The seizure of the Crimean parliament building and snap military exercises constitute a dangerous ratcheting up of tension
Sergei Lavrov's statement was categorical. Russia, the country's foreign minister said on Tuesday, would stick by its "principled position of non-intervention" in Ukraine's internal affairs. While one can applaud Mr Lavrov's sentiment, it is hard to reconcile his words with events on the ground on Thursday.
After a series of overnight raids, masked men wearing flak jackets and armed with rocket-propelled grenades and sniper rifles seized the parliament building in Simferopol, the capital of Ukraine's Crimea region. The men, described by Russia's semiofficial Interfax news agency as "Crimean self-defence units", barricaded themselves inside the building and raised the Russian flag. A few hours later the deposed Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, who has been on the run since last Friday, surfaced in Russia. In a statement broadcast on Moscow state media, he called for protection from "the actions of extremists" who had toppled his government.
Russian armed forces were meanwhile vigorously deploying along the Ukrainian border as part of a snap military exercise ordered by President Vladimir Putin. Russian armoured vehicles were reportedly seen outside the limits of Russia's military base in Sevastopol, prompting Ukraine's acting president, Oleksandr Turchynov, to warn Russia that any movement by Russian forces outside their bases in the southern republic of Crimea would be interpreted as an act of military aggression.
Whether the hand of the Kremlin is behind the occupation of the parliament building or not, the country's combined actions represent a clear threat, a demonstration of Russian power and influence in Ukraine and a dangerous ratcheting up of tension in a region that is already in crisis.
There are of course good reasons for Mr Putin to fear Kiev's revolution, not least because of Ukraine's strategic importance to Moscow: the country now lies at the outer edge of Russia's sphere of influence and is the conduit for billions of dollars' worth of gas sales to Germany and western Europe. It also hosts the Black Sea fleet at Sevastopol under a long-term lease agreement. The two countries' populations are inextricably linked: ethnic Russians make up some 58% of Crimea's two million citizens, many of whom would welcome a return to the country it belonged to until 1954. The Ukrainian parliament's decision, the day after dismissing Mr Yanukovych, to abolish a law allowing the country's regions to make Russian a second official language was disturbing and unnecessary, and served only to fan the flames of Russian angst.
Some of Kiev's revolutionaries also give cause for legitimate concern: the interim government appointed on Thursday included two nationalists from the rightwing Svoboda party, fuel to the rhetoric of Russian prime minister and former president Dmitry Medvedev, who railed against the "Kalashnikov-toting people in black masks" who had taken over the country and whom the west is trying to present as a legitimate government.
However much they are provoked, then, the new members of the Kiev government must tread carefully. They must reassure Moscow that its interests and those of the Russian-speaking minority will be attended to. They must move with caution in dealing with the gunmen in the Crimean parliament or risk a Russian response.
There are clear lessons for Kiev in the Georgian crisis in the summer of 2008. After Georgian troops moved into the breakaway, Moscow-backed region of South Ossetia, Russia retaliated. A nasty five-day war saw hundreds killed and led to the long-term Russian occupation of 20% of Georgia's territory. If a similar event were to take place in the much bigger, more heavily armed nation of Ukraine, the results could be catastrophic.
"Provocateurs are marching," Kiev's acting interior minister, Arsen Avakov, said on Thursday. "It is time for cool heads." It is also a time for Russia properly to enact its "principled position of non-intervention". Reported by guardian.co.uk 5 hours ago.
Sergei Lavrov's statement was categorical. Russia, the country's foreign minister said on Tuesday, would stick by its "principled position of non-intervention" in Ukraine's internal affairs. While one can applaud Mr Lavrov's sentiment, it is hard to reconcile his words with events on the ground on Thursday.
After a series of overnight raids, masked men wearing flak jackets and armed with rocket-propelled grenades and sniper rifles seized the parliament building in Simferopol, the capital of Ukraine's Crimea region. The men, described by Russia's semiofficial Interfax news agency as "Crimean self-defence units", barricaded themselves inside the building and raised the Russian flag. A few hours later the deposed Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, who has been on the run since last Friday, surfaced in Russia. In a statement broadcast on Moscow state media, he called for protection from "the actions of extremists" who had toppled his government.
Russian armed forces were meanwhile vigorously deploying along the Ukrainian border as part of a snap military exercise ordered by President Vladimir Putin. Russian armoured vehicles were reportedly seen outside the limits of Russia's military base in Sevastopol, prompting Ukraine's acting president, Oleksandr Turchynov, to warn Russia that any movement by Russian forces outside their bases in the southern republic of Crimea would be interpreted as an act of military aggression.
Whether the hand of the Kremlin is behind the occupation of the parliament building or not, the country's combined actions represent a clear threat, a demonstration of Russian power and influence in Ukraine and a dangerous ratcheting up of tension in a region that is already in crisis.
There are of course good reasons for Mr Putin to fear Kiev's revolution, not least because of Ukraine's strategic importance to Moscow: the country now lies at the outer edge of Russia's sphere of influence and is the conduit for billions of dollars' worth of gas sales to Germany and western Europe. It also hosts the Black Sea fleet at Sevastopol under a long-term lease agreement. The two countries' populations are inextricably linked: ethnic Russians make up some 58% of Crimea's two million citizens, many of whom would welcome a return to the country it belonged to until 1954. The Ukrainian parliament's decision, the day after dismissing Mr Yanukovych, to abolish a law allowing the country's regions to make Russian a second official language was disturbing and unnecessary, and served only to fan the flames of Russian angst.
Some of Kiev's revolutionaries also give cause for legitimate concern: the interim government appointed on Thursday included two nationalists from the rightwing Svoboda party, fuel to the rhetoric of Russian prime minister and former president Dmitry Medvedev, who railed against the "Kalashnikov-toting people in black masks" who had taken over the country and whom the west is trying to present as a legitimate government.
However much they are provoked, then, the new members of the Kiev government must tread carefully. They must reassure Moscow that its interests and those of the Russian-speaking minority will be attended to. They must move with caution in dealing with the gunmen in the Crimean parliament or risk a Russian response.
There are clear lessons for Kiev in the Georgian crisis in the summer of 2008. After Georgian troops moved into the breakaway, Moscow-backed region of South Ossetia, Russia retaliated. A nasty five-day war saw hundreds killed and led to the long-term Russian occupation of 20% of Georgia's territory. If a similar event were to take place in the much bigger, more heavily armed nation of Ukraine, the results could be catastrophic.
"Provocateurs are marching," Kiev's acting interior minister, Arsen Avakov, said on Thursday. "It is time for cool heads." It is also a time for Russia properly to enact its "principled position of non-intervention". Reported by guardian.co.uk 5 hours ago.