Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[Raoul]

What the hell is going on in here ?

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

Not entering into the raging debate from the last few hours here.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is a serious problem as someone obviously violated the sanctions from the last 8 years to provide those American microchips and thus must be found at all costs. However, I have a hard time understanding why Russia would go this far to get those when China is right next door and both have been circlejerking for the last decade.

 

[Frosty]

What the hell is going on in here ?

This is what happens when you leave us unsupervised.

 

[Oly Francis]

Did you see me saying that. I said that according to UN — Russian Military operation in Ukraine is legal.

It's not. You're parroting what Putin claims, not the actual legal interpretation of th charter.

 

[Paxi]

Mate, stop. There's absolutely no merit to their claim under article 51 of the UN charter alone. Any decently competent legal scholar would say it as Dombas is not a state. You're regurgitating russian propaganda.

Russia part of UN council correct? They have a right to recognise states, republic and so fourth. This military operation is all within legal framework. Now, will this be contested, of course! But I’m he fact you’re just brazen about it, just shows how underestimate Russians — keep doing it though. Haha

 

[Frosty]

On Article 51 of the UN Charter, here is Elizabeth Wilmshurst, a professor of International Law at UCL who was in the FCO in 2003 and resigned over the Iraq War, so she does know a thing or two:

Russia has begun a large-scale military attack on Ukraine, having first declared it recognizes Donetsk and Luhansk as separate states. It scarcely needs saying Russia is violating international law – violating the prohibition in the United Nations (UN) Charter on the use of force, violating the obligation to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other states, and violating the prohibition on intervention.

But Russia is using the language of the law to defend its actions. In all the recent verbiage of President Vladimir Putin, some attempts at legal arguments can be elicited – but they do not stand up to scrutiny.

There have been no threats of force against Russia from Ukraine nor from NATO member states. There is nothing to support a legal justification for Russia’s military attack against Ukraine

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the threat or use of force with the only two Charter exceptions to this prohibition being self-defence and action mandated by the UN Security Council. In his speech on 23 February, Putin points to two grounds on which Russia relies on self-defence – defence in aid of the two breakaway republics and self-defence in the light of threats against Russia itself.

Donetsk, Luhansk, and collective self-defence

Putin said ‘the people’s republics of Donbass turned to Russia with a request for help’ and went on to seek to justify his military action under Article 51 of the Charter. But it is only in respect of states that the right of collective self-defence exists – humanitarian intervention on behalf of individuals in a state has not gained a place in international law. And it is only Russia which has recognized the statehood of the two regions.

Putin repeated on 23 February his earlier allegation that the people of the two breakaway republics are being repressed by the Ukraine government, and even that genocide is being committed against them. This baseless allegation is relevant not only to the claim of self-defence on behalf of these regions but also to Russia’s ‘recognition’ of them as separate states.

International law does not give the inhabitants of a part of a state the right to secede from that state. The aspect of self-determination which allows for independence of a ‘people’ applies to peoples in colonies and other overseas territories under the occupation of another state. The other aspect of self-determination is ‘internal’ and comprises the right to freely choose political status and pursue economic, social, and cultural development within the state – as the Minsk accords sought to provide for Donetsk and Luhansk.
There is a somewhat controversial theory in international law that would give a right of secession from a state if the people in question were subject to extreme abuse of human rights and systematic oppression. This is the theory of remedial secession, which some countries, such as Switzerland, used in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in relation to Kosovo’s declaration of independence from Serbia – an independence still not recognized by Russia.

But the theory has no support from the international courts and, even if it did, Russia itself has stated previously that a right of remedial secession is ‘limited to truly extreme circumstances, such as an outright armed attack by the parent State, threatening the very existence of the people in question’ (see Russia’s submissions to the ICJ in the Kosovo case, para 88).

Ukraine retained its membership in the UN at the dissolution of the USSR, having been one of the founding members of the UN as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic

The facts do not substantiate Russia’s claims anyway. The law is as stated on behalf of the UN Secretary-General on 21 February – that Russia’s decision to recognize the independence of the breakaway regions is a ‘violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and inconsistent with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.’ There are no ‘states’ which can request the use of military force.

Is Ukraine a threat against Russia?

Putin refers to the ‘further expansion of the infrastructure of the North Atlantic Alliance, the military development of the territories of Ukraine’ as creating an ‘anti-Russia’ comprising a ‘real threat not just to our interests, but to the very existence of our state, its sovereignty’.

