Should Ireland apply to join the Russian Federation

realitykeeper

The Ukraine has recently had all its debt bought by Russia in return for an agreement to join the Russian Federation. What if Ireland got a similar deal? Should we take it? Admittedly our debts are many times larger than the Ukraine`s but Russia could make the money back by charging the Euro zone countries more for gas.

Russia would gain prestige and a major military security coup.

Personally, I think we should not do a deal with Russia because the EU gave a lot of money to Ireland over the years and our financial problems are of our own making. Besides, playing politics with a bear could be painful. However, that is the corner Ireland has painted itself into. Sooner or later tough decisions will have to be made. Sooner would be better.

Irish politicians should tell the Irish people the true scale of the crisis and then ask for a mandate to impose spending cuts on a scale never before attempted by any country in the history of the planet.

BuilderPlumber

Russia has oil and gas, is a world superpower and the people of both countries like to sing, talk, and of course drink! So, it would be a good deal and Vlad would put that idiot Kenny in his place and all.

feargale

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Russia has oil and gas, is a world superpower and the people of both countries like to sing, talk, and of course drink! So, it would be a good deal and Vlad would put that idiot Kenny in his place and all.

Do you think he might stop at putting Enda in his place? Or might he put more of us in one of his places? I mean, I'd be all for Siberia playing in the Connacht hurling championship, provided their team is composed of native Siberians and not of pesky boardsies who were guilty of asking awkward questions.

Ah jaysus, why Russia as it's too far away. Let's sell Ireland to Great Britain. We have a common language at the least.

Captain Chaos

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Russia has oil and gas, is a world superpower

Russia has not been a superpower since it's USSR days that ended in 1990. The USA is the only superpower in the world.

Captain Chaos

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Russia has not been a superpower since it's USSR days that ended in 1990. The USA is the only superpower in the world.

Actually I think China will overtake the USA as the biggest superpower.

Captain Chaos

Deleted User wrote: »

Actually I think China will overtake the USA as the biggest superpower.

After they buy all the US debt and sell it back to them with interest.

the_syco

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Russia has oil and gas

Oil and gas but in cold places. Like us. Maybe they have good ways to get teh oil and gas? They may even give us some of the profits?

Or they could ship all of us to Siberia.

Captain Chaos

In Soviet Russia, Federation joins you.

BuilderPlumber

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Russia has not been a superpower since it's USSR days that ended in 1990. The USA is the only superpower in the world.

Russia is still a superpower believe me. USA, China, Russia are the 3 superpowers. Each like to consider themselves the 'only' 1. But, Russia still despite its USSR losses is the biggest country in the world, has lots of nukes, has a huge army and has huge oil and gas reserves.

The EU are the pretender superpower. Their main world power, the UK, is more interested in US ties than a United States of Europe. France prides itself as an independent country. Germany too. The EU works well as a trade bloc but its leaders have big ambitions that do not relate to the cultural, ethnic and language differences of its constituent states that covers an area from Ireland in the NorthWest to Greece in the SouthEast.

feargale

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Actually I think China will overtake the USA as the biggest superpower.

Well why on earth aren't we talking about joining China then? I fancy the idea of reading the Irish Catholic in pictograms. And the term " Rice Paddy " could acquire a whole new meaning.

the_syco

Captain Chaos wrote: »

After they buy all the US debt and sell it back to them with interest.

Buy US debt? The US owes China $1.3 TRILLION...!

Manach

If money is the key consideration, why not apply to be a new canton in Switzerland. Gold, Guns and Granola - what is not to love. Plus at least their banks work.

BuilderPlumber

Deleted User wrote: »

Actually I think China will overtake the USA as the biggest superpower.

The superpower club is always very competitive. Past superpowers included the Romans, Persians, Spain, Portugal, the UK and USSR. The US sees itself as the only superpower but Russia and China are both superpowers (if the US started a war with either, that would prove that!). Yes, China could well overtake or definitely equal the US soon.

Some of the failed attempts at becoming superpowers included Nazi Germany, 1940s Japan, and Iraq. The EU also has unrealistic notions.

The reason the US often is hostile to certain countries is they fear they could become potential superpowers. Iran (was already one as Persia in ancient times) and India could well follow China's lead as future superpowers.

old_aussie

realitykeeper wrote: »

Russia could make the money back by charging the Euro zone countries more for gas.

