bizarre and start a World War three. believe that our government should not get involved because it is none of our business. The United States for once should worry about their country only and deal with the problems they have. They should follow George Washington and just be neutral throughout this scenario. I agree with Megan about how Obama should follow Bush 41 footsteps with the UN, but just discuss it with other countries and don't get involved with another war because with wars, the economy will decrease.
ReplyDeletePrior to when this was assigned, I came across this video that has historical context. Although a vlog video made by a YA author usually isn't considered a credible source, John Green also makes educational videos for Crash Course, and appears in the world history videos, making his knowledge of world history more trustworthy than the average vlog. I'm posting the link in case anyone else wants to see/so you know where information that isn't in one of the news clips is from.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2nklduvThs
I agree that military intervention is the wrong way to go. It would put the troops in danger when there doesn’t seem to be a direct threat to American citizens (unless any happen to be in Crimea or near a riot, but at this point, any Americans who felt they were in danger would probably have found a way to leave.) If there is a direct threat to America or it citizens, things would be different, but if nobody has directly threatened America keep the military out of it. Economic sanctions should get the point the across, because not only does issuing a sanction say “we don’t agree with you’re doing’ but it also lowers the funds available to do said disagreeable things.
The situation in Ukraine is tricky. Although at first it might seem like a good idea to find out what the people of Crimea want, geography and history complicate the situation. Geographically speaking, Crimea should be part of Ukraine—after, Crimea is physically attached to Ukraine, and not to Russia. Crimea depends on Ukraine for electricity. However, most of Ukraine’s Russian speaking/identifying population is in Crimea. If the people of Crimea want to become independent or join Russia, their dependence on Ukraine for electricity makes that difficult. Should they decide they want to leave Ukraine and join Russia, a war would probably ensue. Other than economic sanctions and diplomatic activity, America should stay out of this fight unless there is a direct threat.
I agree with Senator McCain, there is no need for military intervention by the United States, this will only cause more havoc. The United States is not directly involved in this crisis and that is how we should remain. However, we can, as Megan stated, intervene economically to discourage Russia's actions. The impact of economic sanctions, although it might slightly hurt the United States, is nothing compared to what another war would do. President Obama needs to consult nations surrounding Russia and the Ukraine to hear their opinions about what should be done. But at the moment, the United States should not become involved militarily, unless the crisis escalates further and it is best for the citizens of our country.
ReplyDeleteI agree with a majority of my classmates that President Obama is handling the Ukrainian Crisis wisely. While, as of now nothing more needs to be done I think that in the future President Obama may need to increase his role. I believe economic sanctions need to be made, more so then they are now. In my opinion economic sanctions are the only way for us to stop Russia. With Russia's weak economy any economic sanctions we place will have an affect. Diplomatically, I do not think that anything President Obama says to Putin will be heard. I agree with Giovanna that other nations surrounding Ukraine should be consulted to hear their opinions on what should be done. I also believe that no military action should be taken unless it is desperately needed in the future. Military action would cause more harm then good because it would lead to many unnecessary deaths and I think another war is the last thing the United States needs as we are removing our troops Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteI believe with Senator McCain in that Obama should not involve military troops in the Crimea, unless major crimes (such as mass murders, torturing, etc.) occurs. I appreciate the idea that economic sanctions are being placed on Russian officials, but clearly the sanctions already enacted are not strong enough to cause Russia to remove its forces. Much stronger consequences need to be forced on Russia for such an act, unless, as Obama stated, the people of Ukraine come to the overwhelming conclusion that they do want to be part of "Putin's Russia" as McCain referred to it. If the people of Ukraine wanted to be part of Russia, however, Russia would not need to send in troops for something that they could just simply annex without struggle, so clearly many individuals do not want to join Russia. In all, Obama needs to prove that the US has certainly retained its strength, as opposed to McCain's statement that said that other countries are beginning to think that we are weaker than we once were. Also, troops should not be involved unless Russian troops start becoming violent with the Ukrainian people, especially after the final return of our troops from Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteI would