Truth be told, the only reason that I’m spending so much time on the Internet

Internet is much worse than drugs… indeed.
We all here are lost for the world

Thanks, Ger. I feel very special now!

Truth be told, the only reason that I’m spending so much time on the Internet in the middle of harvesting season is that things did not go well. I quit farming this July at a fairly big (for me) loss. Nothing to do with either farming or the market (good demand here). With great pain I quit because of unique personal circumstances. I hope to get back to it. That’s all I’ll say.

I’ve been to what used to be Yugoslavia only once. In 1989 we rented an Opel in Belgrade and drove all over the place. Little did we know that in a few years there will so much blood and the places we visited would become different countries (Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia). We did notice, though, that when I said that I was Russian the faces of the Serbs lit up, while the ones of the Croats did not. We also encountered Serbians bad-mouthing the Croats and Croats bad-mouthing Serbs. We also encountered Slovenian separatist, but they never betrayed any anti-Serb animosity. One thing we did not encounter at all was animosity between the Serbs and the Bosnians. So when things went bad in Yugoslavia, I was not surprised by the war between the Serbs and the Croats, but I was indeed surprised not only by the war between the Serbs and the Bosniaks, but also by its viciousness.

The way I see it is that the Serbia-Russia relationship is more one of convenience. Neither side believe more. Serbia/ex-SFRY provided Russia with some leverage against western domination when Russia itself had almost none, especially the west’s complete disregard (or cherry picking/deliberate misinterpretation) of UNSCR. The same was true when the Russian Empire was expanding, Serbs and other slavs posing as a useful foil in entre-empire rub-a-dubbing.

I don’t think the Serbs trust Russia much either (as I already posted that Yeltsin stabbed them in the back over Kosovo and thus ‘won’ the ‘war’ for NATO in 1999), but they have few friends who will stand up for them (curiously Romania is among one of the better ones) and of course is an important glue amongst the nationalists of various shades, i.e. a kind of open marquee. Serbia also uses Russia as leverage against western domination. Both are weary of western ‘promises’ (batteries as always are ‘not included’). Fortunately, with globalization, there are alternative economic partners available to help reduce the influence of one’s near neighbors in the domestic economy and hence its politics.

As for the whole EU-Belarus thing, it’s a bit early to tell, but from the humanitarian propaganda of the last 20 years ‘we had to bomb them to save them’ and the like, I’m amazed that these same people appear to be so quickly dropping (or ’scaling back/resizing/adjusting/whatever’ as they may now like to spin it) this idea in favor of good old-fashioned realpolitik, or what appears to be in this case, just to wind up Laurel & Hardy of the Kremlin.

It begs the question, which of these people are the real idealists and which ones are just the groupies, along for the ride and is/was ‘humanitarian interventionism’ basically a product of seriously asymmetric power relations following 1989?

I wonder what would have happened if Russia had pushed back earlier, say 2005ish? To make a possibly dodgy parallel, post cold war western influence basically mirrored that of the credit crunch, both were living beyond their means for quite a while which was only possible because the trust and the underlying support that it relied on had not been seriously challenged either actively or passively.

These last few years will certainly be a boon for the employment of historians…

NATO still has to die though. It is bad for the EU’s identity and independence, though it is a good excuse to avoid spending $$$ on blowing people up. The umbilical cord should be cut as it is strangling the baby.

my point was that it was not he who ruined relations, or at least create the situation that Russia and the US find themselves in now.

No, he didn’t create the situation. And by “situation” I mean not US-Russia situation only.
But Clinton started the process of fading illusions. When he was “not sure” what it was with Monica If he said “We’d f***d so what?” – then he would get respect from Russian (both men and women). But when “the leader of the free world” didn’t know what he was doing in his office – how we could trust him?
Huge contrast with Ronald the Warrior.

I think – though I could be wrong – that Russia has no genuine interest in Serbia at all

have you noticed I said “Yugoslavia” not “Serbia”? It was not about Serbia or Kosovo. It was about US. When they say “We are partners” but in fact mean “I’m the boss – you the foll” – it would be strange to expect any respect form Russia. Unless you follow the rule “Боятся – значит уважают”.

