By sending troops into the Ukraine, (others than those stationed there by agreement) Putin has broken international law. That does not depend on the Budapest Memorandum. It would be a breach of international law whether the Budapest Memorandum existed or not. The effect of the Budapest Memorandum is rather to oblige the US and the UK to do something about it.
The existence of civil disturbance in a country does not justify outside military intervention. That it does is, of course, the Blair doctrine that I have been campaigning against for 15 years, inside and outside government. Putin of course opposes such interventions by the West, in Iraq, Syria or Libya, but supports such interventions when he does them, as in Georgia and Ukraine. That is hypocrisy. There are elements on the British left who also oppose such interventions when the West does them, but support when Putin does them. You can see their arguments on the last comments thread: fascinatingly none of them have addressed my point about Putin’s distinct lack of interest in the principle of self-determination when it comes to Chechnya or Dagestan.
The overwhelming need now is to de-escalate the crisis. People rushing about in tanks and helicopters very often leads to violence, and here Putin is at fault. There was no imminent physical threat to Russians in the Crimea, and there is no need for all this military activity. Ukraine should file a case against Russia at the International Court of Justice; the UK and US, as guarantor states, can ask to be attached as guarantor states with an interest in the Budapest Memorandum . That will fulfil their guarantor obligations without moving a soldier.
The West is not going to provide the kind of massive financial package needed to rescue the Ukraine’s moribund economy and relieve its debts. It would be great if it did, but with western economies struggling, no western politician is in a position to announce many billions in aid to the Ukraine. The chances of Ukraine escaping from Russian political and economic domination in the near future are non-existent – the Ukrainians are tied by debt. That was the hard reality that scuppered the EU/Ukraine agreement. That hard reality still exists. The Association Agreement is a very long path to EU membership.
Both Putin and the West are reacting to events which unfolded within Ukraine. Action by the West was not a significant factor in the toppling by Yanukovich – that was a nationalist reaction to an abrupt change of political direction which seemed to be moving Ukraine decisively into the Russian orbit. Ukrainians are not stupid and they can see the standard of living in former Soviet Bloc countries which have joined the European Union is now much higher . Anybody who denies that is deluded. Of course western governments had programmes to encourage pro-western tendencies in Ukraine, including secret operations. It would be naïve to expect otherwise. Anybody who thinks Russia was not doing exactly the same is deluded. But it is a huge mistake to lay too much weight on these efforts – both the West and Russia were taken aback by the strength and speed of the political convulsions in Ukraine, and everybody is still paying catch-up.
Which is why we now need a period of calm, and an end to dangerous military adventurism – which undeniably is coming primarily from Russia. Political dialogue needs to be resumed. It is interesting that even the pro-Russian assembly of Crimea region has only called a referendum on more devolved powers, not on union with Russia or independence. However I still maintain the best way forward is agreement on internationally supervised referenda to settle the position. The principle of self-determination should be the most important one here. If any of the regions of Ukraine wish to secede, the goal should be a peaceful and orderly transition. Effective military annexation by Putin, and insistence by the West that national boundaries cannot be changed, are both unproductive stances.
Any referenda in the Crimea under current conditions would be a farce and a forgone conclusion – it would have to be conditional on Russian withdrawal. It would also be extremely important that guarantees would need to be given for the protection of the human rights of minorities after any election, and in particular the Tartars, so as to avoid yet another bout of ethnic cleansing. Let us not forget that Russia happily backed Serbia in the previous European episode. There also has top be some cost/penalty to Putin if only to stop a repeat performance and to discourager les autres. I am very concerned as to how Putin is likely to use this nationalist flag waving as a pretext for cracking down on his own dissidents.
In passing, I might also note that Craig’s principle “that the existence of civil disturbance in a country does not justify outside military intervention” is not something that his hero J S Mill would have subscribed to as an absolute principle, and indeed wrote a paper setting our circumstances when it should be overridden (although some of those were a little bit on the racist side).
Craig, this may be purely pro-Russian propaganda, I found it removed from Wikipedia without a supporting source, but if true, would it affect the legal position regarding Russia’s troops in Crimea?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances&diff=597757436&oldid=597756378
Craig, I’m also worried about this, armed action in Russia itself. Of course, it could be a fake news report, “seeded” by Russian authorities; there’s no way for me to tell. Reposted from previous thread:
———
Comments are closed on this article, which I find worrying. That’s the whole article pasted below; nothing more.
http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/03/02/ukraine-crisis-road-idINL6N0LZ03820140302
I agree, Russia should be negotiating, but Russia seems highly panicked by developments in the region. Maybe they feel that matters are being taken out of their hands.