Russia would gain prestige and a major military security coup.

Why buyout the Irish debt, Russia should just charge the Euro zone countries more for gas. No risk in Ireland defaulting.

A major military security coup? or, the laughing stock opf the world?

Cork boy 55

What type of federal subjects would we be?


the subjects of the Russian Federation

Each federal subject belongs to one of the following types:
46 oblasts (provinces; , oblast) — most common type of federal subjects with federally appointed governor and locally elected legislature. Commonly named after their administrative centers.

21 republics — nominally autonomous, each has its own constitution and legislature; is represented by the federal government in international affairs; is meant to be home to a specific ethnic minority.

9 krais (territories; kraĭ) — essentially the same as oblasts. The title "territory" is historic, originally given because they were once considered frontier regions.

4 autonomous okrugs (autonomous districts; ) — with substantial or predominant ethnic minority

2 federal cities — major cities that function as separate regions.

1 autonomous oblast — the only autonomous oblast is the Jewish Autonomous Oblast


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_subjects_of_Russia


And which Federal district or economic region?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subdivisions_of_Russia

Scofflaw

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Russia is still a superpower believe me. USA, China, Russia are the 3 superpowers. Each like to consider themselves the 'only' 1. But, Russia still despite its USSR losses is the biggest country in the world, has lots of nukes, has a huge army and has huge oil and gas reserves.

The EU are the pretender superpower. Their main world power, the UK, is more interested in US ties than a United States of Europe. France prides itself as an independent country. Germany too. The EU works well as a trade bloc but its leaders have big ambitions that do not relate to the cultural, ethnic and language differences of its constituent states that covers an area from Ireland in the NorthWest to Greece in the SouthEast.

Depends whether you're looking at hard power (military) or soft power (economic). The EU "works well as a trade bloc" and as an economic superpower - that's why the US fights and the EU pays, both for the fighting and rebuilding. Where they agree, as in the Balkans, the effects are dramatic and (so far) lasting - where they don't, we have Iraq and Afghanistan.

If one is comparing and contrasting the effects of hard and soft power in achieving lasting change in countries, I would say soft power is, and always has been, more important. Even in the imperial era, it was trade that achieved bigger and more enduring cultural changes than military force.

And military power is only useful when you're prepared to actually go all the way to conflict. If you're not, you might find that countries that used to be in your orbit are now in someone else's - as pretty much all of Eastern Europe already is, while the rest seems to want to be.

cordially,
Scofflaw

clairefontaine

No way would that happen.

Too many Irish Americans/UK-Irish/Australian/Irish holding dual citizenship and they do not want to be Russian subjects.

dlouth15

realitykeeper wrote: »

The Ukraine has recently had all its debt bought by Russia in return for an agreement to join the Russian Federation. What if Ireland got a similar deal? Should we take it? Admittedly our debts are many times larger than the Ukraine`s but Russia could make the money back by charging the Euro zone countries more for gas.

Ukraine to join the Russian Federation? I stand to be corrected but isn't that a bit of an exaggeration? My understanding is that Russia was unhappy with the possible EU-Ukraine trade deal and offered a loan and cheaper gas to Ukraine in return for dropping talks with the EU. The Ukraine's economy is crippled so may have reluctantly buckled to pressure from Russia.

Eggy Baby!

dlouth15 wrote: »

Ukraine to join the Russian Federation? I stand to be corrected but isn't that a bit of an exaggeration? My understanding is that Russia was unhappy with the possible EU-Ukraine trade deal and offered a loan and cheaper gas to Ukraine in return for dropping talks with the EU. The Ukraine's economy is crippled so may have reluctantly buckled to pressure from Russia.

Ukraine didn't "reluctantly" buckle to Russia. Many of the people protesting against the government's conduct have a fairytale image of the EU bringing them prosperity and human rights, democracy, gummy bears and unicorns.

Then of course there are those who realise that the Ukrainian economy would be annihilated if it joined the EU because it is so uncompetitive, there are those who realise that Ukraine is in massive debt and is hugely reliant on cheap Russian gas and oil (the Russian offer them cheap oil and gas when they could theoretically be extorting money off them for both even despite the fact that the Ukrainians admitted they used to illegally reroute gas from the Russian pipelines in the past) and there are those higher up who realise how important the Russian and Russian-speaking vote is to their continued re-election.