The main two rules of recent US politics is 1. “Уж если я чего решил – то выпью обязательно”.*
2. “Будет такая борьба за мир во всем мире – никому мало не покажется” **

These rules worked (or at least looked like they do) against weak “partners” like Iraq or Yugoslavia. But Russia is a little bit different. And very much disappointed that such simple basic fact escaped from the heads of eggheads in Washington, DC.

PS. Also the country that think Palin is a great person to be President and Dermocracy wins in Pakistan – such country scares not Russia only.

————————————
*”If I decided something – I’ll get dunk no matter what”
**”There will be such fight for peace in the world – no one will escape!”
- but I’m not sure this is good enough translation.

In fairness ivanov I do appreciate that Clinton had no influence in the elections himself at all with Russians, but he did want to be seen to be supporting Boris Yeltsin – my point was that it was not he who ruined relations, or at least create the situation that Russia and the US find themselves in now.

”And all mess with Yugoslavia is not forgotten”

I think – though I could be wrong – that Russia has no genuine interest in Serbia at all, and when Clinton attacked Serbia Russian pride more than anything else was hurt. And Russia’s moaning about Kosovo independence has more to do with what was coming down the line with Ossetiya and Abkhazia than any heartfelt feelings for Serb integrity. I only have anecdotal evidence but a lot of Russians I spoke to consider Serbia a pain in the arse that keeps getting itself into trouble.

”The EU just couldn’t resist!

EU looks for closer ties with Belarus after Georgian war”

In the light of what I wrote above about Belarus, I’m actually horrified Aleks. The EU shouldnt be giving them any friendship at all.

”About half of the comments for this post show that as far as popular culture is concerned I am (and always was) hopelessly out of it.”

Kolya you’ve already had 3 or 4 careers in your life and in fairness that is indicative of an individual who uses his time prudently rather than wasting it watching the likes of 90210, The Hills etc. A soldiering boiologist farmer with the coolest of all Russian names. You the man Kolya. You a LEGEND!

When we – in Russia – were electing Yeltsin the side Clinton was looking at was irrelevant. Believe me (and I voted all the times) – Clinton’s opinion and nose were least things to influence people. In fact more and more people had started to think that if US was not happy with what we were doing – this was indication we were doing right thing. Kolya was right about illusions – they were evaporating very fast.
And all mess with Yugoslavia is not forgotten.

But you are right by saying that Bush administration has made “great” job to whipe off the rest of illusions….

EU looks for closer ties with Belarus after Georgian war
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1429178.php/EU_looks_for_closer_ties_with_Belarus_after_Georgian_war__1st_Lead__

Looks like my initial suspicions were right. Timing, timing, timing.

Human rights? Democracy? Freedom of Speech? It looks like even the EU is now thinking about making a deal with one ‘devil’ to get at another! It is just too hilarious for words. Sad days indeed for the humanitarian warriors…. Benito-Ferrero-Walnutz and all.

Pathetic

Clinton looked the other way during the First Chechen War not because he favored Yeltsin. Clinton looked the other way in an awful lot of situations.”

Candide, Clinton looked the other way when Yelstin levelled Chechnya cos he wanted Yeltsin the remain in power. Clinton could have made as much noise as he wanted in 1995-1996 but didnt because he wanted to ensure Zyuganov wasnt elected, and Clinton did indeed look the other way when allegations of electoral fraud in 1996 in Russia were touted, and had no complaints when the votes of Yeltsin’s re-election were burned literally the day after the ballot, in blantant controvention of Russian electoral rules. I do appreciate that that Clinton did piss off the Russians in 1999 when he bombed Serbia, but I think the importance of Serbia to the Russians has always been greatly overstated. There were protests at the US embassy by a few thousand Russians(and Mark Ames)but the thing was forgotten about very quickly. By the time Clinton stepped down in 2000 relations had been restored with Putin then at the helm. Points involving China, whilst interesting, are not actually relevant to your original point that the Democrats ruined relations with Russia. Patently they did not.
Compare this to what I said earlier about the Republicans pissing off the Russians with scrapping missile talks and the WTO, and add in the Republican’s support of major NATO encroachment on Russia’s borders and the missile defence shield in Poland. I think its quite obvious from all this that Bush, and not Clinton, have ruined relations with the Russians (and of course the Russians have contributed too).
By the way I make no attempt to justify or support Clinton; I’m just calling it as I see it – whom Americans elect to be their President is their own business at the end of the day.