• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ukraine accuses Russia of Occupation calls for help from US/UK

Ben K.

DP Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
4,717
Reaction score
1,981
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Deeply worried politicians inside Ukraine's parliament have pleaded with Britain and the United States to come to their rescue, after Russia was accused of launching a series of raids in the Crimea region.

The two Western powers signed an agreement with Ukraine in 1994, which Kiev's parliament wants enforcing now. The Budapest Memorandum, signed by Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma – the then-rulers of the USA, UK, Russia and Ukraine – promises to uphold the territorial integrity of Ukraine, in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.

Article one reads: "The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine ... to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine."

And Kiev is now claiming that their country's borders are not being respected.


Ukraine pleads for Britain and US to come to its rescue as Russia accused of 'invasion' - Telegraph

Paramilitary proxy warfare or will this continue to escalate?

 
I have a felling the UK wont do anything without US involvement. Now its crunch time for Obama.
 
I have a felling the UK wont do anything without US involvement. Now its crunch time for Obama.

It speaks to the wider nuke proliferation issue is well. Russia wouldn't be able to do much if Ukraine had nukes. Iran and other states are watching.
 
No global army without a global tax and proportional global participation.
 
It speaks to the wider nuke proliferation issue is well. Russia wouldn't be able to do much if Ukraine had nukes. Iran and other states are watching.
Incidents like this is exactly the reason why Iran wants and needs nukes, I bet the Ukrainians are kicking themselves now for giving up their nukes.
 
I have a felling the UK wont do anything without US involvement. Now its crunch time for Obama.

Why should the UK or USA take action? The Germans, Poles and French took the lead and talked bravery into the opposition's hearts. This is not a US responsibility. Of course the US and UK should help its allies. That goes without saying. But they must not take the lead.
 
It speaks to the wider nuke proliferation issue is well. Russia wouldn't be able to do much if Ukraine had nukes. Iran and other states are watching.

I would say the Russians can grab Crimea with impunity, should Putin want. After all, the EU guarantees peace in Europe.
 
Why should the UK or USA take action? The Germans, Poles and French took the lead and talked bravery into the opposition's hearts. This is not a US responsibility. Of course the US and UK should help its allies. That goes without saying. But they must not take the lead.

I agree with you, EU should take the lead and I feel the US should stay out of it since personally I am politically an advocate for non-interventionism but however we did sign that treaty with them so you know... :doh
 
Why should the UK or USA take action? The Germans, Poles and French took the lead and talked bravery into the opposition's hearts. This is not a US responsibility. Of course the US and UK should help its allies. That goes without saying. But they must not take the lead.

The US and UK signed the agreement im afraid.
 
Seems like those parts of Ukraine are no different than the Sudetenland. History does seem to keep repeating itself.
 
I agree with you, EU should take the lead and I feel the US should stay out of it since personally I am politically an advocate for non-interventionism but however we did sign that treaty with them so you know... :doh

With Ukraine?
 
Yes, I believe it was called the Budapest memorandum sometime in the mid 1990's. US did sign onto that.
 
I haven't read the treaty- does it say we will go to war if the Ukraine declares itself compromised? If anything the Russians are violating the treaty as they signed on to 'protect' the Ukraine's territory as well.

Not the same as the Sudetenland. In the Crimea, Russia has considered it Russian since the wars with the Turks. Charge of the Light Brigade and all that. Russia has maintained military bases in the Crimea for centuries- Germany had not in the Sudetenland. Russia seizing land from Finland would be a better comp for pre-WWII Germany.

But as best anyone can tell there is no land grab as in Georgia, but securing the lifelines back to Mother Russia. If Russian troops seal the penn and pour divisions into Crimea...THEN it is an invasion.
 
I haven't read the treaty- does it say we will go to war if the Ukraine declares itself compromised? If anything the Russians are violating the treaty as they signed on to 'protect' the Ukraine's territory as well.

Not the same as the Sudetenland. In the Crimea, Russia has considered it Russian since the wars with the Turks. Charge of the Light Brigade and all that. Russia has maintained military bases in the Crimea for centuries- Germany had not in the Sudetenland. Russia seizing land from Finland would be a better comp for pre-WWII Germany.

But as best anyone can tell there is no land grab as in Georgia, but securing the lifelines back to Mother Russia. If Russian troops seal the penn and pour divisions into Crimea...THEN it is an invasion.

Nope. But if a signatory can break the agreement, and the others say "whatever", what value does any treaty have?
 
The US and UK signed the agreement im afraid.

