Ukraine Crisis - Page 89

On February 28 2014 22:50 mcc wrote:

What did you see in the video, except unclear helicopters flying somewhere in the world at unclear point in time. Also Russia has a base in Sevastopol, are you surprised they have military equipment there ? Seems to me you are jumping to conclusions based on nothing.

Ukraine’s new premier invokes treaty in bid to resist Russia
Financial Times: February 27, 2014 6:50 pm
By Kiran Stacey in London and Roman Olearchyk in Kiev

Ukraine’s new prime minister invoked a 20-year-old international agreement as he appealed for western powers to help him resist Russian attempts to assert itself in the south of the country.

Arseniy Yatseniuk called upon the members of the UN Security Council to help preserve Ukraine’s “territorial integrity” hours after armed pro-Russian separatists in Crimea took over the local parliament calling for unification with Moscow.

His words are a deliberate echo of the so-called Budapest Memorandum, signed as part of the deal that saw Ukraine give up its nuclear weapons in 1994.

According to the agreement, the US, UK and Russia all agreed to protect the sovereignty and “territorial agreement” of Ukraine, meaning any Russian support for an attempt to declare Crimean independence would be in violation of their international obligations.

The three powers committed to “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and “refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”.

Significantly, the wording suggests Russia’s insistence that Ukraine forgo an EU trade deal may have already breached the terms of the agreement.

The signatories agreed to “refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind”.

Western diplomats are now scouring the text to check whether they are obliged to intervene in the country to prevent it from breaking up if Russia does so first.

John Lough, associate fellow of the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House, the foreign policy think-tank, said: “While this does not legally oblige the UK and other western powers to intervene, they might feel morally obliged to.” He added: “Russia has already violated the spirit and letter of this agreement through the economic pressure applied to Ukraine in the run-up to the Vilnius Summit,” a reference to the November meeting when then president Viktor Yanukovich declined to sign the EU deal.

The UK Foreign Office said foreign secretary William Hague and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov were in agreement that it was “for the people of Ukraine to chose their own future, secure in their sovereignty and territorial integrity”. Nato defence ministers had on Wednesday pledged to support Ukraine’s “territorial integrity”.

But while European ministers are urging their Russian counterparts to abide by the agreement signed in 1994 by then president Boris Yeltsin, they are also putting pressure on Mr Yatseniuk to do more to appease Russian supporters in the south and east of the country.

One person involved in the negotiations with Kiev said: “Making Ukrainian the only official language, rather than both Ukrainian and Russian, was needlessly antagonistic.”

Source.

On March 01 2014 00:13 Gorsameth wrote:
Putin is playing a very dangerous game here. Gambling that the West doesn't want to risk an armed conflict over the Ukraine.
Assuming he actually go's trough it it that is.

Be a good boy Putin and don't start WW3 on my birthday....

On March 01 2014 00:37 xDaunt wrote:

It all depends upon Obama. Unfortunately, because Obama has been so weak on the foreign policy stage to this point, Putin may not take Obama seriously.

As for an American/NATO response, I'd probably support the creation and enforcement of a no-fly zone over the Ukraine along with some ancillary naval support (like submarines). I don't think anyone is interested in a more generalized conflict with Russia.

On March 01 2014 00:37 xDaunt wrote:


As for an American/NATO response, I'd probably support the creation and enforcement of a no-fly zone over the Ukraine along with some ancillary naval support (like submarines). I don't think anyone is interested in a more generalized conflict with Russia.

Joint declaration by the foreign ministers of Poland, Germany and France on Ukraine

We take note of the formation of a transitional government in Ukraine supported by a broad majority of votes in the Ukrainian parliament. This transitional government will have to face immense challenges in order to improve the standards of living of the citizens of Ukraine which can be only achieved through the implementation of the transition and modernization reforms, including fight with corruption, and respect for democratic values. We are ready to support Ukraine in these efforts.

We remain convinced that political stability and reforms in Ukraine require a broad consensus supported by all relevant stakeholders without exception. In particular, a lasting accommodation of the existing diversity in Ukrainian society necessitates reaching out to Eastern and Southern regions and engaging with all legitimate interests, including minority rights especially regarding language issues.

The situation facing Ukraine can only be addressed in a sustainable fashion, if all major political forces unite and pursue a common agenda.

We are deeply concerned with the tensions in Crimea. Everything must be done to decrease the tension in the eastern region and promote peaceful discussions among relevant parties. We restate our support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country. We appeal to all parties in Ukraine to refrain from actions that could challenge this.


Radosław Sikorski
Frank-Walter Steinmeier
Laurent Fabius

Source.

On March 01 2014 00:33 Go0g3n wrote:
My best guess is, that Putin wants several Ukrainian provinces to declare autonomy. Basically, to repeat the "Georgia" scenario, without the actual war.

On March 01 2014 00:54 Derez wrote:

Should be a russian flag. Haven't seen any reports of american paratroopers arriving.