Transnistria to no longer receive Russian gas by 2025

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

Tiraspol will only benefit from free gas from the Russian Federation one more year because Ukraine will not extend, in December 2024, the transit contract for Russian gas to Europe.

The announcement was made by the director of the Ukrainian company "Naftogaz", Alexei Chernyshov

A few days before, Chișinău and Tiraspol extended until December 2024 (exactly when the transit contract between "Naftogaz" and "Gazprom" expires) the contract for the purchase of electricity for the right bank of the Dniester from the Thermal Power Plant in Transnistrian region (MGRES).

Like the countries of the European Union, the Republic of Moldova is preparing for the moment when Ukraine will stop the transit of Russian gas to Europe. In the case of gas, Chișinău reoriented itself towards the European market and now imports it through Romania, but the situation regarding electricity is different. Even being connected to the ENTSO-E network and having access to the European energy market, the Republic of Moldova is not totally independent.

A way out of the situation would be the Isaccea-Vulcănești-Chișinău high-voltage line, through which it would be possible to import electricity from Romania. The construction of this line is still in progress and Chișinău plans to have it operational only in 2025.

Source - https://moldova.europalibera.org/a/transnistria-va-ramane-fara-gaze-rusesti-in-2024-dupa-ce-ucraina-va-opri-tranzitul-spre-europa-care-sunt-efectele-pentru-chisinau/32659877.html 

@LoliLux tagging you here because the news relate to our discussion on the topic

[Illuminati 15,965]

Good to see that despite the war Ukraine fulfilled its contracts and chose to end this the proper way

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

9 minutes ago, Illuminati said:

Good to see that despite the war Ukraine fulfilled its contracts and chose to end this the proper way

This is more complex than mere pro-Ukraine narrative building. Contractually Ukraine still receives money from Russia for allowing the gas to flow in into Europe in the form of transit fees, but apparently it doesn't receive the full sum of money - this prompts Ukraine to contemplate suing Russia which would in turn make Russia cease all gas imports into Europe. The idea of Russia stopping gas imports to Europe loomed ever since the invasion began in 2022 and the volume of gas reduced to only a third of its pre-war levels already.

Although the current transit is underpinned by commercial gas supply contracts and the 2019 gas transit agreement between Ukraine’s Naftogaz and Russian Gazprom, Naftogaz initiated arbitration proceedings against Gazprom in September 2022 for not paying the agreed transit fees in full. In response, Russia threatened to impose sanctions against Naftogaz, which would have prevented Gazprom from paying any transit fees, leading to a complete halt of transit flows through Ukraine. Similar sanction threats were issued by Russia in June 2023 when Naftogaz initiated legal action to enforce a $5 billion arbitration award against Russian state assets in the US as compensation for the company’s seized assets in Crimea in 2014. (https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/qa-russian-gas-transit-through-ukraine/)

[Illuminati 15,965]

7 minutes ago, FfFfFfFF said:

This is more complex than mere pro-Ukraine narrative building. Contractually Ukraine still receives money from Russia for allowing the gas to flow in into Europe in the form of transit fees, but apparently it doesn't receive the full sum of money - this prompts Ukraine to contemplate suing Russia which would in turn make Russia cease all gas imports into Europe. The idea of Russia stopping gas imports to Europe loomed ever since the invasion began in 2022 and the volume of gas reduced to only a third of its pre-war levels already.

Although the current transit is underpinned by commercial gas supply contracts and the 2019 gas transit agreement between Ukraine’s Naftogaz and Russian Gazprom, Naftogaz initiated arbitration proceedings against Gazprom in September 2022 for not paying the agreed transit fees in full. In response, Russia threatened to impose sanctions against Naftogaz, which would have prevented Gazprom from paying any transit fees, leading to a complete halt of transit flows through Ukraine. Similar sanction threats were issued by Russia in June 2023 when Naftogaz initiated legal action to enforce a $5 billion arbitration award against Russian state assets in the US as compensation for the company’s seized assets in Crimea in 2014. (https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/qa-russian-gas-transit-through-ukraine/)

I appreciate the extra context but this just gives them another reason not to extend the contract.