Article 51 allows for self-defence ‘if an armed attack occurs’. This has been interpreted by many states to include defence against the threat of an imminent attack – for example, there is no requirement to wait until a nuclear strike has begun. But under no interpretation of ‘imminence’ can the situation in Ukraine constitute a threat to Russia. There have been no threats of force against Russia from Ukraine nor from NATO member states. There is nothing to support a legal justification for Russia’s military attack against Ukraine.

The myth of Ukraine never having had ‘real statehood’ also does not give any legal justification for Russian aggression. The UN is based on the ‘principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members’ (Art. 2(1) of the UN Charter). Ukraine retained its membership in the UN at the dissolution of the USSR, having been one of the founding members of the UN as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

What are the legal consequences of Russia’s actions?

Within the UN, it is the Security Council which has the mandate to uphold international peace and security, and act when there is a threat to the peace. But there will be no help from there with Russia’s status as a permanent member holding a veto.

The UN General Assembly may act instead. Since 2014 it has adopted a series of resolutions (the latest on 9 December 2021) requiring Russia to withdraw immediately and unconditionally from Crimea. But the General Assembly does not have the powers of the Security Council, and cannot mandate peacekeepers or the use of force.

In due course there may be the need for a UN Human Rights Commission of Inquiry to be launched if there are breaches of human rights law and international humanitarian law, and human rights cases may be brought against Russia at the European Court of Human Rights. But international institutions do not have the necessary powers to stop what is going on right now.

International law gives the right to Ukraine, being attacked, to call for support from other states. And as well as imposing sanctions, states may wish to consider cyber countermeasures. Some of the recent cyber activity against Ukraine has been attributed by the US, UK, and Australia to the Russian Main Intelligence Unit (GRU).


Ukraine: Debunking Russia’s legal justifications 2nd part

On the negative side, international law (specifically, Article 41(2) of the 2001 Draft Articles on State Responsibility which reflects customary international law) imposes obligations on states not to recognize situations resulting from the use of force. This includes the obligation not to recognize the independence of the two breakaway republics.

Putin complains in his 23 February speech about past violations of international law by the West – and his reference to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 is telling. But the naked aggression exhibited against Ukraine cannot be justified by any violations of international law in the past.

Russia has presented itself as a defender of international law – in 2016, Russia and China made a joint declaration ‘on the Promotion of International Law’. Russia would do well now to call to mind the reaffirmation in its declaration of ‘the principle that States shall refrain from the threat or use of force in violation of the United Nations Charter’ as well as the statement that ‘sovereign equality is crucial for the stability of international relations’.

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/02/ukraine-debunking-russias-legal-justifications

 

[Beans]

I respectfully disagree. If Russians suddenly made Cuba their satellite state. It would cause an an absolute sizemic geopolitical crisis.

How can you disagree that there are immoral actions that are strategically advantageous? Are you saying that anything that gives a country an advantage against another is moral? Would you say the same thing for the individual, anything that gives me an advantage in life is moral?

Like nuking North Korea, for example. That's not okay, even if it makes the world a safer place. You can take a position that making the world safer justifies evil action, but it's still evil. And you have the problem that this logic might be applied to anyone, which would make the world decidedly less safe.

So instead we give people and countries rights, and they're to be defended.

 

[Zehner]

I’m not saying there no propaganda.
It’s a horrible fecking war and that’s that.

We didn’t call you orcs, or some fecking stupid names for your soldiers.
We didn’t call you Untermenschen gloatingly did we. Maybe see who’s doing that.

I'm against calling Russian soldiers orcs and dehumanizing them, you can read that up, I had a few discussions about that in this thread. But you're ignoring clear evidence of war crimes which is bad. Really, really bad.

 

[Beans]

Russia part of UN council correct? They have a right to recognise states, republic and so fourth. This military operation is all within legal framework. Now, will this be contested, of course! But I’m he fact you’re just brazen about it, just shows how underestimate Russians — keep doing it though. Haha

That's not correct, just read the next post after that one.

 

[The Firestarter]

What the hell is going on in here ?

Revan got threadbanned for one post, this has now taken pages.

 

[Maagge]

Ukrainian battalions are in absolute alignment with his view but like do you see me trying to justify their involvement?

What do you mean here? Justify Ukrainians' involvement when your guys invaded their country?

Tell me where Putin has murdered people — (journalists don’t count)

Journalists are not people or what?

