The U.S. feared a military involvement in the crisis in Ukraine

While closely following the events in Ukraine , the U.S. now raise the level of attention to the issue with the direct intervention of U.S. President Obama. What creates greater concern to the White House is the replacement of the chief of staff Volodymyr Zamana , replaced by Admiral Yuri Ilin by President Yanukovych. This rotation creates concern for a possible intervention in the Ukrainian crisis , from the armed forces , which so far have had a low profile , remaining closed in the barracks . Any emergency declaration may provide for the use of the military against civilians, a hypothesis which he had always said he opposes the chief of staff decayed Zamana . For now, the maintenance of order was the exclusive task of the police force , but with the worsening of the situation it seems clear that the action is not enough police forces to stem the violence. The hypothesis of the use of the armed forces , which had initially been ruled out by the Minister of Defence , becomes more likely, but points to the fact that the solution of the dialogue is set aside and the government does not intend to consider the reasons of the rioters and even suggested that by the EU , that is to arrive with a transitional government to a referendum where the people's will prevail or not allowing Europe. The greater openness of the new chief of staff to direct employment in the crisis of the armed forces seem a further demonstration that the path chosen by Yanukovych to overcome the crisis and turn the country into a state of Ukraine under military protection . It should , however, see how they will react the same armed forces in their presumed involvement in the task of maintaining order . The Ukrainian army is a force relatively young man who has worked joint exercises with the Atlantic Alliance and it is said that fits in a compact manner to a request for repression of the crowd. In any case, the personal involvement of President Obama will not have an impact on the relationship between the U.S. and Russia, which presents itself as a destabilizing element in the international scene . If before there was an ideological difference to characterize the conflict , the end of communism had resulted in an initial phase where the relations were good, but now the differences are still present , especially in the setting of foreign policy given by Putin to his country, characterized by nationalism pushed to excess , where cases like Ukraine are experienced as interference in the internal affairs of Moscow. It is no secret that Putin wants to recreate , albeit in another form , the area with the Soviet Russian nation with a pre-eminent role in relation to other countries. Conversely, for the U.S. it is important to erode allies in Moscow and encourage those in which there are political and social forces in favor of a move away from Russia. This comparison , however , can not be limited to the particular case, a Russian reaction might be going to engage with its consequences , the negotiations for Syria , the situation of instability in Southeast Asia and even the same fight against Islamic terrorism , in which the two powers are located on the same side . On the other hand the concern expressed by Obama demonstrates how the United States wants to become protagonists in question , surpassing the European Union itself , whose action was not considered sufficiently adequate and effective from Washington . It remains so to see if the Ukrainian armed forces will actually in the arena, what are the concrete steps of Washington : The range may vary by additional penalties, including the most serious , to be added to the European ones , up to a direct aid to the protesters. This solution , however , appears less likely because it would undergo a series of significant contraindications . Easier than the U.S. formulate solutions in favor of a possible negotiation between the opposing forces , along the lines of what has been done so far by the EU.