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

15 minutes ago, Illuminati said:

I appreciate the extra context but this just gives them another reason not to extend the contract.

I myself am of the opinion that Russian gas shouldn't be imported to the EU because it's too dangerous as blackmail tool/ instrument for Russian soft power. In Transnistria's case, Transnistria receives the gas for free while the rest of the Republic of Moldova has TO PAY Transnistria to get some, in other words MD basically pays its own separatist entity. 

The decoupling needed to happen long ago actually.

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

2 hours ago, FfFfFfFF said:

Tiraspol will only benefit from free gas from the Russian Federation one more year because Ukraine will not extend, in December 2024, the transit contract for Russian gas to Europe.

Transnistria's standard of living will decline if it no longer receives free energy from Russia. In addition, it was indirectly an exchange that Tranistria agreed to "shadow independence" and Russia provided something in return, so it was attractive for both. The question now is: will Russia continue to be attractive for Transnistria or will TRA reorient itself towards the west? So where will TRA get its energy from now on?

This would be a golden opportunity for MOL and UKR to impose a bilateral blockade on TRA, which will only be lifted if TRA agrees to be controlled by Chisinau again. But it seems to me that Moldova is passive here and is just watching and not doing anything actively. My opinion is: The Soviet Union fûcked up Moldova's geography and intentionally denied it sea access and also intentionally arranged Transnistria to be without sea access. At that time, geography played in favor of Soviet RU. But now geography is playing against Russia's plans! And MOL should finally take advantage of it! TRA is landlocked and therefore RU has no access to it. At the same time, TRA certainly doesn't want to become a wartime&wartorn province in future like Donbass has become.  RU is no longer VERY attractive for TRA, or less so. TRA thought it could be becoming a Crimea 2.0 (Crimea became richer without war after joining RU, an ideal dream scenario that South Ossetia and TRA have) in future. Now TRA realizes that if it moved towards RU the maximum, it'd become Donbass 2.0. And nobody wants to become Donbass 2.0, they wanna be Crimea 2.0 instead. But Crimea 2.0. is unrealistic now. If MOL and UKR join forces, they can bring TRA back under MOL control. MOL should make a deal: It and UKR take control of TRA, and the top half of TRA gets UKR, while MOL gets a piece of the Budjak region in exchange and southern TRA, including Tiraspol. This would allow MOL to correct (MASSIVE) historical errors. TRA cannot be re-supplied by RU because UKR will block access.

However, it seems, the MOL government is sitting there and always waiting for TRAs impossible demands and then always delaying any action; MOL gov'mt must realize that the TRA situation will never change in favor of MOL if MOL doesn't get more involved with action. Also MOL should make attractive promises to TRA: bilingual schools Romanian-Russian (not unilingual), it should refrain from doing anything that remotely ressembles ethnic cleansing. In the long run, the people of TRA will then have the choice, to orientate themselves towards East or West and if Ukraine imposes UKR-language in Odessa, there will be less reasons for TRA to know RU, they will become an isolated RU-speaking "island" and slowly integrate back into the Romanian cultural sphere, it will take decades.

(I will reply to the autumn RO topic later today or tomorrow)

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

@LoliLux I agree 80-85%! The ceasing of free gas from Russia is a golden opportunity for reintegration and for Transnistria to finally ditch Russia (as I said, I believe Transnistria could prove to be flexible than it may seem at first glance, because it was born out of different circumstances than the separatist republics in Donbas and is much more isolated from Russia, the elites there value their own illegal schemes more than they value being part of the Russian world on ethnic or ideological grounds). Without free gas from Russia Transnistria will inevitably question its place in regards to Moldova and Romania and it will help remove a barrier of the unification and further integration of Romania and the Republic.

Transnistria, like the separatist republics in Georgia are more useful to Russia as proxies able to influence Moldova and Georgia from within - in this sense they are not comparable to Crimea. The positive part is that this allows them to be more easy to reintegrate for their respective countries, at least in Moldova's case as Transnistria doesn't share a border with Russia.