Craig
It’s unfortunate that you feel the need to compare Russian intervention in the Crimea and Georgia with the West’s actions in Iraq, Syria and Libya.
How are these even remotely similar?
And, what does international law have to say about organising coups in other countries?
Linking the Ukraine mess with the Syria mess is inevitable, but not in the sense the Western media and the dreaded Hague propose. Putin and by association the Ukraine people are both being punished for Putin obstructing the attack on Syria by the USA and its chums. It was only a matter of time for the knock on the door with retribution.
The timing is the key to explaining such events. I imagine the US and their sponsors in the ongoing ousting of Assad the Saudis considered some kind of other disruptive activities during the Olympics but we can at least be happy they waited till after the Sochi Olympics. Whatever the retribution, it had to happen sooner or later to slap Putin on the wrist and to keep him busy on his borders, and to enable the ongoing Saudi/US mission to thwack Assad in Syria.
Double whammy. The people to feel saddest for are the populations of Ukraine and Syria while the US and Saudis play their “House of Cards” dirty games.
The Ukrainian government was, is and will be gangsters. As is the Russian. The US. UK, EU. And the Scot pretender. Self serving elitist killing machines everyone of em.
Down with all governments. They can’t be trusted you know.
Thanks Craig.
I have looked up nationalist.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism
Egalitarian. We are not all equal as some are less fortunate and thus deserve more.
Craig ,with regards to international law the US is a well known culprit yet there does not
seem to be the same fuss made when they break it. Remember Grenada as one example.
Saakashvili was a neocon puppet; Prince Bandar told us Saudi was in charge of Caucasus Islamists; and “we” have been pouring money into the Ukrainian opposition for years in preparation for just such regime change. I’m not defending Yanukovich of Putin, but the West has made a policy out of degrading Russia’s sphere of influence; “we” have enforced ours with Tomahawks and shock and awe.
Kerry saying Russia is behaving “in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped-up pretext”.
The hypocrisy is breath-taking. When you rip up the rule book don’t be surprised when other countries with their own agendas follow your lead.
“Action by the West was not a significant factor in the toppling by Yanukovich – that was a nationalist reaction to an abrupt change of political direction which seemed to be moving Ukraine decisively into the Russian orbit.”
Sigh…. I find that infinitely depressing coming from someone who is looked to for guidance by confused people who distrust their own government; I really do. Tell me you don’t REALLY believe – Pleeeeze. Otherwise can I ask you to have a ponder about this – second thoughts its good for a bit of a rueful chuckle anyway.
Dave Lawton
The US is indeed a serial offender in breaking international law, but I am not sure there is little fuss about it!
Clark,
No, under no circumstances could a pronouncement of the regional government of Ukraine affect the legal position by inviting in Russian troops
As somebody on Medialens says, there were no problems about Hollande invading Mali and later the Central African Republic, or questions raised.
There are other threads there about Greenwald and Omidyar and one about Craig’s take on Ukraine.
Michel Chossudovsky knows the score, and is very well informed.
Scary stuff.
Ukraine and the “Politics of Anti-Semitism”: The West Upholds Neo-Nazi Repression of Ukraine’s Jewish Community
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, February 26, 2014
Region: Europe, Russia and FSU
Theme: Politics and Religion
The US and the EU are supporting the formation of a coalition government integrated by Neo-Nazis which are directly involved in the repression of the Ukrainian Jewish community.
There are about 200,000 Jews living in Ukraine, most of them in Kiev. This community is described as “one of the most vibrant Jewish communities in the world, with dozens of active Jewish organizations and institutions”. A significant part of this community is made up of family members of holocaust survivors. “Three million Ukrainians were murdered by the Nazis during their occupation of Ukraine, including 900,000 Jews.” (indybay.org, January 29, 2014).
Ukrainian Jews were the target of the Third Reich’s Einsatzgruppen (Task Groups or Deployment Groups) which were supported by Ukrainian Nazi collaborators (Wikipedia). These “task forces” were paramilitary death squads deployed in occupied territories.
Graphic
Source: Dennis Nilsson wikimedia.org
Contemporary Neo-Nazi Threat against Ukraine’s Jewish community
While the Western media has not covered the issue, the contemporary Neo-Nazi threat against the Jewish community in the Ukraine is real. Ukrainian Neo-Nazis pay tribute to Stepan Bandera, a World War II-era Nazi collaborator who led the pro-Nazi Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B). The contemporary Neo-Nazi Svoboda Party which is supported by Washington follows in the footsteps of the OUN-B.
