Posted on 05/16/2022 8:19:17 PM PDT by FarCenter
Ukraine's military said it was working to evacuate all remaining troops from the Azovstal steelworks in Mariupol.
"The 'Mariupol' garrison has fulfilled its combat mission," the General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces said in a statement on Facebook.
"The supreme military command ordered the commanders of the units stationed at Azovstal to save the lives of the personnel... Defenders of Mariupol are the heroes of our time."
The rest of Mariupol is already under Russian control. The city had been under Russian siege since the start of the war.
(Excerpt) Read more at dw.com ...
Most of my employees are Russian or have Family in Russia. They are good people who work harder and have a lot more class then most of us Americans. They also value freedom and Christianity . The Ukrainian government is just more western styled globalists. I hope to hell non of my tax dollars went to hurt any Russian people or soldiers .
There is a fantasy on FR that Russia will somehow disappear at the snap of some western neocon fingers. Even were it to experience some kind of national humiliation vis a vis Ukraine, it would still be there geopolitically. Just as the U.S was and is after the vietnam and Afghan humble pie
The West should have been driving hard toward a negotiated settlement from the start.
***Ras Putin invaded when there was a weak-kneed prez the first time, didn’t do anything when there was a strong prez, then invaded a second time when we had a second weak-kneed dufusPrez. The West should have backed up the sovereignty & borders the first time, honoring the assurances they gave in exchange for nukes in 1994. Otherwise it would have been better for the Ukes to have never given up those nukes. If we don’t get nuclear nonproliferation right, we doom everyone.
The Putinic Cult of FR savoring their first “win”. Coming after months of devastation I can only imagine how good it must feel. But it’s not for long.
Nuts, you beat me to it. My thoughts exactly.
The West should have backed up the sovereignty & borders the first time, honoring the assurances they gave in exchange for nukes in 1994.
This lie, repeated ad nauseam, remains nonsense.
Pursuant to the Budapest Memorandum on security assurances of 1994, there was an assurance that any arising situation would be brought before the UN Security Council.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the NonProliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
Their was no assurance to do more in exchange for nukes or anything else.
Ukraine gave up nukes as a prerequisite to obtain recognition of sovereignty. The US and Russia refused to recognize Ukraine except as a non-nuclear party to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Ukraine tried to accede the the NPT conditionally and that was rejected. They acceded to the treaty for recognition of sovereignty, not for a promise of military intervention on their behalf.
If we don’t get nuclear nonproliferation right, we doom everyone.
We got nuclear non-proliferation right with Ukraine. They are too unstable and irresponsible to be trusted with nukes. The United States and Russia refused to do it.
Evacuating/surrendering. 😏
Doesn’t Budapest have another clause that effectively prohibited Russia from taking EITHER direct action (invading it) OR interfering in it (eg by colluding with Yanokovych to sabotage thd EU trade deal, hand over Crimea, promote separatists)?
Didn’t Russia break that assurance in December 2013 when it nobbled/bribed Yanukovych? Or a few years earlier - the time Russia poisoned Yanykovych’s rival in an election?
You're referring to these clauses, which were aimed not just at Russia, but all of the other parties:
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 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;
Then it becomes a matter of what you think rises to the level of the threat of force or economic coercion (because America and other members of NATO were certainly far from blameless in that regard, even prior to the Maidan revolution of 2014).
The Minsk Agreement of 12 February 2015 (MINSK II) followed the Minsk Protocol of 5 September 2014 (MINSK I)
MINSK II AGREEMENT, 12 February 2015 (as endorsed at UN Security Council, 17 Feb 2015)
ANNEX IPackage of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements
Minsk, 12 February 2015
1. Immediate and comprehensive ceasefire in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine and its strict implementation as of 15 February 2015, 12 a.m. local time.