The difficulty still remains in the need to not involved Moldova in the war. Ukraine already proposed for Romania/Moldova to begin an offensive to oust the Russians from Transnistria, but Romania is very reluctant to be involved directly and/or to drag the Republic of Moldova, so RO denied. The Transnistrian issue will need to be resolved diplomatically, not militarily, and I am actually optimistic about that!

As a sidenote that plays into your suggestion, Aurelian Lavric proposed in the past for Ukraine to give Moldova majority Romanian southern Cernăuți & for Transnistria to be partitioned between Moldova and Ukraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Moldova#/media/File:Lavric_proposal_for_a_Moldova–Ukraine_territorial_transfer,_2011.svg) 

Another proposal was that Transnistria should be given to Ukraine and Romania should receive the southern part of Budjak back - including Reni raion which is majority Romanian and Ismail and Chilia - this proposal doesn't make sense anymore given Ukraine is no longer a Russian puppet as it was in the early 2010s (https://rsbadita.wordpress.com/2018/03/02/schimb-teritorial-cu-ucraina/). Oddly this overlaps with the area that Ukraine wants to be covered by Romanian airdefences nowadays.

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

17 hours ago, FfFfFfFF said:

Ukraine already proposed for Romania/Moldova to begin an offensive to oust the Russians from Transnistria, but Romania is very reluctant to be involved directly...The Transnistrian issue will need to be resolved diplomatically, not militarily, and I am actually optimistic about that!

I'm going to fusion my answer for this topic and the other autumn landscapes topic into this topic now, so I suggest to continue the discussion here:

I agree with your well-described analysis that there are not very deep cultural ties between Transnistrians and Russia apart from watching Russian TV and entertainment, and they are rather pragmatic with their relations with RU. The older Transnistrians also have a somewhat romanticized image of Russia in which they nostalgically think back to the Soviet times, although they actually think back more to their beautiful youth and not really to the political structures, which were already macabre back then. However, a basic problem remains: It is not enough that Russia is now unattractive, Moldova must be at least a little richer than TRA so that the TRA can be enthusiastic about joining back MOL. MOL has not yet achieved this.

TRA will probably wait to see who makes the "best offer". Theoretically it is even possible that Ukraine will be divided into several vassal countries if it loses the war entirely and Odessa Oblast/Southwest Ukraine becomes a new nation on its own, and TRA then decides to remain "shadow independent" and align with the new vassal state, if MOL remains ultra-poor. I think the only solution to this is, is for MOL to tell TRA that if they will be in the EU, subsidies will be received from Germany and so German subsidies could lure TRA back to MOL and thus the EU. It would be too much to ask for TRA to have a right of veto and MOL has rightly rejected this, but I think MOL will also have to make some concessions:

My forecast for the future is: MOL will become a federal state and TRA and MOL will become the two federal states, while Gagausia might become a third one. There will be no right of veto for TRA, but a normal proportional weighting of votes relative to the population shares. This will be a fair solution because on the one hand it addresses TRA's special status and on the other hand it prevents pro-Russian positions from blocking the country.

And then I predict that there will be a referendum on reunification with RO after TRA and MOL have merged, and 51% of MOL-TRA will vote for independence, and TRA will be the reason it narrowly fails, because they don't want to be a peripheral area

Moldova must also remember that the situation in 2024-2034 is no longer the same as in 1991: it is no longer a given that every Moldovan speaks Russian, nor that they like speaking it, much to the astonishment of Tranistria, which suddenly finds the dominance of Russian on the left and right to be falling. How many percent of young Moldavians learn Russian at school and for how many years? Transnistria and MOL have linguistically drifted apart, even though they still understand each other, and this will pose a difficulty, similar to Flanders and Wallonia. However, 96% of Tranistria is less than 30km away from Moldova's border and approximately 50% is less than 11km away from it. In contrast to the Walloons, the Transnistrians cannot simply allow themselves not to learn Romanian (in the case of WAL it is Dutch) because of their vertical geography and this is why MOL must reject speaking Russian, otherwise TRA will not learn Romanian. It would be a mistake to try to appease TRA and declare RU a mandatory school language in MOL.