agree with most of my classmates in the opinion that President Obama is handling the Ukrainian Crisis as best as he can. As of now the main way Obama has responded to the Russian presence in Ukraine is through economic sanctions. This in my opinion is the only real way to get Russia’s attention. As Senator McCain said there is not a military option that can be exercised now, I would agree with him. We do not need to start what would basically start World War 3. The only thing sending troops to Ukraine would do is increase the tensions between the US and Russia. So Military assistance is not a very good option. Finally Diplomatic measures would not work either. This is because I do not believe that either Putin or Obama are stubborn enough to start a military conflict between the US and Russia. So if Obama tells Putin to pull Russian troops out of Crimea, Putin would not listen because in reality the only way Obama can respond is by increasing economic sanctions. This causes no change, so diplomacy would not work.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with Jeremy and Senator McCain, that military action is not the best policy at this point. Of course, diplomacy would be the preferred course of action but it is quite unrealistic as Putin is in no rush to negotiate with Obama. The only way to get through the Russia is through economic sanctions. Russia's economy is not thriving and the economic sanctions could be a wake up call or could cause negotiations in the future. However, the current economic sanctions are strictly on individuals and I agree with Katie, the economic sanctions need to be stronger. Of course, it is wise to keep watch on the Crimea Peninsula to make sure that Russia does not expand beyond the parts of the peninsula that truly support Russian rule.
ReplyDeleteI believe that as a country we should be taking economic sanctions against Russia in response to Putin’s aggression. Since military action may start an unnecessary conflict, we should at least retaliate to Putin’s aggression by freezing Russia’s assets. In this way we can send a message that the U.S. will not cooperate economically with a country that deliberately breaks international law.
ReplyDeletePersonally I don’t believe that diplomatic measures will be very effective in this situation because what Putin wants to do, he will most likely do, even if Obama asks him not to. I don’t think Putin fears Obama, and because of that, diplomacy will not settle the situation in Ukraine and Crimea. I agree with McCain that we may not seem as strong and powerful a country as we seemed to be in the past, but I think we are also wiser with our military choices. We are more careful with the foreign conflicts we choose to get involved in, and in turn more careful with the lives of our soldiers.
President Obama is being passive when it comes to using military force against Putin. I think it may have been inevitable that Crimea would fall to Russia, but that does not justify Putin’s takeover of the area. In world history when a country took imperialistic action, and did not face any consequences (Germany), the hunger for more power would only increase.
Overall I believe that it is not necessary to retaliate strongly against Russia militarily, but Obama should be taking more action, possibly economically, in response to the Ukrainian Crisis.
I agree with Jane that so far, Obama has been doing the right thing by standing back in this situation. Michael O'Hanlon seems to agree with Obama's actions so far also, but then begins to say that stronger measures might be needed in the long run. I also agree with O'Hanlon when he says that if Russia does attack Ukraine, then Obama should consider helping out the Ukraine's military. Obama's foreign policy is more focused on negotiation and collaboration rather than confrontation and unilateralism. However, critics and also the American people see him to be hindering foreign policy. The people see him as the president that waits for things to fix themselves and once it does, Obama takes all the credit. If the time does come when an attack occurs,Obama needs to take more military action and putting it against Putin is a great place to start. If he wants people to look back at his foreign policy as successful, he needs to actually get involved and not sit back and wait for everything to patch itself up.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tara that economic sanctions are probably our best option against Russia at this point, and that Putin does not fear Obama. We don't want to appear even more deserving of our international reputation as a big, militant bully, but in this situation, Russia has to understand the full military power of the United States and how Putin's actions can very well trigger our use of this power.
ReplyDeleteIf Crimea and Eastern Ukraine want to join the Russian Federation, it is completely fine for a vote to be held on the subject throughout each region. If the results signify the join with Russia, then the international community should let Russia absorb these two regions. This vote cannot be held, however, when Russian tanks are literally on the ground in Crimea or Eastern Ukriane—a startling military presence has a good chance of influencing the opinions of voters. Russia should under no circumstances be allowed to absorb any part of Ukraine by force, so the United States should definitely fund Ukrainian military efforts to remove Russia from Ukrainian soil.
