What US Interests Lie in Ukraine? Well, that depends on The Budapest Memorandum

Damocles

Damocles

Accedo!
Staff member
Back in 1994 there was the Budapest Memorandum... wherein the United States, Russia, and Britain committed to assurances protecting Ukraine from invasion and respecting the borders of Ukraine if they disarmed themselves by giving up their nuclear weapons to Russia. Russia has ignored its promises and the US promise of "serious interest" has been replaced with sanctions that cannot be effective while a global superpower (China) continues to support Russia.

While Yeltsin (then President of the Russian Federation) respected the independence of the former satellite states, Putin does not..

US interests in Ukraine are tied to US Promises made to Ukraine and whether we are interested in keeping them.

Now these assurances are not the same thing as guarantees of protection that NATO relies on for their protection, however Ukraine had to rely on these assurances at that time to believe that they were safe while disarming themselves.

What US interests are there in Ukraine? That depends entirely on what we believe these United States should do when a nation we have given assurances to in regards to their protection when we are demanding they disarm themselves has been invaded.

What say you? What should the US do from here? Do you believe that these "super sanctions" will stand while Italy has a pass on selling Gucci shoes to Russia, or while other nations have a pass to sell Diamonds, or while the US and the West cannot agree to sanctions on oil? Do you believe that in two months we'll be "standing strong" and that these will suddenly be effective?

(once again, this is written by me, it is not from an article somewhere, do not expect a link to something other than this thread itself...)
 
Damocles said:
Back in 1994 there was the Budapest Memorandum... wherein the United States, Russia, and Britain committed to assurances protecting Ukraine from invasion and respecting the borders of Ukraine if they disarmed themselves by giving up their nuclear weapons to Russia. Russia has ignored its promises and the US promise of "serious interest" has been replaced with sanctions that cannot be effective while a global superpower (China) continues to support Russia.

While Yeltsin (then President of the Russian Federation) respected the independence of the former satellite states, Putin does not..

US interests in Ukraine are tied to US Promises made to Ukraine and whether we are interested in keeping them.

Now these assurances are not the same thing as guarantees of protection that NATO relies on for their protection, however Ukraine had to rely on these assurances at that time to believe that they were safe while disarming themselves.

What US interests are there in Ukraine? That depends entirely on what we believe these United States should do when a nation we have given assurances to in regards to their protection when we are demanding they disarm themselves has been invaded.

What say you? What should the US do from here? Do you believe that these "super sanctions" will stand while Italy has a pass on selling Gucci shoes to Russia, or while other nations have a pass to sell Diamonds, or while the US and the West cannot agree to sanctions on oil? Do you believe that in two months we'll be "standing strong" and that these will suddenly be effective?

(once again, this is written by me, it is not from an article somewhere, do not expect a link to something other than this thread itself...)
Click to expand...

I think Watermark posted something yesterday about this.

Русский агент;4971671 said:
Western governments made promises they didn’t keep and offered assurances they can’t fulfill.

One of the challenges of setting yourself up as the world's policeman is that people may take you seriously.

Then they expect you to intervene in horrendous situations that you have limited will or capability to address.

That's the situation that faces the United States and NATO in Ukraine after the long-awaited invasion of the country by Russian forces.

For all of Ukraine's flaws, ranging from deep corruption to questionable elections, the country is a far more sympathetic party than the aggressor in this fight.

Democracy-ish is probably the best way to characterize Ukraine's government; it's classified by The Economist's Democracy Index 2021 as a "hybrid regime" with a flawed but functioning electoral system. "

Where things get complicated is that Ukraine, victim to a much more-powerful neighbor's aggression, has a decades-old claim to protection from the West under the Budapest Memorandum.

In 1994.

Who was president of the USA then?



https://reason.com/2022/02/24/there-are-few-good-options-in-ukraine-crisis/
Click to expand...
 
So did I, complete with link:

Legion said:
The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. As a result, between 1994 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. Until then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile.

In 2009, Russia and the United States released a joint statement that the memorandum's security assurances would still be respected after the expiration of the START Treaty.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has publicly commented on the Budapest Memorandum by arguing that it provides no true guarantee of safety.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances


iu
Click to expand...
 
1. The Agreement was aimed at the West. Ukraine was in the 'Russian Camp' and it was giving up it's Nukes (to Russia) and was assured by the US, UK, Russia, that it's Borders would be respected. No one in a million years thought it was meant as the 'West' protecting Ukraine from Russia.

2. This is a 'fight' between 2 'Slavic Brothers'. It's like a Domestic Disturbance. When the Cops arrive, both the Husband/Wife attack the Cops. 'Russia' starts with the Kievian Rus. They have along intertwined history. It's in our best interest to sit this out.

3. It's in 'Our Interest' to let Ukraine 'Hate' Russia for interfering in their Country. The more the death and destruction, the more the Hate and desire to become 'European'.

4. In my view, Russia has walked into Quicksand, he's shot himself in the foot. He's done JUST THE OPPOSITE of annexing 'Little Brother' back into the Family.
 
Jackoff said:
1. The Agreement was aimed at the West. Ukraine was in the 'Russian Camp' and it was giving up it's Nukes (to Russia) and was assured by the US, UK, Russia, that it's Borders would be respected. No one in a million years thought it was meant as the 'West' protecting Ukraine from Russia. 2. This is a 'fight' between 2 'Slavic Brothers'. It's like a Domestic Disturbance. When the Cops arrive, both the Husband/Wife attack the Cops. 'Russia' starts with the Kievian Rus. They have along intertwined history. It's in our best interest to sit this out. 3. It's in 'Our Interest' to let Ukraine 'Hate' Russia for interfering in their Country. The more the death and destruction, the more the Hate and desire to become 'European'. 4. In my view, Russia has walked into Quicksand, he's shot himself in the foot. He's done JUST THE OPPOSITE of annexing 'Little Brother' back into the Family.
Click to expand...

Your subjective opinion is noted, and I have filed it in the appropriate archive.

2ieLV4Qy2SScg.gif
 
Legion's ONLY interest in this is to use this as a vehicle to proclaim 'Biden is Weak and indecisive'. A Fox News propaganda sound bite.
 
Legion said:
Your subjective opinion is noted, and I have filed it in the appropriate archive.
Click to expand...


Putting it in historical context.

Please, tell us YOUR Plan of Paratroopers into Moscow, Tank Battalions to Odessa, and Nuclear Strikes on St. Petersburg.
 
Jackoff said:
No, you aren't.

Please, tell us YOUR Plan of Paratroopers into Moscow, Tank Battalions to Odessa, and Nuclear Strikes on St. Petersburg.
Click to expand...

I don't recall having such a plan. Are you suffering a stroke?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Legion said:
I don't recall having such a plan. Are you suffering a stroke?
Click to expand...

The ONLY reason you are blathering about this is because you view it as a chance to bludgeon Biden. You have NO ideas that are constructive from an American viewpoint.
You are a simple PARTISAN HACK.
 
Jackoff said:
The ONLY reason you are blathering about this is because you view it as a chance to bludgeon Biden. You have NO ideas that are constructive from an American viewpoint. You are a simple PARTISAN HACK.
Click to expand...

So you say. As Damocles will doubtless confirm, I am notable for my ability to see all sides of an issue and have no party loyalty whatsoever. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top