2. Withdrawal of all heavy weapons by both sides by equal distances in order to create a security zone of at least 50 km wide from each other for the artillery systems of calibre of 100 and more, a security zone of 70 km wide for MLRS and 140 km wide for MLRS “Tornado-S”, Uragan, Smerch and Tactical Missile Systems (Tochka, Tochka U):
— for the Ukrainian troops: from the de facto line of contact;
— for the armed formations from certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine : from the line of contact according to the Minsk Memorandum of Sept. 19th, 2014;
The withdrawal of the heavy weapons as specified above is to start on day 2 of the ceasefire at the latest and be completed within 14 days.
The process shall be facilitated by the OSCE and supported by the Trilateral Contact Group.
3. Ensure effective monitoring and verification of the ceasefire regime and the withdrawal of heavy weapons by the OSCE from day 1 of the withdrawal, using all technical equipment necessary, including satellites, drones, radar equipment, etc.
4. Launch a dialogue, on day 1 of the withdrawal, on modalities of local elections in accordance with Ukrainian legislation and the Law of Ukraine “On interim local self-government order in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions” as well as on the future regime of these areas based on this law.
Adopt promptly, by no later than 30 days after the date of signing of this document a Resolution of the Parliament of Ukraine specifying the area enjoying a special regime, under the Law of Ukraine “On interim self-government order in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions”, based on the line of the Minsk Memorandum of September 19, 2014.
5. Ensure pardon and amnesty by enacting the law prohibiting the prosecution and punishment of persons in connection with the events that took place in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine.
6. Ensure release and exchange of all hostages and unlawfully detained persons, based on the principle “all for all”. This process is to be finished on the day 5 after the withdrawal at the latest.
7. Ensure safe access, delivery, storage, and distribution of humanitarian assistance to those in need, on the basis of an international mechanism.
8. Definition of modalities of full resumption of socioeconomic ties, including social transfers such as pension payments and other payments (incomes and revenues, timely payments of all utility bills, reinstating taxation within the legal framework of Ukraine).
To this end, Ukraine shall reinstate control of the segment of its banking system in the conflict-affected areas and possibly an international mechanism to facilitate such transfers shall be established.
9. Reinstatement of full control of the state border by the government of Ukraine throughout the conflict area, starting on day 1 after the local elections and ending after the comprehensive political settlement (local elections in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions on the basis of the Law of Ukraine and constitutional reform) to be finalized by the end of 2015, provided that paragraph 11 has been implemented in consultation with and upon agreement by representatives of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in the framework of the Trilateral Contact Group.
10. Withdrawal of all foreign armed formations, military equipment, as well as mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine under monitoring of the OSCE. Disarmament of all illegal groups.
11. Carrying out constitutional reform in Ukraine with a new constitution entering into force by the end of 2015 providing for decentralization as a key element (including a reference to the specificities of certain areas in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, agreed with the representatives of these areas), as well as adopting permanent legislation on the special status of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in line with measures as set out in the footnote until the end of 2015. [Note]
12. Based on the Law of Ukraine “On interim local self-government order in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions”, questions related to local elections will be discussed and agreed upon with representatives of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in the framework of the Trilateral Contact Group. Elections will be held in accordance with relevant OSCE standards and monitored by OSCE/ODIHR.
13. Intensify the work of the Trilateral Contact Group including through the establishment of working groups on the implementation of relevant aspects of the Minsk agreements. They will reflect the composition of the Trilateral Contact Group.
Note
Such measures are, according to the Law on the special order for local selfgovernment in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions:
— Exemption from punishment, prosecution and discrimination for persons involved in the events that have taken place in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions;
— Right to linguistic self-determination;
— Participation of organs of local self-government in the appointment of heads of public prosecution offices and courts in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions;
— Possibility for central governmental authorities to initiate agreements with organs of local self-government regarding the economic, social and cultural development of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions;
— State supports the social and economic development of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions;
— Support by central government authorities of cross-border cooperation in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions with districts of the Russian Federation;
— Creation of the people's police units by decision of local councils for the maintenance of public order in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions;
— The powers of deputies of local councils and officials, elected at early elections, appointed by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by this law, cannot be early terminated.