About Romania:

It amazes me how much Hungary clings to its old territories. Hungary must understand that although it ruled for a while, these areas were often ethnically mixed and the Hungarians were not alone there. The Hungarians also have to admit that their settlement policy was not wise: instead of a vast empire, they should have preferred to settle a small corridor in the Croatia-Slovenia area and make it a Hungarian heartland, which would have increased the chances that the many "peace treaties" would have remained them to be under Hungarian control but they thought they forever will be an empire. That's a difference to Austria-Germany: there they've actually internally come to an end with this matter, they don't expect the old territories to return, they don't demand their return, and they no longer really care about the few remaining remnants of German/Austrian culture there, except for Südtirol.

While it is true, that it would cost much and be a big effort to move the capital, this is a single-time cost, it would cost 1x very much but then it would be moved. It seemed impossible to do it in Turkey, too, but they managed to move the capital from Istanbul to Ankara, and once they moved, it was moved.

By the way, I have a new cover pic on my profile (and the first time in eight years that I actually have a cover pic). Do you wanna guess from which region it is?

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

@LoliLux Instantly knew it was the Danube Delta.  I didn't go far inland, but I saw it in 2016 (shame that nowadays one of its villages - Paluru - is no longer safe anymore because of the war)

I will come back later with a full reply!

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

@LoliLux 

The support for outright unification in the Republic is growing constantly over the years. I think the referendum should be oficially concluded when support reaches around 75% in the polls (which often times don't ask for the opinion of the Moldovans living in the EU which naturally favor unification over independence) - or if the needs arises, as an emergency measure if Russia wins in Ukraine or makes some great advances. More federalization would unfortunately likely turn Moldova into Bosnia & Herzegovina which is very dysfunctional/ disjointed and in many ways, and both Transnistria and Găgăuzia are prone to the outside influence of Russia - for this reason, I wish Găgăuzia would revert back to Gagauz Turkish and consume more Turkish media than Russian.

But I heavily suspect the West will not allow Russia to win in Ukraine, despite rethorics of disengagement from some political actors. But if something happens and Russia achieves some major victory over Ukraine or if Zelensky's government is removed from power and there is a power vacuum, US will absolutely push Romania, Hungary and Poland to retake their previous territories, because US would rather want to have a more solid NATO eastern flank than to lose its entire soft power apparatus inside Ukraine - based on the Congress bill I shared earlier there is even legal precedent for recognizing Romanian claims over Chernivtsi and Budjak.

But Romania is decisively not interesting in going to war or being directly military involved, in fact Romanians are frustated with Ukraine for trying to bring the war closer to us. As they always do, an Ukrainian official guilt-tripped and accused Romania of giving its airspace to be used for Russia because Romania denies Ukraine's request to extend its airdefences in western Odesa oblast. And there are sources that Romania is looking to impose conscription because duh.. we are very close to the war. I and many other Romanians hate this because we are not interested in military intervention.

In terms of the Russia-Transnistria link - I think it's useful to look at the ethnic make up of Transnistria. Something perhaps unexpected to hear is that when the war broke out Romanians outnumbered Russians and formed a plurarity. By 2004 the share of Russians was only a slightly percent higher than that of Romanians. Russians are virtually only present in the cities because the Russian colonization of these places was urban. The countryside of Transnistria was 50% Romanian in 2004 - the number is higher if we count the 2 Transnistrian villages where the Republic of Moldova has control which are majority Romanian, and if we discount Tighina/Bender which is on the left side of the Nistru river but is controlled by Transnistira.

In 2022, 19,1% of all Moldovan students studied in Russian and 25,6% studied Russian as a second language (less than English and French - which are the only 2 mandatory foreign languages). Knowledge of Russian is very much decreasing (which is a good thing - it's a language imposed by colonizers). However, the status of Romanian in Transnistria is infamously bad - Transnistria doesn't even allow Romanian to be written in the Latin alphabet. 

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

On 11/3/2023 at 9:41 AM, FfFfFfFF said:

But if something happens and Russia achieves some major victory over Ukraine or if Zelensky's government is removed from power and there is a power vacuum, US will absolutely push Romania, Hungary and Poland to retake their previous territories,

Yes,  Danube Delta is the correct location!