And getting your knickers in a bunch over name calling when you're doing your best to emulate Nazi Germany. fecking hell.

 

[Cloud7]

This has become quite the meltdown.

It’s always a strange phenomenon, seeing someone have a full blown mental breakdown on a football forum, and yet it happens so often on here. The caf really is a special place.

 

[Raoul]

Revan got threadbanned for one post, this has now taken pages.

Are you attempting to coax the ref into showing another poster a red ?

 

[Frosty]

Are you attempting to coax the ref into showing another poster a red ?

I think he is merely suggesting you use VAR.

 

[Oly Francis]

Russia part of UN council correct? They have a right to recognise states, republic and so fourth. This military operation is all within legal framework. Now, will this be contested, of course! But I’m he fact you’re just brazen about it, just shows how underestimate Russians — keep doing it though. Haha

That's... not how any of this work. The fact that feel like laughing after such an uninformed and biased statements tells volume about your inclination.

 

[Gehrman]

This has become quite the meltdown.

It’s always a strange phenomenon, seeing someone have a full blown mental breakdown on a football forum, and yet it happens so often on here. The caf really is a special place.

Football.... bloody hell!

 

[Paxi]

I'm sorry @Paxi but you're so wrong on pretty much everything in here. Even if we discount Bucha (although how can we? There's an overwhelming amount of evidence that points to Russian and literally nothing that points to any kind of a set up or whatever it is you're trying to point us towards with your fresh corpses thing), what about, say, Mariupol? Who was it that demolished the entire city? Or do you think that those were Ukrainians as well, for whatever reason, that somehow manage to fight with an entire Russian army while keeping up indiscriminately demolishing their own country to the ground to paint Russia as the Nazi Germany 2.0 in the eyes of the rest of the world (something that, even if we assume that Ukrainians somehow did it, they've already achieved — yet Ukrainian towns and villages keep getting bombed and burned to the ground day by day)?

Yeah harms whom was it that absolute

I'm sorry @Paxi but you're so wrong on pretty much everything in here. Even if we discount Bucha (although how can we? There's an overwhelming amount of evidence that points to Russian and literally nothing that points to any kind of a set up or whatever it is you're trying to point us towards with your fresh corpses thing), what about, say, Mariupol? Who was it that demolished the entire city? Or do you think that those were Ukrainians as well, for whatever reason, that somehow manage to fight with an entire Russian army while keeping up indiscriminately demolishing their own country to the ground to paint Russia as the Nazi Germany 2.0 in the eyes of the rest of the world (something that, even if we assume that Ukrainians somehow did it, they've already achieved — yet Ukrainian towns and villages keep getting bombed and burned to the ground day by day)?

Where is the overwhelming evidence mate?
Despite Bucha happening… and I honestly don’t know what happened… you can’t say there is an overwhelming evidence.
It’s just simply not true. A lot of innocent people got executed and I feel absolutely horrible about it. From what I know, from my dad, foreign mercs get executed — none of the Ukrainians get the same treatment. That what I’ve been told and that seems to be the word on the ground. If you disagree, I’d love a source:

Whom was in Mariupol mate? Ukrainians were not going to leave and Russians were going to storm it. Understand how we went into Grozny in 96 and got ambushed and suffered (what now seems relatively low casualties) — and then the difference in the second Chechen war… I absolutely adore your football knowledge but bear in mind that Russians have adjusted not only from conflict to conflict Chechenya 96 - Georgia 08.

Also, the fact that you say; Russians are indiscriminately bombing place; it’s just not true.

 

[calodo2003]

Putin should not be in power. It is a dictatorship by all intents and purposes.

im getting lost at mass genocide though. Tell me where Putin has murdered people — (journalists don’t count)

That’s the thing I’m not a fan of Puitin but the indiscriminate punishment of Russians has absolutely played into Putins hands. @harms please attest to that.

Journalists don’t count?

 

[Raoul]

Yeah harms whom was it that absolute

Where is the overwhelming evidence mate?
Despite Bucha happening… and I honestly don’t know what happened… you can’t say there is an overwhelming evidence.
It’s just simply not true. A lot of innocent people got executed and I feel absolutely horrible about it. From what I know, from my dad, foreign mercs get executed — none of the Ukrainians get the same treatment. That what I’ve been told and that seems to be the word on the ground. If you disagree, I’d love a source:

Whom was in Mariupol mate? Ukrainians were not going to leave and Russians were going to storm it. Understand how we went into Grozny in 96 and got ambushed and suffered (what now seems relatively low casualties) — and then the difference in the second Chechen war… I absolutely adore your football knowledge but bear in mind that Russians have adjusted not only from conflict to conflict Chechenya 96 - Georgia 08.