President Obama's indecisiveness may be a cause of this problem. If Putin knows he can start conflict with no immediate penalty, he'll continue to do so. Taking a passive approach ealry on in the conflict has only prolonged the problem of Putin's aggression. But I feel that at this point it is rather unnecessary for military action as Russia's moves are only speculation and could be stopped with threat of sanction. If sanctions can solve the problem, it is without a doubt unnecessary to risk American lives and money
ReplyDeleteDue to all the cautiousness and talk about the past Olympics in Sochi and everyone paying more attention to it their year because it was in Russia because of the past we have with them i do believe even though that now it is over giving any economic aid or support to the ones who need it in the Ukraine would be setting a spark or adding new fuel to an old fire with Russia. I think this is bad because we are already in tremendous debt so why increase it just to get an enemy in Russia out of it. Diplomacy wise i do not see what we can do to help them, we can't make any legislatures to help the Ukraine because it wouldn't directly pertain to them and that would anger Russia even if we tried especially with the President they have now anything can happen. I agree with Obama for once when it comes to not acting militarily because it is not our battle to fight even though it is sad and since we are not roving military support at the moment i believe we should most definitely not provide any economic support.
ReplyDeleteAs of now, I agree with President Obama's actions in the Ukraine. Like John McCain said, there simply is no military option right now. Even though the United States has the most powerful military in the world, using it in this situation would only cause war with Russia. I feel it is hypocritical of the United States to tell Russia this is wrong, considering we have done this many times before. But on the other hand, Russia is using a bias vote to justify their invasion of Crimea. Like John McCain said, considering Stalin deported thousands of Russians to Crimea a while ago, obviously they want to rejoin their original country. This is the reason their vote was bias, they are all originally Russian citizens. I agree with Tara and Schulte that the best action to take would be to freeze out Russia economically and hopefully they back off from Crimea. If this does not work, unfortunately Obama will have to intervene using the military. I also agree with Tom that President Obama is being a little indecisive about his actions in Russia. Obama's foreign policy is not heavily based off the military, therefore Poutin thinks his actions will have no immediate consequence. I think it is in Obama's best interest to cut off Russia through the economy and trully show the power of the United States.
ReplyDeleteMegan Musachio
Further economic sanctions should follow an escalation of controversy surrounding the crisis in Ukraine. I do not think President Obama has been “feckless” as started by Senator McCain, however, I also do not believe that we can really take substantial action without appearing hypocritical. Russia has claimed the same reasons for occupying Crimea that the United States claimed for several invasions such as those in invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. This is not to say that diplomatic measures should not be pursued to absolve this crisis. This is obviously still a different situation than that those of the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan despite the similarities in measures taken by the aggressor country. I do not believe that military assistance should be pursued directly by the United States at all. Military aid should be pursued through the United Nations and a coalition should be made(although that might still include US soldiers, whoops). The Obama Administration should proceed much as it always has in my opinion, a measured approach that strays as far and safely away as possible from the unilateralism of the previous administration. I do not believe that Obama's policy has allowed the US to appear soft to our enemies and encouraged them to commit acts that are against our interests, they would have done so under any administration. In fact, the only way to prevent aggressive hostile actions such as the civil war in Libya which is mentioned in the beginning of the voanews video or the Ukraine crisis is to just occupy everything with soldiers. This obviously cannot happen, which is why there will always be some kind of deadly and hostile action towards any United States foreign policy since the United States has vested foreign interests all over the world.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't fully agree with senator McCain, I do believe that Obama hasn't been strict enough in regards to the Russian invasion of the Crimea. While war should be avoided at all costs, Obama still needs to be more stern with world leaders such as Putin. Sanctions on Russia was a good step by the US to show Russia that we are serious. Freezing the assets of the elite of Russia may just work in the long run, but for right now, the US needs to make sure that Russia knows that any hasty decisions will create further conflict. I believe Obama should be stern with Putin and assure him that America will continue to police Eastern Europe util we know that the region is stable.