In my opinion, the Korean scenario seems the most likely, because even if southwest Ukraine were taken, there would still be western, central and northwest Ukraine, where Russian is practically not an everyday language and where Russia could drive people out, but it simply wouldn't have new people to settle these areas, so they remain to be either divided among the neighbor states or constitute Leftover Ukraine Republic. Wouldn't there be unrest in Poland if it took over the areas around Lviv, given that 1 million Ukrainians now live in Poland? Indirectly, there was an exchange between the Polish eastern territories in Lithuania and Ukraine and the East German territories in Prussia, directed by the Soviet Union. Although Germany is not demanding the territories back and no longer has any valid legal claim to them, Poland could be paranoid and think this is possible and therefore hesitate because the old historic exchange is modified. If I were a Polish politician, I don't know if I would take back the territories if Ukraine actually fell apart - they would mean decades of subsidies, they would mean that politicians would devote a lot of time and attention to ethnic tensions between Poles and Ukrainians, which will slow Poland's progress. Such an area would actually be like Transnistria; it would be - you used this beautifully accurate word - a Trojan horse. And then independence movements would form, and Ukrainians would want their own state. Poland would then invest a lot of money for something that it could end up losing. Poland couldn't just settle the areas with enough Poles, its population is stagnating and Poles wouldn't want to move to these poor areas, that's simply not possible in a democracy. However, this could be the secret goal of the US: to create tensions in Poland and elsewhere. The US wants Eastern ans East Central Europe to be poor, so it can buy politicians votes with cheap money and rule more easily. The US wants to destroy financially Eastern Europe, it is scared of entering the war directly with its own military just like Romania is scared, so they look for alternative ways to disrupt EE. EE should be careful about US' Trojan horse offer.

Hungary would be there straight away, before anyone else, and would be keen to take over the territories. Romania would probably have second thoughts and wouldn't dare. As always, Moldova would be too passive and would do nothing. It was a mistake for Romania to recognize Snake Island as Ukrainian. It should have simply continued to contest it, but leave it under Ukrainian control, which it was anyway. Then it would be easier to get Snake Island if Ukraine falls apart, because Romania previously claimed it as Romanian. Snake Island has an important strategic importance, it is the only island in the Black Sea that is a little further deeper into the sea and is not directly on the coast and therefore just like an extension of coastal strip. Romania should at least aim to occupy Snake Island. Russia will not attack Romania because it does not want to risk war with NATO over Snake Island. Since it already has Crimea, Snake Island is not essential to it, whereas for RO it is.

 

 

 

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

@LoliLux Poland is in a special situation, because its former territories which are now part of the Ukrainian state were largely purged of ethnic Poles, and as you rightly point out, Poland received a territorial compensations to its west which, when all is said, it's agreeed it was probably better than keeping the old ethnically mixed areas in Galicia - I think this is why Poland would rather want to turn Ukraine into an deeply integrated extansion of the Polish state which is to remain distinct from Poland, but closely aligned with it and where Poland has a lot of soft power.

But when it comes to Hungary and Romania it's different because many of said countries' territories annexed by the USSR to Ukraine were and are still ethnically Hungarian/Romanian. As such the latent border disputes between Hungary and Romania and Ukraine are more of a sore point. Many people in Romania for instance ask why should Romania support Ukraine getting back its lost lands when Romania itself lost lands to Ukraine. And truth be told, it's plain and simple a question I've heard no convincing answer to - Romania had to ''get over'' losing Chernivtsi, Snake Island and Budjak, yet God forbid someone say Ukraine accepts losing Crimea and Donbas. 

But Romanians also absolutely do not want for Romania to be more militarized or for Romania to reinstate forced conscription the way it's rumored it's going to happen, so at most Romania will ask for the previous lands diplomatically.

(Even though Romania is really anti-Russia because of the whole Moldova/Transnistria situation, there is also a strain of thought that is very circumspect of NATO and its policies in the region, many people believe the US would send us into the war if they get something out of it and we should be cautious).