/..
http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-and-the-politics-of-anti-semitism-west-upholds-neo-nazi-repression-of-ukraines-jewish-community/5370790
It is somewhat irrelevant that things got out of control of West hands. What is relevant is that it that the west was supporting the revolution. From that perspective, the Russian reaction was completely predictable.
I am waiting for someone to inform us that the Soviet liberators were invited into Prague in 1968, Hungary in 1956 in order to squash the counter revolutionary forces of fascism and imperialism. I’m sure it will be somewhere in the deleted pages of Wikipedia.
Indeed Mary. Complete silence from MSM on the fact that neo-Nazis are now in government in Ukraine. And you’re spot on, TonyF12. All this kicked off just as the Olympics were ending. Perhaps the Bandar threat was a feint; the real action was the NGOs mobilising their people.
Yanukovich may have been a corrupt apparatchik, but this was a coup, with added brownshirt muscle.
Seventy per cent of German casualties during WW2 were on the Eastenr front. The Soviet Union beat the Nazis, and Russia doesn’t want them on its doorstep again.
Craig,
if the ouster of Yanukovych was achieved by illegal means, then the Ukraine which should do this or that according to you, would be the Yanukovych Govt’s Ukraine. simple as that.
the Associated Press had this excerpt squeezed into an otherwise anti-Putin/pro-protesters article. yet it is the most important aspect of this entire sorry episode.
AP: Ukraine’s Parliament Boss Takes Presidential Powers
The legitimacy of the parliament’s flurry of decisions in recent days is under question. The votes are based on a decision Friday to return to a 10-year-old constitution that grants parliament greater powers. Yanukovych has not signed that decision into law, and he said Saturday that the parliament is now acting illegally.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/ukraines-parliament-boss-takes-presidential-powers/495066.html
all else follows from one’s interpretation of that vote. whether Russia/Putin is right or wrong doesn’t come into it.
those who take the view that the vote was probably illegal, including myself, MAY or MAY NOT consider ignoring territorial integrity/international law is just as bad (or good) when done by Russia/Putin doing it, as it is when done by Bush/Blair/Obama/Cameron/Israel/Qatar/Australia etc.
i simply believe that it is THIS legal question about the ouster which should be debated right now, and it isn’t & won’t be – not in the MSM anyway. your legal questions, on the other hand, will be in the MSM, indeed are all over the MSM. i’m not prepared to move on. i would like to see this question resolved.
you say:
“Action by the West was not a significant factor in the toppling by Yanukovich” – you don’t know that. it is an opinion.
as for being deluded if one imagines Russia wasn’t also interfering –
one: who imagines that?
two: interference from a deeply-connected neigbouring country does seem less reprehensible than interference from major powers thousands of miles away somehow.
u say: “Ukrainians are not stupid and they can see the standard of living in former Soviet Bloc countries which have joined the European Union is now much higher” here’s another opinion:
The Crisis In Ukraine
By Paul Craig Roberts
In 2004, Hungary joined the EU, expecting streets of gold. Instead, four years later in 2008 Hungary became indebted to the IMF. The rock video by the Hungarian group, Mouksa Underground sums up the result in Hungary today of falling into the hands of the EU and IMF…
http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Crisis-In-Ukraine-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Crisis_Neocons_Russia_Ukraine-140225-898.html
EU hasn’t turned out great in Italy with yet another unelected Govt – BBC did benignly say the guy would have been elected if they had elections, so i guess that’s democratic enough!
all are opinions, so no need to tag people who have a different opinion as “deluded” or pro-Russian.
International law has been severely weakened by the USUKIS alliance and others. The pungent hypocrisy by this ‘exceptional’ band of deceivers is indeed significant.
Britain and the US has thrown its weight around the international scene for so long without repercussions that it may have forgotten that there are nations in the world that possess capabilities that are not subservient to U.S. interests.
Mon Dieu! The EU voted on a resolution that condemned the U.S. drone program as a “violation of international law,” ignored UNSC resolutions on Israel’s land theft succinct examples of blatant mockery laws circumvented by deceit.
The US maintained the ‘Monroe Doctrine’ [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine], protecting its sphere of influence in Latin America, for almost 200 years.
A step change in awareness occurred in me when I witnessed our own SAS dressed as Arabs planting explosives in Iraq.