ReplyDeleteI agree with President Obama's decision to place economic sanctions on wealthy Russian officials and businessmen who have close ties with Putin. I believe this was a good first step, however, I do no think that that will be enough to stop Putin. Unfortunately, I do not think any diplomatic measures will solve the conflict. I also do not see any negotiations happening in the near future. I think the military should be used as a last resort because the United States does not need to get involved in another war and does not need to lose any more soldiers. I think President Obama's next step should be to impose tougher economic sanctions on Russia.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Senator McCain with regards to military intervention. Involving the military in this conflict at any point in the near future would not be a wise decision for President Obama to make, like Ryan Schulte said, “We don't want to appear even more deserving of our international reputation as a big, militant bully.” However, I have to disagree with McCain’s statement that US foreign policy is “feckless.” I believe that President Obama has made appropriate diplomatic actions, as he is traveling to Europe this week to meet with G7 leaders about Ukraine. He has also signed executive orders which impose sanctions on Russia, and has been intensifying these sanctions as Russia continues to be uncooperative. Further sanctions will only further isolate Russia from the international community, allowing the United States to pressure them more easily without the need for military force.
ReplyDeleteI too agree with Senator McCain’s statement with regards to military intervention in Crimea. It isn’t that there is no need for US military intervention in the area, but it would do more harm than good at this point. Unlike the thoughts of Senator Cruz, military assistance of any sort would not help the situation, but turn it into two of the biggest world powers fighting each other again. On the other hand, I agree with Jaclyn that it is indeed too late for diplomatic measures to solve this conflict. Anything that the Obama administration tries to say to Putin just goes into one ear and out the other; Obama’s talks are doing nothing but adding fuel to the “Obama’s policy is feckless” fire. Like McCain said, we need to exhaust our resources to come up with plan after plan after plan until we finally find one that works. This all should have been done two weeks ago though. At this point, economic sanctions seem like our only resort. The US can still show its strength by showing Putin how devastating his actions are in an economic sense to the Russian Federation. While no plan is perfect, the US needs to do something that will directly affect Putin to show that we are still strong and that we want this situation to end.
ReplyDeleteI believe that unless the United Nations decides to initiate war on Russia or intervene in the Ukraine that the United States should stay completely out of the issue. the US has not declared war since WWII and I believe it should stay that way, there is absolutely no reason why the US should go to war every time something happens outside of our country that we have nothing to do with. We're finally beginning to recover from our recession and I honestly believe that a war will only set us back. We also have a huge debt, and we shouldn't send aid to the Ukraine that we don't have to spend because this will only hurt the younger generation (ours) who have to suffer for what the older generation is doing presently. As for diplomatic or militaristic measures I think that again this is something the Ukraine and Russia must sort out unless, again, the UN decides to get involved. When troops were sent to Iraq and Afghanistan they were supposed to be in and out, but instead it took over 7 years to get the troops back to the US and it cost countless lives that didn't have to be spent, if we send troops to Crimea there is a great chance that once again they will be there longer than anticipated and not only that they'll give their lives for something the US had nothing to do with to begin with. Many people say that a second Cold War will be created from this situation but in my opinion I believe a third World War will be created. The US cannot afford another war and should honestly remain neutral or close to neutral throughout this event.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with what Mr. Bachman had said in class a few weeks ago about how Russia is becoming more confident because Obama has 'recognized' Putin. Obama has indeed allowed Putin to come to the table however I don't think that the US should take the bait that Putin is throwing out. Putin is indeed testing the waters to see how the US will react and I do not think that it is a sign of weakness if the US decides to stay out of something that they have no place in. The US isn't a police to the world, it has rarely worked in the past and I don't understand why the US continues to believe it will work in the future.
