It is interesting how previous and current agreements on nuclear assets between Russia and the United States plays very strongly into the level of protection for sovereignty of former USSR states. Jane Armstrong, for example, writes on her blog that Ukraine should enjoy a much stronger obligation to its security and sovereignty from the United States than Georgia did because of Leonid Kuchma’s clever deal to guarantee the country’s sovereignty in exchange for the surrender of nuclear arsenals. She writes “In essence, Washington is guarantor to Ukraine’s sovereignty, unlike Georgia’s, which was punished by Russia for an incursion, invaded temporarily and two of its breakaway provinces acquired.” A civilian nuclear deal with Russia is also being scuppered by the Bush administration as an expression of its disapproval of Moscow’s war conduct (never mind that the deal wasn’t going to get passed by Congress anyways). The AP reports that the Kremlin “might not be much inclined to hear” to hear this warning, given that Russia “appears to feel it no longer has as much need for the potential billions in revenue the deal would have provided.” To us, this seems very, very ill-considered on Russia’s behalf, especially as the markets there hit a new two-year low today.