Ukraine Audio Analysis: Is This a “New Cold War”? (No.)


While the crisis in Ukraine is beyond our areas of daily coverage, we have been keeping a close eye on developments.

This morning, BBC Hereford and Worcestershire gave me an opportunity to evaluate the current state of the conflict and what is likely in the near-future, starting from the question, “Is This A New Cold War?”

Listen to discussion from 34:43

The answer to the opening question: “No”, followed by other points of analysis:

1. “This is a regional conflict, in which Russia is flexing its muscles, in part to assert their power, in part because they are worried about a pro-Western government on their doorstep.”

2. “What the Russians are trying to do is get leverage over the bargaining, because there will have to be a new government in Ukraine and there will have to be some reasonable arrangement over security. The Russians are trying to have the upper hand in that by deploying their forces.”

3. “Russia suffered a serious defeat when Ukraine President Yanukovych fled the country, and Vladimir Putin is not a man who likes weakness, so he flexed his muscle. I just don’t think he wants a war.”

Related Posts


  1. Putin sees the conflict at Ukraine like this:

    Western civilization isn`t compatible with Orthodox Russia and behind all the declared western goals at the end there will be only the intention of the West to destroy Russia and to divide the items of the Russian Empire among themselves.

    Putin has added it would be legitimate if Russia would militarily intervene throughout the Ukraine.

    Surely it doesn`t sound like a peaceful conflict resolution. Beyond that the deployment of 15,000
    russian troops at Krim doesn`t look peaceful neither.

    • As many say, Putin has taken this path as some face saving measuring in the light to have lost Ukraine, even if that face is of a thug that surely knows he has gone as far as he could have without destroying himself, russia, and everyone in between.

  2. So, here are few thoughts come to mind….

    Putin says yanukovych asked Russia, a foreign country, to send troops into Ukraine to save his government….. And then, in the next breadth, Putin complains that there was a coup d’etat that kick this president out of the country…..


    I think we are on to something here. Maybe sometimes a coup d’etat might not be a bad thing. What’s wrong with people kicking out such a president who has been more than obvious about his loyalties? I think everyone have been quite clear about why people didn’t want yanukovych. Putin came to this epiphany on his own?

    The other thing about this “Russians being asked” to preserve someone else in power reminds me of soviets in afghanestan: “…The government of Afghanistan asked the Soviet Union many times to send troops…”

    How far would yanukoviych like the russians go in preserving him in power, stay for a week, shoot more people, what was the nature of this adventure was suppose to be?

    And why I think Putin is nothing more than knuckle head KGB thug….

    Putin, through his action has made sure there is a new level of disdain for Putin’s Russia, and not just in Ukraine.

    Putin is more on his way to create a disdain for himself within Russia too, I believe.

  3. Today, the real issue is not whether Russian troops remain inside their bases in Crimea or show their teeth in the streets of Sebastopol.

    The real issue is how to find Russia a place in a world order in the creation of which it played no part. Putin’s current policy could transform Russia into a fully fledged rogue state.

    And that would be dangerous both for Russia and the world.

    100 years after the beginning of WW I we are observing a re-awakening of russian imperialism. Fortunately it always needs two for tango. That`s why an intelligent policy is needed which protects putin against himself.

    • I think the point of many that object to russians behavior is this thug-ish behavior. I fully understand what smarter people in russia are concerned about, nato is at their step now, to say of nothing else.

      Today, if you ask an average german what they want their place to be in the world, I doubt the answer would be that different from what a german in 1938 would have responded. But they have learned their lessons through a lot pain that you can make others to respect you without you holding a gun to their head. But in russia, which have gone to at least as much pain of growing, the ruling class have learned nothing. They put a knife to your throat and ask why don’t you love me. This is the exact same foolish behavior that you see in islamic republic and elsewhere.

      In my opinion, that is why in most of the free world, people think prosperity or slavery is better in the west than to be in the hands of these elite thugs, corrupts, and self riotous dictators who define one’s life according only to their own liking, which incidentally always keeps the elite as elite on top. Which begs the question, what moral ground do they stand on?

      • The catatstrophe was in full gear and WWII almost inevitable at 1938.
        This madness was supported by a large share of the german population. If that had not been the case WWII would not had cost 50 million lives. Exaggerated nationalism and pathological self-esteem were some of the ingredients among many others of the
        delusional german deadly cocktail. In contrast to you I believe that the settings of german individuals has largely changed.
        To assume the opposite would be cruel – 69 years were in vain?
        The problem of russia today is that they are linked to political conceptions from 1914 not implementing that the world and europe has changed. In contrast the Germans have had little of its history what they could use to orient themselves after the wars of the last centuries. Therefore the german decision of west – integration was an important step which helped to make the change of settings possible.

Leave a Comment