Hypotetically the question is will the population vote YES or NO in case of a vote to be reincoporated into Hungary/Poland/Romania? I think the ethnic minorities would naturally want to be again part of their respective countries and even Ukrainian might vote YES because that would allow them to be part of EU (Ukraine is the most pro-EU non-EU country according to surveys - it would be quite something if pan-European identity would win over the ethnic identity, but the Ukrainian far right is very nationalist and ethno-centric).

Then, there is also the possibility for the lands to become part of the Republic of Moldova (and there is the argument of restoring Bessarabia's historical borders and maybe even the argument of allowing the Ukrainian Gagauz villages to be part of Găgăuzia), but the Republic has no power projection capabilities so it will depend on Romanian action too - plus Budjak being added to the Republic of Moldova would further increase the numbers of Russians.

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

On 11/5/2023 at 8:39 PM, FfFfFfFF said:

closely aligned with it and where Poland has a lot of soft power.

 And truth be told, it's plain and simple a question I've heard no convincing answer to - Romania had to ''get over'' losing Chernivtsi, Snake Island and Budjak, yet God forbid someone say Ukraine accepts losing Crimea and Donbas. 

for Romania to reinstate forced conscription the way it's rumored it's going to happen,

 many people believe the US would send us into the war if they get something out of it and we should be cautious

but the Ukrainian far right is very nationalist and ethno-centric

 

The recent elections in Moldova show us the country's internal turmoil. A stronger tendency towards the EU can be seen, but larger cities stay away from this rapprochement. It's surprising that the cities are pro-Russian and the country is pro-EU, normally rural areas are nostalgic and not for change and the liberal cities are pro-EU, but then I remember that Russians have increasingly settled in the big cities during Soviet times (they then at some point became Moldovans in terms of passports), and “the real Moldavians” live in the countryside.

Many nations act selfishly and once, in 2004, Moldova asked for Ukraine's help, and Ukraine, then more Russian-oriented, did not help Moldova and bypassed the blockade. "In the summer of 2004, the Transnistrian authorities closed four of the six schools in the region that taught Romanian using the Latin script....During the crisis, the Moldovan government decided to create a blockade that would isolate the disputed region from the rest of the world. The blockade was ineffective because of a lack of cooperation from Ukraine."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian-language_schools_in_Transnistria

I think that even if the Romanians do not want mandatory military service, the RO government will decide on it, simply because it does not affect them, since the élites have special status. Putin and Selenksky don't fight themselves; they send people to war, which is much, much easier and more convenient than fighting themselves. And that's exactly why the RO government will prioritize the country's security and introduce something like this.

Poland has undergone a lot of development and progress and is no longer insignificant. But somehow I find it hard to imagine that it will exert soft power on young Ukrainians. Young people may rather like K-pop from South Korea or Japanese anime. Korea and Japan exert more soft power on the globally minded youth often than neighbor countries, I think. Then Poland also has to compete with US/England for soft power, and loses. And economically Poland is interesting, but Germany is even more interesting and as long as GER offers such high social benefits, high wages with and even without work, Ukrainians will then be more attracted to GERs soft power. Poland simply lacks an entertainment industry like USA, Japan and is not a big player enough to be an influential soft power. Ukraine has been nationalized and radicalized, they will not give up their state, especially  after they invested so much in fighting. But it will be RU+USA who ultimately decide what happens in the end, UKR will have to accept it even if it does not accept it.

Sometimes I think that the introduction of the anti-rocket missile defense bases in Deveselu and Slupsk Region, POL, led to Putin deciding to attack UKR, because he assumed that if POL and RO have such bases, they will also be established in UKR at some point in future. And militarily it would make sense for RU to annex UKR, because then it can build missile bases that are close to these bases and would destroy them immediately in the event of war, in Kaliningrad it will counter the Slupsk base, and at some point from Kherson Oblast, the Deveslu Base.

[FfFfFfFF 58,081]

@LoliLux

Both of your points are correct (Russification was an urban process in Moldova: Russians tended to settle in the cities and this made Russian the lingua franca for minorities who couldn't understand each other, ie Ukrainians, Gagauzes etc also speak Russian and consume Russian media/propaganda). And Ukraine supported Russia during the Transnistria war. A far right Ukrainian grouping even fought to make Transnistria part of Ukraine - Ukraine had at certain points in time ambitions to annex parts of Moldova, for instance at the WW1 peace proposals.