The insipid deception by the West must stop now peeps regardless of International law. Moral authority rules and British and American exceptionalism based on democratic ideals and personal liberty is an illusion, an empty fairy story whose only purpose is to control our lives and the lives of others passionate for peace without the arsenal of mass destruction weapons that give santuary, shield and preserve lives in an increasingly sentient world.
“Seventy per cent of German casualties during WW2 were on the Eastenr front. The Soviet Union beat the Nazis, and Russia doesn’t want them on its doorstep again.”
Actually, the Soviet Union brought the Nazis to its doorstep by signing the Nazi-Soviet Pact and carving up Poland between each other. Stalin was mortified and disbelieving when Hitler, of all people, betrayed him.
“Seventy per cent of German casualties during WW2 were on the Eastenr front. The Soviet Union beat the Nazis, and Russia doesn’t want them on its doorstep again.”
They are inside the house already – just Google “Far right” and “Russia” and Putin doesn’t seem too concerned about his own fascists he even allowed his favourite Zhironovsky to visit occupied Crimea. The Russians deserve so much better.
Absolutely, Mark. I remember those SAS guys who were grabbed from jail in Basra after being found with a car-boot full of bombs. Nothing like inciting some inter-ethnic strife to justify a “protection” force.
They were part of the Special Reconnaisance Regiment, set up by Geoff Hoon and commanded by one Brigadier John Gordon Kerr. Check him out with regard to Northern Ireland. He was up to the same dirty tricks there.
RD, Putin obviously prefers Russian nationalists to German ones. Neither are very pleasant.
The following is just one of my FB friend’s comments but thought I’d pass it on for what worth as perhaps you have some insights on the issue of implications of Chernobyl:
Because of the need for a Sarcophagus to contain the radiation from the nuclear meltdown at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine, Putin should worry that the Fascists in Kiev could exploit this facility to make dirty radioactive bombs. The Russians should send an airborne combat unit to ensure that the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant is secure. The ultra-right “Svoboda” (Liberty) party has stated through one of its” representatives in the Ukrainian parliament that if Russia doesn’t tread carefully it will be dealing with a nuclear power” as a warning to Russia. In addition, one of Ukraine nationalist leaders called for terrorists to act against Russia. Chernobyl would provide the terrorists with enough radioactive materials to make a dirty bomb for use against Russia. Someone in Russia should take this into consideration.
“A leader of the Ukrainian radical group Pravy Sektor (Right Sector), Dmitry Yarosh, has called on Russia’s most wanted terrorist Doku Umarov to act against Russia in an address posted on Right Sector’s page in VKontakte social network.”
“Ukraine nationalist leader calls on ‘most wanted’ terrorist Umarov ‘to act against Russia'” http://rt.com/news/yarosh-nationalist-address-umarov-380/
Correction. The emergency NATO meeting took place today.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26404584
‘”And so, in addition to calling yesterday’s emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, the United Kingdom will join other G8 countries this week in suspending our co-operation under the G8, which Russia chairs this year, including the meetings this week for the preparation of the G8 summit.”
He said Britain would keep its approach to further G8 meetings under review.
In Brussels, Nato has been holding emergency talks about Russia’s move to take control of Crimea.’
That will shake Putin to the core. Not.
Wait for the markets to open tomorrow. Oil and gas prices particularly.
Interesting article on the impracticality of an independent secessionist Crimea:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2014/03/vladimir_putin_s_crimean_mistake_the_russian_president_is_miscalculating.html
Craig
You’ve now posted on several topics with eminent moderation and common sense, and your latest is no exception; I would disagree with nothing you say.
Just one question which might improve the context you’ve set out even further: you write
“…the Ukrainians are tied by debt.”
Can you – or anyone else – give a breakdown of the current Ukrainian debt, please?
Oh. Here you are habby. Both yourself and Angrysoba have been avoiding these questions even though you both are trumpeting the role of parliament in the removal of the president.
1. Were members threatened with or in fear of violence?
2. Were all members who wished to vote in attendance.
3. Was the president ousted lawfully and in accordance with the constitution?
Herbie
“And, what does international law have to say about organising coups in other countries?”
________________________
This comment is seriously flawed (assuming it is meant to be serious):
1/. Firstly, it assumes that the change of government was organised from outside, so you would have to justify that assertion before asking the question;
2/. rather than asking others to say what international law says, you should yourself tell us, since you obviously believe that it has been broken.
Thank you.
[Personal arguments will be deleted]