My guess is that the Kiev-centered western Ukraine can’t support itself as a modern state, that is, with the high living standards of a techno-industrial culture. It will be looked back on with nostalgic amazement.
Like other regions of the world, Ukraine’s destiny is to go medieval, to become a truly post-industrial agriculture-based society with a lower population and lower living standards.
Within the same time-frame, the IMF may have to turn its attention to the floundering states of western Europe.
That floundering will worsen rapidly if those nations can’t get gas from Russia.
And it’s consistent with the idea that US “leadership” at the national level consists of hopelessly bought-and-paid-for dilettantes.
And so now they’ve had the referendum vote and the result is about 87 percent of the voters in eastern Ukraine would prefer to align politically with Russia rather than the failing Ukraine state governed out of Kiev. First, there’s the ethnic divide at the Dnieper River: majority Russian-speakers to the east.
And, doubtless, lots of people still read you, even though few are commenting right now.
On the Ukraine – your view seems to be that the whole mess is mostly the fault of the US. This view is unavailable in the mainstream media here – which lends it credence. Just as a CFN trivia question – I wonder how many are reading the comment thread without commenting.
Conceivably, they would have been satisfied with a politically stable, independent Ukraine and reliable long-term leases on the Black Sea ports.
Russia is barely scraping by financially on an oil, gas, and mineral based economy that allows them to import the bulk of their manufactured goods.