Participants of the Trilateral Contact Group:
Ambassador Heidi Tagliavini
Second President of Ukraine, L. D. Kuchma
Ambassador of the Russian Federation to Ukraine, M. Yu. Zurabov
A.W. Zakharchenko
I.W. Plotnitski
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ANNEX IIDeclaration of the President of the Russian Federation, the President of Ukraine, the President of the French Republic and the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany in support of the “Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements”, adopted on 12 February 2015 in Minsk
The President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, the President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, the President of the French Republic, François Hollande, and the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, Dr. Angela Merkel, reaffirm their full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. They firmly believe that there is no alternative to an exclusively peaceful settlement. They are fully committed to undertake all possible individual and joint measures to this end.
Against this background, leaders endorse the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements adopted and signed on February 12, 2015 by all signatories who also signed Minsk Protocol of September 5, 2014 and Minsk Memorandum of September 19, 2014. Leaders will contribute to this process and will use their influence on relevant parties to facilitate the implementation of that Package of Measures.
Germany and France will provide technical expertise for the restoration of the segment of the banking system in the conflict affected areas, possibly through the establishment of an international mechanism to facilitate social transfers.
Leaders share the conviction that improved cooperation between the EU, Ukraine and Russia will be conducive to the crisis settlement. To this end, they endorse the continuation of trilateral talks between the EU, Ukraine and Russia on energy issues in order to achieve follow-up stages to the gas winter package.
They also support trilateral talks between the EU, Ukraine and Russia in order to achieve practical solutions to concerns raised by Russia with regards to the implementation of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine and the EU.
Leaders remain committed to the vision of a joint humanitarian and economic space from the Atlantic to the Pacific based upon full respect for international law and the OSCE principles.
Leaders will remain committed to the implementation of the Minsk Agreements. To this end, they agree to establish an oversight mechanism in the Normandy format which will convene at regular intervals, in principle on the level of senior officials from the foreign ministries.
Doesn’t Budapest have another clause that effectively prohibited Russia from taking EITHER direct action (invading it) OR interfering in it (eg by colluding with Yanokovych to sabotage thd EU trade deal, hand over Crimea, promote separatists)?
It is a diplomatic Memorandum. It contains non-binding assurances. It does not prohibit anybody from doing anything. Memoranda are not enforceable treaties. It rises to the level of a pinky swear. Nothing in it states a prohibition. Ukraine wanted more but was refused. What it did was give Ukraine leaders political cover to give up the nukes which were quite useless to it.
According to V. Vasylenko, “Ukraine had to give up nuclear weapons for it to become sovereign state and its independent status to be recognized all over the world.”
Ukraine's forgotten security guarantee: The Budapest Memorandum
DW News [German]
Date 05.12.2014
[Excerpts]
Twenty years ago, the Budapest Memorandum marked the end of many years of negotiations between the successor states of the Soviet Union and leading Western nuclear powers. Ukraine had a special place in the talks.After the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the eastern European country inherited 176 strategic and more than 2,500 tactical nuclear missiles. Ukraine at that point had the third-largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world after the United States and Russia.
But Leonid Kravchuk, then the president of Ukraine, told DW that was only formally the case. De facto, Kyiv was powerless.
"All the control systems were in Russia. The so-called black suitcase with the start button, that was with Russian president Boris Yeltsin."
Western pressure
Ukraine could have kept the nuclear weapons, but the price would have been enormous, Kravchuk says. Though the carrier rockets were manufactured in the southern Ukrainian city of Dnipropetrovsk, the nuclear warheads were not. It would have been too expensive for Ukraine to manufacture and maintain them on its own.
"It would have cost us $65 billion (53 billion euros), and the state coffers were empty," Kravchuk said.
Additionally, the West threatened Ukraine with isolation since the missiles were supposedly aimed at the United States. Therefore, "the only possible decision" was to give up the weapons, according to Kravchuk.
[...]
In 1984, when they signed the agreement, yes. Now in 2022. Ukraine was drifting to the West.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.