Actually, I had forgotten the Budapest Memorandum and just reread it and it probably would mean the US would be obliged to ask the Security Councii to assist Ukraine. But I don't see an obligation to throw troops against the aggressor or even supply weapons.
 
Nope. But if a signatory can break the agreement, and the others say "whatever", what value does any treaty have?

It got the nukes out of the Ukraine- very valuable. Like Europe needs another volatile nation with nukes??? :shock:

If we look at past history, especially in Europe, we see most of their treaties are not worth the paper they are written on and rarely survive a decade. All the grand bargains during the scramble for colonies, the great alliances since Napoleon? They had impressive names and fancy high dollar words- but alas they either fall by the wayside or slaughter a generation of Europeans...

Is the EU going to hold the signatories to a higher standard than they have managed? :peace
 
It got the nukes out of the Ukraine- very valuable. Like Europe needs another volatile nation with nukes??? :shock:

If we look at past history, especially in Europe, we see most of their treaties are not worth the paper they are written on and rarely survive a decade. All the grand bargains during the scramble for colonies, the great alliances since Napoleon? They had impressive names and fancy high dollar words- but alas they either fall by the wayside or slaughter a generation of Europeans...

Is the EU going to hold the signatories to a higher standard than they have managed? :peace

The EU didn't sign the treaty. And what future value is there to non-proliferation treaty's if they don't last a decade in practice?
 
Seems like those parts of Ukraine are no different than the Sudetenland. History does seem to keep repeating itself.

What we are experiencing is the expected development towards a multi polar structure of International security after a time of the relative stability from first MAD and later mono polar power. The situation should deteriorate considerably by mid century allowing for world war in the second half, if we do not internalize security at a supranational level. Should we not succeed in doing the latter, watch and weep.
 
Yes, I believe it was called the Budapest memorandum sometime in the mid 1990's. US did sign onto that.

The Memorandum dealt with Ukraine's giving up its nuclear weapons. The U.S., Russia, among others made commitments not to intervene in Ukraine, not to use nuclear weapons in any conflict against Ukraine, etc. There were no binding defense commitments should one or more parties violate the terms of the Memorandum.

Ukraine is not a member of NATO, either. Hence, the U.S. has no commitments to defend Ukraine should Russia choose to use force.

Should Russia do so--and it's unclear whether the gunmen in Crimea are Russian proxies or acting with recognition that Russia will not move to thwart them in tit-for-tat fashion for the West's silence when the brokered deal between the ousted President and political opposition immediately began to collapse--the West should take non-military measures to pressure Russia.

The exception might be if parties in Ukraine tried to seize or interfere with Russia's naval base at Sevastopol. There are some reports that Russia may have moved in a limited fashion in that vicinity to safeguard the base, but there's a lot of uncertainty concerning those reports. In any case, Russia would have a legitimate right to act to secure that base were it to be threatened. Beyond that, Russia and any other outside party should exercise restraint. The focus should be on developing an approach to help the emerging Ukranian government attain stability, acquire assistance in addressing Ukraine's deep financial challenges, and assure that it respects all Ukrainian residents/does not act opportunistically against Ukraine's ethnic Russian minority.

Finally, given Russia's interests and the consequences to those interests from Ukraine's change of government, one should not be surprised if Russia uses its natural gas as leverage and if Russia decides to cancel its prior financial commitments to Kiev. Russia may or may not go beyond reviewing its bilateral commitments e.g., it may not necessarily use its position on international bodies to obstruct assistance to Ukraine.
 
Actually, I had forgotten the Budapest Memorandum and just reread it and it probably would mean the US would be obliged to ask the Security Councii to assist Ukraine. But I don't see an obligation to throw troops against the aggressor or even supply weapons.

What would that "assistance" consist of if not troops or weapons? An Obama happy face tee shirt?
 
Boy what a mess for ole Obama and Co. Will Hillary step up and say something? Will Russia yet again say suck it to Obama and the USA? Clearly this is the year of Putin, and Obama looks like a dolt. The boy can organize a fantastic community, and heck raise money, but man, this guy cannot lead and is in way over his head.

Tim-
 
Life is better with a little US-Russian Cold War.
 
Boy what a mess for ole Obama and Co. Will Hillary step up and say something? Will Russia yet again say suck it to Obama and the USA? Clearly this is the year of Putin, and Obama looks like a dolt. The boy can organize a fantastic community, and heck raise money, but man, this guy cannot lead and is in way over his head.

Tim-

No kidding.

Obama probably bought a board game of Risk to plot his strategy on this.
 
Back
Top Bottom