‘All About Money,’ with host, John Sakowicz, returns to KZYX on Friday, March 21, at 9 a.m., Pacific Time, with a second show in a series called “Cold War II” about the escalating crisis in the Ukraine between the US and Russia.
The crisis is about politics. But it''s also about economics, as most conflicts and wars are about money or land. Our guests will be Ohio State University international law professor, John Quigley, and Carnegie Foundation program manager, David Speedie.
This follows our last show with Katrina Vanden Heuval, editor and publisher of The Nation, with Francis Boyle, professor at the University of Illinois College of Law and author of “Foundations for World Order,” and Peter Mello, executive director of the Los Alamos Study Group.
NPR affiliates, KZYX and KZYZ, broadcast at 88.1, 90.7, and 91.5 FM, in the Counties of Mendocino, Lake, Humboldt, and Sonoma, in northern California. We are also heard streaming live from the web at www.kzyx.org.
We may have other guests call into the show.
JOHN QUIGLEY, Quigley.2 at osu.edu
Professor emeritus of international law at Ohio State University, John Quigley dealt with the Crimea issue following the breakup of the USSR, at the request of the U.S. Department of State, which was working through the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on the issue.
He recently wrote the piece “Finding a Way Forward for Crimea,” for the Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law.
Quigley recently said: “Crimea’s affiliation with Russia is legitimate. There were issues with the referendum, but the referendum is a fair representation of the will of the people living in Crimea, who have sought since the mid-1990s to sever their connection with Ukraine. The International Court of Justice said a few years ago in regard to the declaration of independence of Kosovo from Serbia that international law does not prohibit a declaration of independence by a segment of a state’s territory. In exercise of the right of self-determination, the people of Crimea can decide on their political status.”
DAVID C. SPEEDIE, dspeedie at cceia.org
Director of the U.S. Global Engagement Program at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, David Speedie has been interviewing experts in Ukraine.
Speedie recently said: “In simple terms, half the people in Ukraine look to Russia and the other half look to the West.
“Putin’s show of force is just that — a show of displeasure at the de facto banning of the Russian language in the Ukraine, threats to Russian Orthodox churches and other things we’ve seen threatening to the Russian-speaking people there. It is not on Putin’s agenda to get into any rash military action.
"Unfortunately things are getting white-hot in Crimea with the reported occupation of a regional government building in Simferopol by pro-Russian protesters. Of course, you could say that this is a tit-for-tat for the similar occupations by pro-Europe protesters in Kiev, and obviously Russia has legitimate concerns about the status and security of its Black Sea Fleet, which has a faithfully negotiated lease to be in Crimea until 2042, and on which there is the threat to renege.
“Now is the time for serious political compromise, not for ratcheting up the rhetoric. I don’t think Secretary Kerry’s remarks about ‘Rocky IV’ are helpful. We need to get out of this zero sum thinking of Russia vs the West and navigate these shark infested waters and allow cooler heads to prevail and achieve an interim political accommodation.”
MORE FROM JOHN QUIGLEY
Professor emeritus of international law at Ohio State University, Quigley dealt with conflicts between Ukraine and Russia arising from the breakup of the USSR on behalf of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Recently, the Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law published his piece: “Finding a Way Forward for Crimea,” which states: “The Russians of Crimea see themselves as being in a posture not unlike that of the Albanians of Kosovo, as that group perceived itself, in 1999. That situation led to military intervention that secured separation. While differences may surely be found between the two situations, the Russians of Crimea do, in the main, fear for their future within Ukraine.
“The Crimea parliament voted on March 6 to separate from Ukraine and to join Russia. It in fact indicated that the separation is effective immediately. Nonetheless, it has scheduled a referendum vote for the population of Crimea for March 16. The ballot will ask voters to choose whether to join Russia, or to remain in the autonomy status in Ukraine under the Ukraine constitution. The vote may well go strongly in favor of affiliation with Russia. The Government of the Russian Federation has not indicated whether it would accept Crimea, but in the Russian Duma, parliamentarians are indicating they will address the issue.
“The majlis — the legislative body representing the Tatars of Crimea — has indicated it does not recognize the recent actions of the Crimea parliament as legitimate. The Tatars may boycott the referendum. They oppose affiliation with Russia. If Crimea does affiliate with Russia, the Government of Russia will need to move proactively to assure the Tatars that their status will be protected.
“Affiliation with Russia, if it comes about, is likely to be regarded by the Western powers as a product of Russian aggression. They might deem the affiliation invalid, an outcome that could result in uncertainty as to Crimea’s status and potential difficulties for its inhabitants.
“Self-determination is a concept whose implementation in the international community has been inconsistent. Given the history of the territory, the population of Crimea has a plausible claim to self-determination. If Crimea remains within Ukraine, it may be an irritant between Russia and Ukraine for a long time to come. It could well be to the interest of Ukraine that Crimea affiliate with Russia. The Government of Ukraine does not see the matter that way, to be sure. It regards the action of the Crimea parliament and the scheduled referendum as unlawful under the Ukraine constitution. It will also point out that Russia has agreed to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
“Whatever the outcome, it is important that the Western powers, Ukraine, and Russia all refrain from regarding the Crimea question through the lens of geopolitics at the world level. The issue should not be whether President Putin or President Obama emerges a winner. The focus should be on the welfare of the population of Crimea.”
Quigley recently appeared on The Real News: “Is Russian-Ukraine Intervention Illegal?”
Also see Los Angeles Times: “CIA Reportedly says Russia Sees Treaty as Justifying Ukraine Moves.”
MORE FROM DAVID SPEEDIE
Director of the U.S. Global Engagement Program at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, Speedie has been continuing to interview experts in Ukraine.
He said: “Ukraine deserves a deeper, more nuanced analysis for several reasons. The view from Kiev is not enough, and that is what we get from the Western press. It can be argued that there are ‘four Ukraines’ — East, West, Crimea and Kiev. The country is split almost down the middle on pro-Russian, pro-European lines. …”
David Speedie also gave this interview to the HuffPost Live: http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/russia-ukraine-olympics-western-media-perception-problems/530500eafe344473e80000f9