Regarding the elections - I think the rulling party did above expectations. Pro-Russians made it seem as if they are going to fail miserably because living in conditions in Moldova after the war decreased, and it was assumed the population would blame Maia Sandu and her government.

I also do believe mandatory conscription is coming because the global elites are edging for war. I blame both US and Russia for this, because nobody wants to make a real effort to deescalate and countries like Romania will be caught in the crossfire sooner or later.

Regarding Poland's soft power in Ukraine - even before the war, many Ukrainians emigrated to Poland for better paid jobs, as such many Ukrainians learned Polish and consume Polish content, have family members dispersed acrodss the 2 countries, Poland and Ukraine also see themselves as two brother nation at this point. Because of this, and because Ukraine is dependent on Polish aid, Poland already has a lot of influence in Ukraine (then again Hungary and Poland don't have the same ambitions, they are not inter-connected Slavic countries like Poland and Ukraine- at most they care about their own ethnic diaspora in Ukraine).

On Ukraine's radicalization - this is a scary point that I have thought for the longest time. Ukraine has international backing to the extend no other country has, which naturally translates into Ukraine feeling emboldened to act however it pleases. I don't put it past Ukraine to do asssasinations or terrorist attacks to kill pro-Russians across Europe. Ukraine won the propaganda war on day 1 - this gave Ukraine a lot of power. This was useful when Russia seemed like it would steamroll Ukraine, but it will backfire big time.

But as a counter-example I am reminded of how war-torn Serbia eventually accepted the seccesion of Montenegro without a fight, because Serbia was consumed by the loss of Kosovo and had no desire to resist this decision, even though Belgrade still saw Montenegro as part of Serbia.

Regarding the US bases in Romania, I believe they are needed because Russia would've likely invaded Romania the same way it invaded Ukraine. Russia has been extremely hostile to Romania (and still is), so by aligning itself with the US, Romania gained a deterrent. The problem is that the US doesn't know where to stop - after all, nobody settles for less when they can have more.

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

15 hours ago, FfFfFfFF said:

Ukraine had at certain points in time ambitions to annex parts of Moldova, for instance at the WW1 peace proposals.

even before the war, many Ukrainians emigrated to Poland for better paid jobs, as such many Ukrainians learned Polish and consume Polish content

But as a counter-example I am reminded of how war-torn Serbia eventually accepted the seccesion of Montenegro without a fight, because Serbia was consumed by the loss of Kosovo

Regarding the US bases in Romania, I believe they are needed because Russia would've likely invaded Romania the same way it invaded Ukraine.

What is Moldova doing with the Ukrainian refugees, are they integrating well, will they stay? They are a way to temporarily halt the population decline in Moldova. Actually, the Ukrainians are the only realistic way to stop the population decline for Moldova, because no one else would migrate there. The Ukrainians are now anti-Russian and would thus ensure a balance against the pro-Russians. The Ukrainians could also fill gaps caused by Moldovans moving to the West with Romanian passports.

Interesting that Ukraine wanted the entire Kuban region, the areas around Krasnodar east of Crimea.

It is true that Poland and Ukraine are deeply intertwined and many Ukrainians there work in POL and in this way come into contact with Polish culture. However, it then arises out of economic necessity, not in the sense of voluntariness or conviction and love for Polish culture. For example, we are not forced to be here on GagaDaily and write in English, but we do it voluntarily, Anglo-American pop culture has somehow led us here. And I think of the young Ukrainians who, when they will be in the "Leftover Republic of Ukraine", will somehow build relationships and feelings towards other states/cultures. In Poland they have voice over for foreign media productions, voice over means that the same person reads an entire film or series in Polish and in the background you can hear the original voices in a quieter voice. They are not dubbed into Polish. And that's a big minus for the cultural appeal of Polish, because voice over is a sign that a nation can't afford dubbing and the voice over constantly reminds that the film/series is foreign, and there's a lot of voice over in Poland. In Germany/Austria, there is dubbing. Everything famous and even less-famous stuff gets dubbed into German, from movies to cooking books, to TV shows. And the massive amount of dubbing results into a massive pool of content available in German, which is a pull factor when Ukrainian people in Germany go home after work and decide which language they want to be exposed to in their free time and they may opt more often for German instead of Ukrainian, once they know German well enough. In Poland, I can imagine that they learn faster Polish but still continue to watch mostly their Ukrainian and Russian-language content because Polish is not competitive enough.