Unfortunately, Senator McCain is justified in saying that our handling of Russian aggression has been “feckless.” What is more unfortunate, however, is that this is unlikely to change greatly. As McCain and many of my classmates have pointed out, it is highly unlikely that we will resort to military intervention in the region. Putin is well aware of this and, based upon his ongoing unresponsiveness to our diplomacy, it seems that he doesn’t consider us to be a real threat to his plans. As such, economic measures seem to be our only recourse. The sanctions that have been put in place thus far, however, mainly target high-profile members of the Russian oligarchy and are not very far-reaching. In a recent Twitter post, Russia’s deputy prime minister scoffed that “all these sanctions aren’t worth a grain of sand of the Crimean land that returned to Russia.” Based upon the content of the tweet, it would probably be a good idea for the international community to impose harsher, more extensive economic sanctions. On a more positive note, I feel that Obama’s decision to pledge $1 billion in aid to the Ukraine was a good step in the right direction. Looking to history, there are numerous examples, such as the Marshall Plan, that show that giving aid to endangered nations can be beneficial to our political cause. Therefore, in order to achieve a positive resolution to this issue, it is clear that we must make the best possible use of our nation’s economic might.
ReplyDelete-Joe F
Period 7
I agree with Senator McCain that the government has been handling the situation fecklessly. Given Putin's attitude and recent actions it is very unlikely that negotiations through diplomacy are going to be possible in the any near future but I believe that taking military action is also not an option. I also agree with mostly all of my class mates that placing economic sanctions is our best bet and it is also a good way to send a message that we mean business without becoming too aggressive and taking military action.
ReplyDeleteTara F
Period 7
Although I agree with Senator McCain in that the government is "feckless" in its dealing with Russia, I believe that acting with aggression is not the proper course to take with a country like Russia. I agree with the point that we should use economics to deal with Russia because warlike actions could only cause more bad then good. On the other hand, the Ukraine is in a huge rut both economically and politically, so I believe that the U.S, should keep a close eye on what is to come with Russia's new influence there. As we slowly remove troops from the Middle East, I do not believe it is wise to start new military tensions with another nation over seas. We have had relatively stable relations with Russia for the past few decades and although I do not believe that the U.S. should act "fecklessly" they should not cross boundaries that will wake the sleeping giant. The U.S. can put its foot down without causing tension.
ReplyDeleteJenna
Period 7
I support the belief that our foreign policy in dealing with a number of issues has been lacking a firm stance on where we draw the line on issues of aggression. I also feel we cannot afford to jump to military aggression in this situation. What the Russian government is doing is blatantly wrong and isn't permissible in modern times but it simply isn't a wise decision for the U.S. to become involved militarily. The U.S. must avoid sending any type of military assistance to Ukraine and instead must increase economic sanctions while also providing financial support for western Ukraine to prevent Russia from attempting to overtake them as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Obama did the right thing by placing economic sanctions on the elite community of Russia and those who have close ties with Putin. I also agree with Jenna that military action should no be taken against a country like Russia, despite the fact that we should not be acting "fecklessly" either. Diplomatic policy is no longer an option because no negotiation is going to stop Putin at this point. Through tougher economic sanctions, the United States will be able to put it's foot down and show Russia that the situations regarding Russia will not be left alone. There is no need to take military action just yet. If we were to do so, we'd be creating more tensions within Russia and we'd be putting our people and troops at a large risks towards a new war.
ReplyDelete- Jacqui Finston
I agree with the previous statements that Obama has dealt with the Crimea crisis well. I don’t believe it is necessary to possibly lose more of our American lives just as soon as we pulled out from Iraq. Even though Obama has stated his motives as to why America will not be intervening, Putin does not see us as threat now and a lack of respect to diplomacy is definitely seen from Putin’s actions. Just as McCain stated that the government is acting “feckless” and I can also see that side, but there is no need to jump into a war with aggression. However with that being said, Jenna and Tara both make excellent points about Putin’s past and that if America chooses to not intervene, there should still be a close watch on the Russians in Crimea.
ReplyDeleteAs both O'Hanlon and McCain as well as many others who have commented have pointed out, there isn't a reasonable military option. Obama has made it clear that the US takes very seriously its commitment to NATO allies and for Russia to continue what it's doing will clearly just lead to more diplomatic isolation for Russia. Obama needs to be careful to not escalate the situation but resolve it and diplomacy is the best way to do that, however, diplomacy on its own may unfortunately not be enough to resolve this situation which puts Obama in a difficult situation. On one hand people believe he's not doing enough but if he took military action than he would be getting way to involve and people would blame him for that. The only option is to take more economic action against Russia. This also isn't a perfect solution because the impact of economic sanctions might hurt the US economy although significantly less than another war, it still is not a perfect solution.
