this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
476 points (96.9% liked)

World News

39046 readers
2488 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“Whether you like it, or not, history is on our side. We will bury you,” he said quoting former USSR leader Nikita Khrushchev.

Russian politician Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday Russia could have a right to go to war with NATO.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Badass_panda@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean... I can't see any issue with NATO not stopping Ukraine from invading its own territory... the territory the UN recognizes as part of Ukraine... and which Russia signed three separate treaties promising to respect as part of Ukraine.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not doubting you for a second, but can you point me to the treaties? I seem to have to convince people over and over on this service that Ukraine is an independent country with recognized international borders.

[–] Badass_panda@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes of course... Russia acknowledged Ukraine's borders and territorial integrity when:

  • Ukraine was admitted to the UN in 1945 with its current borders (which Russia could have vetoed).

  • Ukraine's sovereign status and territorial integrity were guaranteed in the Belovezha Accords in 1991, which recognized the dissolution of the USSR and the borders and sovereignty of the former member states.

  • Ukraine agreed to transfer control of its 4,700 nuclear weapons to the Russian Federation in exchange for guarantees by the US, UK, and Russian Federation that they would not threaten to use (or use) military force against Ukraine... in the Budapest Memorandum in 1996.

  • Russia specifically recognized Ukraine's sovereignty in Crimea when Ukraine agreed to lease it military bases there (and split the Black Sea fleet, stationed in Crimea, 50/50 in 1997) in the Partition Treaty.

  • The two countries agreed not to declare war on one another, to treat each other's territory as inviolable and to prohibit the use of military force to resolve any future territorial disputes in the same year's Treaty of Friendship.

  • Russia agreed to "final borders" in January 2003 (which include Crimea, Kherson, etc)

  • As you know, Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014; they signed a ceasefire in 2015 once again confirming Ukraine's territorial integrity, but this was almost immediately violated, so I'm not sure I'd even count it.

Hope it helps. The three that were top of mind for me were 1991, 1996, and 2003.

[–] okamiueru@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

One of them is the Budapest Memorandum

Not sure which are the other to. Perhaps https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisbon_Protocol

It's always fascinating to hear Putin talk about "history", and "denazification". You know the truth, so you can observe a mad man lying, and perhaps believing it. Like a child telling an obvious lie, convinced he pulled it off. Except, much less cute and a lot more terrifying.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago

The point of the lie isn’t to convince. Everyone knows it’s not true. The point of the lie is to make others repeat it, proving that they value your favor more than they value the truth.

It’s a loyalty test.

[–] Badass_panda@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I listed them in another comment in reply to the question... i wasn't even including the Lisbon protocol, wild.