Also, the fact that you say; Russians are indiscriminately bombing place; it’s just not true.

What is your definition of overwhelming evidence ?

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

What the hell is going on in here ?

Someone is justifying mass genocide and war crimes with the comeback of a 5 year old ... "prove it".

His reply to Watermelon was probably the worst post I've ever seen on this site. No idea how not deleted all his posts and banned.

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

Putin should not be in power. It is a dictatorship by all intents and purposes.

im getting lost at mass genocide though. Tell me where Putin has murdered people — (journalists don’t count)

That’s the thing I’m not a fan of Puitin but the indiscriminate punishment of Russians has absolutely played into Putins hands. @harms please attest to that.

You are a disgusting human being.

I'm advocating a motion for a permanent threadban.

 

[calodo2003]

Boy, we got a live one on the hook.

 

[do.ob]

Journalists don’t count?

Daddy, who appears to engage in some light war crimes, but only against foreigners, trumps any other source.

 

[frostbite]

This is mental and it’s why Russias despise the West. You just throw around “war crimes” like some sort of cowboy.

Show me irrefutable evidence of war crimes? If
You do, then go and show it to UN.

Don’t post in this thread unless its verified.Certainly don’t call people orcs.

Here is a long list, that also contains references:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

Here is an article from Amnesty International:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...-war-crimes-in-kyiv-oblast-new-investigation/

There is tons of evidence about war crimes. Check any reputable international organization and you will find that they are saying the same.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

This has become quite the meltdown.

It’s always a strange phenomenon, seeing someone have a full blown mental breakdown on a football forum, and yet it happens so often on here. The caf really is a special place.

And it's fun when it's about football or our favourite TV show.

But this.... mind blowing. Soulless, tactless, hypocritical, propoganda spewing apologist w@nker.

 

[Raoul]

Paxi is taking a break to cool off. If he returns to his senses, he can come back later.

 

[Frosty]

Also it is illegal to summarily execute foreign mercenaries under International law.

 

[MTF]

Daddy, who appears to engage in some light war crimes, but only against foreigners, trumps any other source.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Here is a long list, that also contains references:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

Here is an article from Amnesty International:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...-war-crimes-in-kyiv-oblast-new-investigation/

There is tons of evidence about war crimes. Check any reputable international organization and you will find that they are saying the same.

When he said "journalists don't count", he assumed we'd include non political charity organisations in that.

And other Russians who disagree.

Basically anyone who disagrees.

 

[SirAnderson]

Wow, never knew he harbored such terrible views to be able to so easily dismiss death as a side note and want Overwhelming evidence...as if there isn't already. Clear case of ignorance is bliss with clear propaganda delusions.

 

[Rams]

Paxi is taking a break to cool off. If he returns to his senses, he can come back later.

I don’t think he deserves a banning. Yes, he may have views which we are factually wrong and he seems to be brainwashed. But he’s entitled to his opinions and has done nothing else wrong.

 

[Organic Potatoes]

I don’t think he deserves a banning. Yes, he may have views which we are factually wrong and he seems to be brainwashed. But he’s entitled to his opinions and has done nothing else wrong.

It also more entertaining than essays on German geopolitics, to be fair.

 

[Raoul]

I don’t think he deserves a banning. Yes, he may have views which we are factually wrong and he seems to be brainwashed. But he’s entitled to his opinions and has done nothing else wrong.

He's not banned from the rest of the site, only taking a temporary break from this thread.

 

[Lemoor]

What is your definition of overwhelming evidence ?

He needs to be overwhelmed by it to the point that he's physically incapable of typing that it's not overwhelming.

 

[Frosty]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

They could be lying or exaggerating.

 

[Stookie]

Well this thread has certainly exploded. I’m on nights and just woke up to this!

 

[Krakenzero]

Now I got worried about the dejournalistification of Ukraine

And now for something completely different, are there any news from the battlefront?

 

[Frosty]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Rajma]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

If I talk I’m in a big trouble.

 

[Frosty]

Now I got worried about the dejournalistification of Ukraine

And now for something completely different, are there any news from the battlefront?

Russia making slow but steady progress in the Donbass.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date