ReplyDelete~Natalie Goklevent
Given the situation, I think President Obama has handled it quite well. People need to remember that Putin didn't just wake up one day and decide to invade Ukraine because "The (US) President is weak." This conflict in Ukraine began in October, starting with small street protests. Ukraine is a nation that is split down the middle politically, but in their national Presidential election, a Pro-Russian Candidate became President. When he ended up sticking to his alignment and taking funds for Russia and denying the opportunity to move closer to the European Union, people revolted and forced him to flee. A government was then installed, acting as if the last Presidential election resulted in a Pro-Western candidate being elected. Russia merely grabbed an opportunity that was on the field; not because of President Obama, but because of the current circumstances in his region. Although Russia had mainly driven out the Tartars in a not-so-orderly manner, the majority of Crimeans are ethnic Russians and voted for a Pro-Russian Government, something that protests in Kiev just took away from them. Their wanting to leave the nation is not that hard to understand, and all Putin did was grasp at the opportunity to gain power in the world community. No matter the sitting President, he would've done the same thing. There isn't much as a country that we can do besides slap economic sanctions on their leading aristocrats and possibly trade stops (though doing so would cripple the European economy due a lack of oil) unless of course the President wants to start another World War.
ReplyDeleteI Think what the President needs to focus on is actually maintaining talks with Russia as to not let this conflict escalate another. In other words, because of the situation in Ukraine, Russia and the US have been unable to continue the peace talks that they are co-sponsoring in Syria. Now more than ever, with the strong appearance of the ISIS in the northern region and Damascus, these peace talks need to take place, or the moderate rebels will be completely wiped from the playing field, as the extremists are selling the government's own oil back to itself after seizing their oil fields, allowing them both to function at higher levels than before, both of whom want to kill off the moderates.
I think if the President confronts Putin about that situation and acts to preserve peace despite these actions (of which the US took strikingly similar actions in 2008 in Kosovo, making it an independent nation, but still barred from the UN to do China's and Russia's non-recognition of it as a sovereign state) he will help to quell the chaos that is arising, and be known through history as a President who worked to find peace, and didn't start an active war with Russia.
I agree with Obama’s decision to stay out of Crimea and instead use economic sanctions instead of military action. I feel that what happens in Crimea does not affect us personally and it should be left to the United Nations to handle it accordingly. I feel that Putin never saw us as a threat to begin with and by us not invading does not change anything. I feel that by using economic sanctions on the Russians proves to be a good method to show them that we are serious about the situation, but not stupid. Both Putin and Obama know that by starting wars with each other, it would create a huge downfall and a possible 3rd war. I feel that by Putin talking with Obama it shows that he does not want a war, but he certainly is testing the waters on how far he can go without military intervention.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't believe there is any direct military aid we can provide (seeing as US and Russia have had a pretty intense relationship and have come very close to war multiple times), I do think some serious economic aid is in order. Whether Russian leaders like it or not, no matter how legitimate the Ukrainian government is, it exists and its people consider themselves separate from Russia, they consider themselves Ukrainians. Even if Russia were to regain that land, there would still be Ukrainian people that would want to be free from the hands of the Russian government, and as a nation that was founded by those who wished to break apart from a strong nation attempting to keep us within its control, we should respect that enough to aid them as much as possible. That being said, an economic approach is great, but in the end diplomacy may very well be our saving grace. True, Putin is a very powerful man and is not very likely to stray from his current path, but with enough nagging from other, even more powerful people (Mr. President) he might consider other options, maybe even striking a deal with the Ukrainian people, one that doesn't include the forceful "retaking" of land. Maybe if President Obama is to uphold the ideologies that our nation once held so dearly, and acted in the ways I have stated, than his foreign policy will cease being "feckless" in the eyes of men like Senator McCain.
ReplyDelete