[Aizutox]

James Dunnigan...


http://www.strategypage.com/dls/arti...8101103629.asp


"Russia has an offer that neighboring Ukraine can't refuse, and that won't make Russia look like a bully. Russia wants to built aircraft carriers, but the shipyards best suited for that kind of work are in Ukraine. At the moment, Ukraine and Russia are at odds over several major issues. One is possession of the Crimean peninsula (in southern Ukraine), and the Russian naval bases there. Currently, Russia has leased Crimea, but the lease expires in nine years, and Ukraine does not want to renew, no matter how much the Russians huff, puff and threaten. Ukraine does not trust the Russians, especially after what Russia has done to neighboring Georgia (invaded, then annexed part of Georgia). So some Russian legislators have come up with a clever solution.

It goes like this. Russia would provide contracts to build aircraft carriers in Ukrainian shipyards, as well as cash to get those yards back in business (they are closed for lack thereof). In return, Ukraine would extend the Crimean lease. Currently Russia stations 50 warships (most of them small, and many just patrol boats) and 80 aircraft in Crimea. But there is a large Russian population in Crimea, and Russia would like to stay. It's also becoming clear that the EU (European Union) was shaken up by what happened to Georgia, and especially by the way Russian just shrugged off EU protests. The EU and the U.S. are making aggressive noises that Ukraine will receive more substantial (more than diplomatic) support in any future confrontation with Russia. So now Russia is looking to use the carrot, rather than the stick, to get its way. The carrier contract solution works out for everyone, except Western nations unhappy with Russia having a carrier fleet. But that's a decade or more in the future, and the Russians have never shown any great capacity for effectively running aircraft carriers. "

[djmassk]

Maybe the Ukraine should give half of it back.

[EvaQWmrm]

In that case I declare the universal monarchy has broken out in Europe and crown myself as emperor of all Eurocoms

[boiffrona]

There are two options in what will happen with the EU.

1) EU goes crashing down because the member states can't agree on a common policy
2) An EU with divergent speeds will really start to develop now, with the Euro countries taking the initiative. This already exists to some extent. Now's the opportunity to really get that started. The EU has always changed due to crises, and this is one of them.
In contrast to the ECB, who proves to be a good federal authority, there should be a political counterpart. As it is now, Barroso is still dependent on member state leaders, and despite advances in parliamentary power, that parliament only posesses a symbolic approval of the commision. That should definately change.

The exact same people who blame the EU of its malfunctioning and its weakness, want to hold back the EU, not granting it more power at the expense of their own sovereign influence. The hypocrisy is mind-blowing

Belgium ex-prime minister Verhofstadt has published a booklet called "the united states of Europe" in which he advocated this EU with different speeds. the book was greeted with scepticism or downright refusal, in that even some Euro countries don't want to go as far as Verhofstadt would lik, Juncker said. But now the political landscape has drastically been upset, this new EU has a far higher chance of succeeding.

[Stainditnew]

Maybe the half that glows in the dark...

[Zesavenue]

You might want to check the news before making such assertions.

Euro Rises Most in 3 Weeks as European Leaders Guarantee Banks

By Candice Zachariahs

Oct. 13 (Bloomberg) -- The euro rose the most in three weeks against the dollar and the yen after European leaders agreed to guarantee bank borrowing and prevent big lenders from going under.

The currency advanced as leaders of the 15 countries using the euro announced measures including a pledge to guarantee new bank debt issuance until the end of 2009; permission for governments to shore up banks by buying preferred shares; and a commitment to recapitalize any ``systemically'' critical banks in distress. http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2...qEk&refer=home

Expect resistance to a common bailout fund to subside and first steps towards a common financial regulator in the Eurozone.

[GreefeWrereon]

Unified action is exactly what they presented a few hours ago...

[hotelhyatt]

Originally posted by TheStinger


The only country who have come up with and implemented a proper plan is the UK- the rest including Geramny, France and the benelux have not done anything in unison, now this group is supposed to be core europe and this crisis if nothing else demonstrates that europe is not ready for further integration Read the news. Merkel's Germany has agreed for a unified action with Sarkozy's France. They were to be holding a common view. Before the summit on sunday Germany was reluctant for unified action because they would have to bear many of the costs (they are the biggest net contributor after all - by far).

The Eurogroup agreed on a common statement with concrete measures. This is what simply what is required from such a meeting. It doesn't mean that everyone thinks the meeting was a 100% success. Belgium's Leterme wanted more from the meeting, as he claimed the union is facing an existential crisis, according to De Standaard. What this means is that he wanted more, but nevertheless the Eurogroup had a common voice, and came to an agreement.

It's not wrong to have different opinions. It's wrong when those different opinions preclude a quick and decisive agreement because the procedures make it too hard to do so.

That is the paradox with countries like the UK. They believe the EU can't come to an agreement, so further integration is pointless. It's the other war around, since we need more integration and more supranational mechanisms, more power to the parliament rather than the member states governments and the abolishment of unanimity in council decisions on foreign affairs for example. Only then a decisive and unified voice can be sent. That won't mean there isn't room for dissent or debate, it's just that the EU will not be disrupted by lengthy discussion that never ends.

Oh and by the way. It just so happens that the UK and the Eurogroup in general had similar views on the measure to be taken. It's by all means not a 'UK plan'.

And another by the way: I think Leterme was right. A crisis is facing the EU. We need to use this crisis to topple the existing standstill and use the Eurogroup to take the iniative. That failed today, but meh we'll see what the future holds.

[rushiddink]

Originally posted by BeBro
In that case I declare the universal monarchy has broken out in Europe and crown myself as emperor of all Eurocoms

Hard luck Lancer, we're going nowhere

Actually it does piss me off that my country is such a bunch of fencesitters...