Southeast Asia's Russian dilemma as summits loom

Why should the South East Asian countries spoil their relationship with Russia over a war in Europe which they have nothing to do with?

Europe should get rid of the mindset that Europe’s problems are the worlds problems.

Widely agreed, but also having nothing to do with it, doesn’t exclude that they are affected in SE Asia too and in a longer run or wider sense their freedom is at stake too. And about Europe, well, first one has to find it nowadays, it’s in principle fully bygone. Anyway, the problems in that area there are of course also becoming global problems. I guess, you meant their mindset, that the whole world has to abide to their theoretical ethics, moral and political opinions. That’s surely something they have to learn to get rid of. But again, who still cares so much if they learn it or not.

EvilBuddhaToday 02:45 pm JST

Europe should get rid of the mindset that Europe’s problems are the worlds problems.

Exactly. It was that mindset that lead to WW1 and WW2 becoming global conflicts instead of just European ones.

LOL.

read between lines- "somebody" is afraid or russian influeence in South East Asia....

While "we" insist that the issue started when 'Russia invaded Ukraine' other countries put the start of the issue at when 'US overthrew the Ukrainian government'.

The first makes the phrasing 'not punishing Russian aggression' seem reasonable, the second phrasing makes 'not rewarding American aggression' seem reasonable.

The US never 'overthrew the Ukrainian government'.

The Ukrainian people threw out the pro-russian President when he reneged on an election promise to form closer ties with Europe.

The issue started when Vladevort had a hissy fit because he saw he was losing his toehold in Ukraine, and sent his anonymous little green men into the Donbas and at the same time stole Crimea.

No hissy fit = no annexation = no war.

Love how right after reelecting a guy President, Ukrainians threw him out for doing exactly what he campaigned on doing, telling Europe that Ukraine wanted a deal that allowed them to maintain good relations with Russia. That doesn't sound like a foreign sponsored overthrow at all, well, except to me.

RichardPearce

Love how right after reelecting a guy President, Ukrainians threw him out for doing exactly what he campaigned on doing, telling Europe that Ukraine wanted a deal that allowed them to maintain good relations with Russia.

He said he was looking to join the EU, then Putin had a word with him and he backtracked on that. That's what sent the people out to the Maidan to protest. A protest which the president tried to quell - with bullets. Which is why he eventually had to flee back to Russia.

That doesn't sound like a foreign sponsored overthrow at all, well, except to me.

Yep, you're on your own there.

Sorry, hind front, but the simple matter is that he campaigned on joining if the EU offered a REASONABLE deal, the deal that was offered was extremely one sided, he rejected the specific deal because it was bad for Ukraine, and was overthrown despite his having the mandate from the entire Ukrainian population to do exactly what he did.

Note that the coup installed regime has never had a mandate from the entire Ukrainian population, refusing to accept the votes from the Eastern Ukrainian states. There's a reason why when American polling firms asked Ukrainians post coup if they saw the regime as legitimate, with the Azov Brigade on the loose, the unbridled American surveillance monster placed in service of the regime, as willing to provide it with a target list and cover as it had been to Saddam, and the Shah, and the Saud, the answer they got was a statistical tie.

Putin to stay home

ASEAN's dilemma is obvious - sit on the fence and make back-door deals with Putin, and suffer disastrous consequences with the G7. I can see a concerted effort by the US to cut all aid and trade with ASEAN, and it's not pie-in-the-sky. The economies of those countries would tank. Overnight.

RichardPearce

Sorry, hind front, but the simple matter is that he campaigned on joining if the EU offered a REASONABLE deal, the deal that was offered was extremely one sided, he rejected the specific deal because it was bad for Ukraine,

Nope. He rejected it because it didn't suit Russia.

and was overthrown despite his having the mandate from the entire Ukrainian population to do exactly what he did.

Shooting protesters was more likely the reason of Yanukovych's demise.

There's a reason why when American polling firms asked Ukrainians post coup if they saw the regime as legitimate, with the Azov Brigade on the loose,

The Azov Regiment was formed to fight pro-Russian forces in the Donbas War; so the Azov Brigade wasn't on the loose, they weren't even formed when Yanukovych fled to Russia.