Reply To: Russian Tensions
OK, we’ve a problem here. Ukraine was no longer a sovereign country. Its legitimate government had been overthrown in a US funded coup. Victoria Nuland publicly admitted to spending $5 billion on the overthrow of the government. She personally chose the new cabinet. This government launched the war in the Donbass which caused a massive refugee exodus and disenfranchised similar numbers of voters with sympathies toward Russia. This disenfranchisement ensured that all future governments, including the current one, are not legitimate. Kiev is Washington’s pawn. Washington scuttled peace talks with Russia and entirely funds its government and military apparatus. Ukraine, therefore, is not sovereign. So, an appeal to sovereignty is moot.
What’s that skippy? He’s moving the goalposts again? That played no part in Moscow’s causus belli there has been no mention from Moscow that their intention is to remove the illegitimate government. That would also be incompatible with annexation, since the point of the war would, Shirley, be to remove the installed government and allow a genuinely Ukrainian government to be formed, within it’s existing territory.
It did all these things. Russia strenuously argued for the implementation of the Minsk 2 Agreement which former Ukrainian and German presidents both recently agreed was a ruse to re-arm Ukraine. Russia also proposed a security agreement halting NATO’s eastern expansion which was summarily ignored by NATO. No ultimatums were issued, no attempt to go through the UN for a peace keeping force, etc. That Putin only decided at the last minute only compounds the crime not exonerating him.
Anyway, I don’t know if the Amnesty report on Russian action in occupied zones has landed here before, apologies if it has: but it’s worth a read, especially to see the faces of the victims of this war: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur50/5561/2022/en/