It is quite possible that Polish will soon overtake Russian in popularity in (Western) Ukraine, but Polish will not have the same status as Russian did in its heyday there. I think it will be like in Lithuania, the national language Lithuanian, and English have all the necessary functions there, other countries and cultures are secondary, apart from the disappearing Russian culture there.

About Montenegro:

It was a huge mistake for Serbia to let Montenegro go. Montenegro is geostrategically more important than Kosovo. Serbia has given too much attention to Kosovo and not enough to Montenegro. Serbia is now 99.999% landlocked (0.001% is the Danube as an international waterway like in Moldova), and has no access to the sea. In the event of war, its allies cannot actually support Serbia because they would need permission from other countries to fly over them, which they can refuse. China's Silk Road project involves countries and Serbia is considered an important transit country, but Serbia would be even more important if it had a port on the sea and China would then invest there and expand it and build Serbia into a trading nation. But that is not possible, and China then looks for other countries. To be honest, I also can't believe that Russia just allowed Montenegro to leave, they should have pressured Serbia to keep it. MN is now a NATO country and Russian influence there is slowly dwindling. At the latest without MN there is actually nothing left of the former Serbian empire. Serbia has become like Austria and Hungary: a small, insignificant landlocked country whose best days are long past.

 

Regarding the military bases in Romania and Poland:

It can also be a false sense of security. Being in NATO gives a false sense of security. What would Romania do if it were not a NATO country? It would now probably build and expand trenches alongside its rivers, have had conscription for a long time, and have a larger number of military goods. Because it is in NATO, it is passive and outsources all responsibility to the USA, true to the motto: "the USA will take care of it". But what will Romania do if at some point the US will be in a civil war, or the US is distracted by a war over Taiwan and no longer has any time for Romania? Romania is actually only safe if the USA is not overloaded. By the way, Romania and Poland finance it without owning it:

"There's also a palpable economic benefit to the American base for the 3,500 residents of Deveselu, where the whole village is getting a facelift. Mayor Ion Aliman says about $8 million in local and European Union funds have gone to upgrade the power grid, sewage systems, roads and municipal buildings to accommodate their new American neighbors, who officially moved in 18 months ago.

Biedron said the Polish government had promised to bring in investors and improve the highways, port and railway in Slupsk in exchange for the base, which he said would have otherwise been turned into a regional airport for residents. But none of it ever happened, and the new government that took over last fall refuses to even talk about it, Biedron said, adding that he is incredibly frustrated.

"There are so many limitations today" because of the base, he explained. "If I want to built anything in my city, I have to ask the American government for permission ... like if I want to build a factory, if I want to build a higher block of flats, I have to ask — not in Warsaw, but in Washington," the mayor said. "This is so crazy!"

He added that analysts estimate the region will suffer big economic losses because of the new base. Other Slupsk residents I spoke to worried that the base will make them ground zero for any Russian retaliation, fears that were exacerbated by a Russian military jet conducting a "barrel" roll last month over a U.S. Air Force plane that was flying a reconnaissance mission above the Baltic Sea."

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/05/18/478414178/u-s-enlarges-its-military-footprint-in-eastern-europe-to-mixed-reviews

In my opinion, Romania must ensure its security INDEPENDENTLY, regardless of its NATO membership. It relies too much on others. During World War II, France promised to help Poland if Nazi Germany attacked. France didn't help. Romania will be totally dependent on the USA and the USA will allow the war to progress so that Romania will somehow continue to exist as a state, but will actually be completely destroyed and dependent on loans from American banks to be re-build. Although that likely won't happen in the near future and it doesn't have to be exactly Romania. Now Romania is wasting its time, it isn't building any trenches which are important obstacles that stop enemies from advancing. It is unprepared on its own for any invasion.