This is one of those things that negotiation will solve. Both Russia and the West currently hold two extreme positions, so you gotta play ball.
Let's see whose turn it is:
American-led coup in Ukraine
Russian-led invasion of Crimea and Donbas
American-led genocide of Donbas
Russian-led invasion of Ukraine
American-led across-the-board sanctions on Russia and aid to Ukraine
Russia-led blockage of food exports
...
...so this is where we are at. What is America's play now? The ball's in the Western court.
Our position is that what happens in Ukraine is the elected government's business. That's not really an extreme position unless you think Modi's BJP leading India is an extreme position also, and therefore you should cede Kashmir completely to Pakistan and China because the dickheads have attacked you. And you should also cede China the bit near Bangladesh because Xi Jinping is being a angry panda and blowing up grain storage facilities. The West should not sanction either of them because that's too extreme.
American-led coup is a fallacy, see below, Yanukovych couped himself out of power through stupid decisions and corruption.
There was no genocide in the Donbass. If armed separatists take territory in India your government will crack down on them with military means. That is not a genocide, that is basic government functionality, cause and effect.
US, NATO and EU (and others AUS, NZ, Japan, ROK, Taiwan), who previously had their differences on Russia, are supporting the elected government against an invasion by a dictatorship by way of sanctions and arms supply. That's far from extreme given what Iraq received 31 years ago for the same dumb mistake.
So you're saying all politicians come through on their promises made in elections manifestos?
I understand your blind support for Ukraine. But it appears it's deaf too.
Nope, there are certain manifesto promises you can get away with breaking, especially if you have sound justification that you can verbalise, e.g. increasing NI to pay for the NHS because of a pandemic. But EU membership is a huge deal issue in nearly every country. Look at the UK, we held a referendum on leaving the EU and still there were large protests afterwards and some violence. What Yanukovych did was to renege on an election promise to join the EU and join a rival economic union with no referendum or justification, done very abruptly for little apparent reason.
The country's refusal to meet demands to free jailed former PM Yulia Tymoshenko has led the government to suspend preparations for the signing ceremony in Lithuania
www.independent.co.uk
Ukraine was due to sign accord at summit next week but MPs reject key bills, especially on freeing Yulia Tymoshenko from jail
www.theguardian.com
Following a secret meeting last week between Putin and Yanukovych, the Ukrainian prime minister, Mykola Azarov, went to St Petersburg on Wednesday to see Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian prime minister. Azarov described the talks as "one of the most productive meetings". The government then said the preparations for the EU summit were being frozen "in the national interest".
With the Ukrainian decision taken, Putin then announced that he had nothing against the pact with the EU.
But the opposition in Kiev was outraged and has called a big pro-European demonstration for the weekend. Opinion polls show a plurality in favour of the deal with the EU.
"A state treason occurred today," said Oleksiy Kaida of the opposition Svoboda party.
So Yanukovych fccked himself in the ars, the US/NATO had zero to do with it. Was it right for the people to remove the government? That's for them to decide, not you, and certainly not Putin.