This isn't a simple Manichaeistic struggle between bright and good EU and dark and regressive Russia. Russia didn't simply bribe Ukraine. The EU offered Ukraine a deal and the Russians offered Ukraine a better deal, which the Ukrainians accepted. The situation is much, much more nuanced than the generic MSM narrative that has been spun over the last few months.

What occurred afterwards has a use to the west as another stick with which to beat Russia and Putin.

Besides, what benefit would result from bringing Ukraine into the EU? It would economically and demographically destroy their country and result in the EU having to pump even more subsidies (when it doesn't have money) in another basket case of a country.

Its simply a prestige project: when Russia "wins", the EU has "lost" Ukraine like the way Truman "lost" China.


In relation to the light-hearted nature of the OP, I for one welcome our new British German Russian overlords!

Lirange

Scofflaw wrote: »

Depends whether you're looking at hard power (military) or soft power (economic). The EU "works well as a trade bloc" and as an economic superpower - that's why the US fights and the EU pays, both for the fighting and rebuilding. Where they agree, as in the Balkans, the effects are dramatic and (so far) lasting - where they don't, we have Iraq and Afghanistan.

Whilst in the abstract I generally agree with your point about the unappreciated importance of soft power I find this particular claim dubious. Are you suggesting the difference between the different outcomes in the two cases is EU capital? Moreover, the US also has considerable "soft power." It's not like the US is a poor cousin to Brussels in terms of global financial muscle (to the tune of 51billion dollars for Iraq recon alone). All the money in the world can't compensate for poorly planned military forays and incompetent leadership.

The Balkan Crisis of the late 90s is not very analogous to either Iraq or Afghanistan. Blair practically had to drag Clinton into that. The operations were finite, with clearer goals, and no post conflict occupations of large swathes of territory were necessary (apart from the UN mission in the sliver of real estate called Kosovo). Moreover, EU capacity and financial interest is going to be more primed on it's own doorstep. Yet you'd have us believe that Iraq and Afghanistan have been nightmares because the EU financial masters couldn't be bothered? I'd suggest the reasons for the state of affairs in these countries are quite different. The chronic primordial conditions in Afghanistan can't remotely be addressed by talking about the the role of financial clout from various western power blocs.

Cork boy 55

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Ukraine didn't "reluctantly" buckle to Russia. Many of the people protesting against the government's conduct have a fairytale image of the EU bringing them prosperity and human rights, democracy, gummy bears and unicorns.

Then of course there are those who realise that the Ukrainian economy would be annihilated if it joined the EU because it is so uncompetitive, there are those who realise that Ukraine is in massive debt and is hugely reliant on cheap Russian gas and oil (the Russian offer them cheap oil and gas when they could theoretically be extorting money off them for both even despite the fact that the Ukrainians admitted they used to illegally reroute gas from the Russian pipelines in the past) and there are those higher up who realise how important the Russian and Russian-speaking vote is to their continued re-election.

This isn't a simple Manichaeistic struggle between bright and good EU and dark and regressive Russia. Russia didn't simply bribe Ukraine. The EU offered Ukraine a deal and the Russians offered Ukraine a better deal, which the Ukrainians accepted. The situation is much, much more nuanced than the generic MSM narrative that has been spun over the last few months.

What occurred afterwards has a use to the west as another stick with which to beat Russia and Putin.

Besides, what benefit would result from bringing Ukraine into the EU? It would economically and demographically destroy their country and result in the EU having to pump even more subsidies (when it doesn't have money) in another basket case of a country.

Its simply a prestige project: when Russia "wins", the EU has "lost" Ukraine like the way Truman "lost" China.


In relation to the light-hearted nature of the OP, I for one welcome our new British German Russian overlords!

The closest model for Ukraine is Poland. Poland and Ukraine started at same place in terms of GDP per capita Poland has vastly outperformed Ukraine
OF course Ukraine Economy is not identically to Poland and has strong links appreciably the industries in east with Russia, but still.

Source
Carl Blidt Tweet 23-04-2014
"Europe makes a dramatic difference. Economic growth of Poland versus Ukraine since 1990."

petronius

I thought we joined the Franco-German Federation?