Randahl Fink
This is where we are at:
Ukraine signed a non-proliferation deal in 1994 and gave up their nuclear weapons… in exchange for the US one day telling them, when Russia fires at civilians in Kharkiv from across the border, Ukraine cannot fire back.
Absolutely insane.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
What were the actual promises made in that deal?
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Im familiar with the 1994 agreement to some extent. That link doesnt address my question.
Eva Chaos
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Thanks, yea that confirms my suspicion, the terms werent laid out in any certain terms and Ukraine is getting screwed over by that as a result... Frankly the whole deal was a horrible move on Ukraine's part, they should have demanded more concrete terms.
helgenug
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Yes those words are clear, the issues is that russia is claiming the agreement was with the last government of Ukraine, which no longer exists as it was dissolved and recreated during their coup detat. Since the agreement is not very explicit that is entierly open to interpretation. Obviously I would disagree with Russia and would fin them in the wrong even if they had no treaty anyway. But by signing a treaty that is so sparse in its wording it does leave things open to reader interpritation.
helgenug
It is fairly concrete/specific (e.g. "[...]reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, **to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine**[...]"). What it lacks, are the means to ensure the document's content is kept/followed.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.