Skip to comments.NATO Secretary-General believes that because of the Crimea Russia can no longer be believed
Posted on 05/17/2014 2:25:04 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen believes that no one will longer believe Russian guarantees of security.
He said about this on a press conference in Bucharest, where he arrived to commemorate an anniversary of Romanias accession to the Alliance, reports Radio Svoboda.
The Head of NATO stated that in 1994, where an international agreement was reached about the non-nuclear status of Ukraine, Russia as one of the participant of the agreement pledged to support Ukrainian sovereignty.
However, after the annexation of the Crimea, according to Rasmussen, there is no longer possibility to trust Moscows guarantees.
In Bucharest Rasmussen had negotiations with the leadership of Romania, including the President of this country Traian Basescu
I still cannot figure out what NATO is doing in the Ukraine.
Just doesn’t make sense to me is all.
“I still cannot figure out what NATO is doing in the Ukraine.”
“Just doesnt make sense to me is all.”
That is a false representaiotn and a strawman argument, given the fact NATO has no military force in the Ukraine. It also ignores the fact the Ukraine and Russia are formal partners in the NATO organization, and the Ukraine conducts military operations with NATO and United Nations peacekeeping operations.
Russia has no right to invade and annex the Ukrainian territories it made a formal agreement to respect in 1994 under international law, which Russia is now flagrantly violating in the worst ways possible.
Not clear on the concept, are we? Let’s go over it again. NATO, at least in principle, is a mutual defense pact. It was obvious a lot of little countries could not withstand the pressure of the Soviet Union. NATO was formed to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.
Any country bordering the Warsaw pact, and willing to commit resources to mutual defense, was welcomed. NATO was formed so that no one country would have to face the Soviet Union alone.
I don’t believe anything from any government or an organization. Especially the United States Government. So this is no big deal for me.
” It also ignores the fact the Ukraine and Russia are formal partners in the NATO organization”
They are? Since when?
Since at least as far back as the nineteen fifties, Russia has indicated in its military doctrine that it would do whatever it took to keep control of Crimea.
I believed them during the cold war, and I still do.
That mission was accomplished about 25 years ago. Today NATO is just a huge mismanaged drain on the American taxpayer who derives no material benefit from it.
Let the European socialist freeloaders pay for and fight for NATO if they're still afraid of the Russians. Without US money and muscle, NATO would fold up like a cheap suit.
“They are? Since when?”
Russia joined the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council on 28 May 2002.
Ukraine joined the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) on 9 July 1997.
Since Russia’s illegal, invasion, occupation, and annexation of the Ukraine’s Crimean territory, Russia’s partnership in the EAPC has been suspended except with respect to the maintenance of ambassadorial level contact.
Euro-Atlantic Partnership is NOT NATO membership. It is merely a discussion forum.
Where is Captain Obvious when you need him?
“Since at least as far back as the nineteen fifties, Russia has indicated in its military doctrine that it would do whatever it took to keep control of Crimea.”
“I believed them during the cold war, and I still do.”
Whatever claims Russia once had upon the Crimea were permanently surrenderd by the uathority of international law with the 1954 transfer of the territory to the Ukrainian Soviet Socilist Republic, the 1991 agreement to dissolve the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR/CCCP), the Russian recognition of Ukrainian territorial integrity in the Budapest Agreement 1994, and the subsequent Russian agreements for leasing bases in the Crimea 1997 and 1998. Anyone who repudiates those legal acts is committing a punishable crime.
Lol...so why don't the "aggrieved" parties take that case into international court?
“Euro-Atlantic Partnership is NOT NATO membership. It is merely a discussion forum.”
You are being dishonestlty deceptive by trying to falsely mislead the readers into thinking I represented Russia and Ukraine as being NATO members. I wrote, “It also ignores the fact the Ukraine and Russia are formal partners in the NATO organization....” Russia and Ukraine are formal partners in the NATO Euro-Atlantic APartnership Council (EAPC) just as I said. I never said and I never imlied Russia or Ukraine wee members of NATO.
Furthermore, being a NATO partner invovles far more than just some participation in discussion forums. NATO Partners, including Russia and Ukraine, have participated in joint combat and/or anti-criminal operations with NATO military forces.
Russia had every opportunity to participate in NATO operations in the role of a NATO Partner with the authority of consensus decisionmaking. Instead Russia has chosen to engage in criminal acts and prey upon its NATO Partners and their territories as conquests in flagrant violations of international law.
“Lol...so why don’t the “aggrieved” parties take that case into international court?”
With respect to subject matter that is within the jurisdiction of the international courts without the cooperation of Russia, the Ukraine has initiated legal proceedings.
However, the larger issues such as the right of sovereignty over the Crimea is not subject to the jurisdiction of the relevant internatonal court/s without the Ukraine and Russia agreeing to that jurisdiction. Since Putin and Russia are not about to agree to the jurisdiction of an international court, nothing the Ukraine can do will compel Russia to submit the issue to such a court.
Welcome to a vocabulary lesson.
“Bar nothing” means that Russia will use any means to retain Control.
The only way Russia will surrender Crimea is if all of their arsenal is exhausted and they can’t come out on top.
This means that diplomacy is window dressing at best and a humiliating display of international masturbatory at worst. Every one who has paid attention knows that to court removal of Crimea is to flirt with a war that has every likelihood of extending to NBC if Russia is pressed, since there is zero chance that they will back down.
I seriously doubt the puppet fascists in Kiev want to appear anywhere near an international court.
Do you have a source for your assertion or are you just taking a WAG at it?
“Welcome to a vocabulary lesson.”
It is yourself who needs the vocabulary test, because the gross and massive violations of international law can and often does have grave consequences for the aggressor, sooner or later as discovered by such criminals as Hitler, Goering, Ribbentrop, Saddam Hussein, and others. The people of Russia need to take immediate heed of those potential consequences and terminate the careers of their leaders engaging in these crimes before Russia and its people suffer the consequences of their aggressions and victimization of the rest of the world.
In the past, even the most criminal leaders of the Soviet Union recognized the risks they were taking and eliminated their leader/s when they got too far out of control. Stalin was apparently assassinated by Beria and others when Stalin appeared ready to purge them in preparation for engaging the Western Allies in a nuclear war for control of Europe.
“The question is can you believe NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Whoever he is.”
It is already a done deal, because Russia’s NATO Partnership was suspended except for ambassadorial contact as a consequence of Russia’s adversarial role and aggressions against the Ukraine and other NATO Members and Partners.